Would You Fly On a Plane With NO Security?
Jan 8, 2011, 10:10 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 7
Would You Fly On a Plane With NO Security?
Came across an interesting article today, and I apologize if this has already been posted:
http://www.american.com/archive/2011...ly-liberty-air
Full-body scanners, invasive pat-downs, harsh carry-on restrictions—has the Transportation Security Administration gone too far? Critics and defenders of the TSA tend to talk past each other, so I propose a new approach to answering the question. Let us imagine there were a major airline that could opt out of all TSA regulations. Call it “Liberty Air.” Liberty Air openly advertises that it takes zero safety precautions when it comes to screening passengers and baggage. Would you fly on this airline?
The upside to Liberty Air’s approach is a far more pleasant airport experience. Liberty Air has no metal detectors, so there are no long lines after you get your ticket. Get to the airport ten minutes before take-off, not two hours. Pack whatever you want in your carry-on, including “dangerous” liquids, disposable razors, a hunting knife, whatever. If you have a laptop, don’t worry about taking it out of its case. Wearing a metal belt buckle? Have a lot of keys? Don’t want your Blackberry to leave your sight? No problem. You won’t have to juggle your boarding pass, your driver’s license, your cell phone, and your laptop. No need to take off your shoes. Don’t feel hassled to collect all your belongings pouring out of the X-ray machine—there is no X-ray machine!
Most important of all, Liberty Air does not do body scans. No machine will take revealing photos of you, nor will X-rays zap you, nor will any uniformed official fondle you in the name of national security.
Not only is Liberty Air more pleasant to fly, it’s also easier on your wallet. Free from paying for security officials and upkeep for expensive equipment, Liberty Air passes the savings on to you. No “September 11 security fee” on your bill. You pay only for the flight, not for the TSA bureaucracy.
Of course, there’s an obvious downside to Liberty Air: it is clearly more vulnerable to a terrorist attack. Does the added risk outweigh the benefits? This is the question everyone should ponder. Would you fly Liberty Air, or would you still choose a TSA-compliant airline?
You can read the rest of the article at the above link - but I know that my answer would be, "Hell, yes! I would fly Liberty Air!"
Thoughts?
http://www.american.com/archive/2011...ly-liberty-air
Full-body scanners, invasive pat-downs, harsh carry-on restrictions—has the Transportation Security Administration gone too far? Critics and defenders of the TSA tend to talk past each other, so I propose a new approach to answering the question. Let us imagine there were a major airline that could opt out of all TSA regulations. Call it “Liberty Air.” Liberty Air openly advertises that it takes zero safety precautions when it comes to screening passengers and baggage. Would you fly on this airline?
The upside to Liberty Air’s approach is a far more pleasant airport experience. Liberty Air has no metal detectors, so there are no long lines after you get your ticket. Get to the airport ten minutes before take-off, not two hours. Pack whatever you want in your carry-on, including “dangerous” liquids, disposable razors, a hunting knife, whatever. If you have a laptop, don’t worry about taking it out of its case. Wearing a metal belt buckle? Have a lot of keys? Don’t want your Blackberry to leave your sight? No problem. You won’t have to juggle your boarding pass, your driver’s license, your cell phone, and your laptop. No need to take off your shoes. Don’t feel hassled to collect all your belongings pouring out of the X-ray machine—there is no X-ray machine!
Most important of all, Liberty Air does not do body scans. No machine will take revealing photos of you, nor will X-rays zap you, nor will any uniformed official fondle you in the name of national security.
Not only is Liberty Air more pleasant to fly, it’s also easier on your wallet. Free from paying for security officials and upkeep for expensive equipment, Liberty Air passes the savings on to you. No “September 11 security fee” on your bill. You pay only for the flight, not for the TSA bureaucracy.
Of course, there’s an obvious downside to Liberty Air: it is clearly more vulnerable to a terrorist attack. Does the added risk outweigh the benefits? This is the question everyone should ponder. Would you fly Liberty Air, or would you still choose a TSA-compliant airline?
You can read the rest of the article at the above link - but I know that my answer would be, "Hell, yes! I would fly Liberty Air!"
Thoughts?
Jan 8, 2011, 10:37 am
#3
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: DTW
Programs: DL 0.22 MM, AA 0.34 MM, PC Plat Amb, Hertz #1 GC 5*
Posts: 7,511
The aircraft and all supply systems should be secured (fuel, catering, maintenance, etc). The flight deck should be secured, with flight crew willing to continue operations even if people in the cabin are under mortal threat. All cargo and checked luggage should be secured.
All carry-on luggage and pax should be secured against any strategic (and not tactical or operational) aircraft risks.
Have fun with that one.
