FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Risked Based Security for pax aged 12 and under
Old Aug 15, 2011 | 2:37 pm
  #41  
mikeef
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Finally back in Boston after escaping from New York
Posts: 13,684
Originally Posted by SATTSO
Odd you should mention that: people feel differently about different levels of screening.

Though I doubt anyone here will believe it, when TSA only employeed WTMD and HHMD, this was the same reaction I received from more than a few passenges. They alarmed the WTMD, needed to be screened by HHMD, and started on how they were being treated like criminals. I saw grown men cry (women too), simply becuse they were going to be wanded.

At the same time, I have had men tell me they could care less if there were patted down with the new procedure, and men and women demand to use the AIT.

My point is this: there will always be those who claim that screening makes them feel like a criminal. And when you implement new procedures, it all shifts, but not in one way.

Most of those with metal implants demand the AIT, because they have correctly learned how to divest their property and avoid a pat down (they were patted down even with the HHMD because, surprise, it would alarm). To them, they feel less like a criminal with the way TSA does things now. But I doubt few here will accept that.

So when someone tells me they don't want "to feel like felons every time [they] walked through the airport", I have to wonder, under what type of security screening are they talking about? The old way with WTMD/HHMD or the new way with AIT/SPD?
For me, the new way. But I can't speak for everyone. I will wholeheartedly agree with you that you will never be able to please everyone. But the system we have now has become a political patchwork of last-minute fixes rather than anything that provides actual security.

AFAIC, the WTMD/HHMD, along with the baggage X-Rays, are about as good as we are going to get. Additional security seems to be maximum imposition for minimum incremental security.

Mike
mikeef is offline