Originally Posted by
LHR/MEL/Europe FF
I would much rather have people's hair touched than risk explosives being carried on board under a wig/turban/other head covering.
Can someone please explain how else you check these places without touching them?
No 'intimacy issue' is worth an explosive decompression at 35,000 feet, or death.
What if someone hides explosives in their anus, or stomach, or vagina?
Do you have the same stance of other, much more significant risks in your life?
For instance, if everyone was required to drive 10 mph on the freeway, there'd be far fewer fatal accidents. Even better, cars that go faster than 10 mph could be made illegal to sell or possess. After all, you're protecting the motoring public from a known risk (one of the biggest killers in the U.S.).
Life involves risk. The risk of being blown up in an airplane was amazingly small before 9/11, it remains amazingly small. Common-sense airport security measures are fine, but strip-searching everyone and touching them in intimate and uncomfortable ways is not warranted given the risk.
Originally Posted by
LHR/MEL/Europe FF
Perhaps the solution is to have a two tiered system. Planes with security, and planes without. I know which one I'd rather be on. And i know which one would make the more likely target for someone wishing to bring the plane down.
Let's make everything a two-tiered system. Malls with airport-style security and malls without. Same with sporting venues, public transportation, schools, apartment complexes.....
Your suggestion is silly. Just because there are people that have a problem rationalizing risk doesn't mean that the rest of us have to suffer.