Jan 8, 2011, 10:40 am
#4
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 855
Yes, I'll Go Liberty Air
but only if they promise not to do any of this:
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
In short, Liberty Air is safer than sharing a flying cattle car with a herd of mindless, bleating sheep. I'll take it.
To bolster the argument, imagine that Liberty Air actually employs a little bit of security. Let’s say it checks IDs against a government database in order to prevent people on a terrorist watch list from boarding. For those of you previously wary of Liberty Air, would you fly it now? Maybe Liberty Air also bans knives and guns from flights. How about now? Maybe it also makes certain high-risk passengers go through metal detectors. Is that enough? I imagine many readers on the fence are now leaning toward Liberty Air. The point is that the security precautions most Americans consider sufficient will likely be far less stringent than those the TSA employs.
In short, Liberty Air is safer than sharing a flying cattle car with a herd of mindless, bleating sheep. I'll take it.
Jan 8, 2011, 10:44 am
#5
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Northern California, in the redwoods, on the ocean.
Posts: 437
but only if they promise not to do any of this:
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
In short, Liberty Air is safer than sharing a flying cattle car with a herd of mindless, bleating sheep. I'll take it.
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
In short, Liberty Air is safer than sharing a flying cattle car with a herd of mindless, bleating sheep. I'll take it.
Jan 8, 2011, 10:47 am
#6
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 502
If you look back, the TSA is always one step BEHIND the terrorists- they react with a change AFTER the terrorists pull something off. This last underpants bomber was actually a success based on the all the expense/trouble he has caused.
I suspect the terorists are already working on ways to overcome the last TSA changes.
I suspect the terorists are already working on ways to overcome the last TSA changes.
Jan 8, 2011, 10:49 am
#7
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
Government should be afraid of their people.
As far as government tyrants are concerned, Judge Lynch never sleeps.
Jan 8, 2011, 11:12 am
#9
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 569
Yes. Absolutely. Fly internally in new Zealand if you want to experience this. Get your BP from a machine, walk onto the plane. That's it. Nothing else. Did about a half dozen such flights last April. Did not worry me in the least. Looking forward to doing this again in jul/aug of this year.
Jan 8, 2011, 11:13 am
#10
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
This is like asking which of two motor vehicles you'd prefer to own: one with a breathalyzer interlock, 50-mph speed governor, no distracting radio, and all cell / navigation features disabled... or one with no seatbelts, airbags, bumpers, brake lights, or anti-skid, and a glass gas tank mounted on the roof. The rational choice is somewhere in between.
Last edited by BearX220; Jan 8, 2011 at 11:19 am
Jan 8, 2011, 11:18 am
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Under an ORD approach path
Programs: DL PM, MM. Coffee isn't a drug, it's a vitamin.
Posts: 12,935
Every flight I take has no security, other than the secure cockpit doors and the crew and passenger attitude.
The TSA certainly does nothing to provide security.
The TSA certainly does nothing to provide security.
Jan 8, 2011, 11:30 am
#13
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
That was one of the outrageous, insulting and ridiculous assertions that Pissy made in his testimony before the TSA Senate oversight committee, that (and yes, I am paraphrasing from memory here) if you gave the flying public two options, one a flight on which everyone boarding had been subjected to intensive screening, and the other on which there was no screening, he was "sure" that "everyone" would take the first option.
He should shut the ____ up and ACTUALLY GIVE US THAT OPTION, instead of testifying before Congress about what he is "sure" we would do in his hypothetical situation!
I would not hestitate to take the scary option, the one that would make Pissy piss himself.
He should shut the ____ up and ACTUALLY GIVE US THAT OPTION, instead of testifying before Congress about what he is "sure" we would do in his hypothetical situation!
I would not hestitate to take the scary option, the one that would make Pissy piss himself.
Jan 8, 2011, 11:32 am
#14
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
And I'm not going to sit next to a stranger packing a sidearm. My disgust with TSA (and the American people for tolerating it) is well-known, but I wouldn't touch Liberty Air. I want reasonable, respectful, COMPETENT security, which we don't have now -- not no security at all.
This is like asking which of two motor vehicles you'd prefer to own: one with a breathalyzer interlock, 50-mph speed governor, no distracting radio, and all cell / navigation features disabled... or one with no seatbelts, airbags, bumpers, brake lights, or anti-skid, and a glass gas tank mounted on the roof. The rational choice is somewhere in between.
This is like asking which of two motor vehicles you'd prefer to own: one with a breathalyzer interlock, 50-mph speed governor, no distracting radio, and all cell / navigation features disabled... or one with no seatbelts, airbags, bumpers, brake lights, or anti-skid, and a glass gas tank mounted on the roof. The rational choice is somewhere in between.
And, yes, I would fly Liberty.