Originally Posted by
bizorbetter
Unless i miss-understand your post......you are saying that this board is a representation of the general flying population?
Because i think it is not and that is why i posted this thread.....i think that this board is skewed to the CON side tremendously. I feel most pax want tough/safer screening, but in here it seems the opposite.
Now certainly that point could be argued ("Most pax want tough security"). I will do some digging and see if i can bring forth some data as opposed to just my interactions with my own flying demographic and my opinion.
But are you then saying this board represents the overall and general views of the flying public?
Not only does this board not represent the general views of the flying public, it doesn't even represent the general views of Flyertalk. I recall reading about an FT sponsored seminar where one of the speakers referred to the people in this forum as nut jobs. Every so often there is a thread started in other forums about leaving electronic devices on. In other forums the consensus is that such people are evil. After the thread is moved here, there is a mass evisceration (to which I contribute).
People in this forum are opinionated but by and large they are driven by data and have a much better command of numeracy than most people in FT or outside of FT. And the numbers say that most existing air safety and border security processes are wrong headed, and often administered by incompetents.
What would tougher security actually mean? What are the benefits? What are the costs? Air travel is the safest form of travel there is, and for individuals it is the least expensive. As a society we should be telling people, if you must travel, please travel by commercial air. It is just. It is humane. Similarly the security screening should be just, humane, and efficient.
It is ironic that the TSA, the same agency that pushed hard on other countries to adopt WBI, shoes off, liquids out, and laptops separate is now moving aggressively, toward allowing the majority of the public to use pre 9/11 security screening. Whether it is precheck per passenger, or blanket grants of precheck to entire terminals for a day, it is happening. The TSA is learning that the unbiased alarm from a WTMD is better than the subjectiveness of a WBI scan.
The only good post 9/11 measure was the secured cockpit door, which, as long as pilots are disciplined, will prevent that scenario and most pre 9/11 scenarios from occurring again.
If you want to start threads advocating a different view, then feel free. I and others will challenge you. If you bring data and logic, you won't have to bring asbestos protection.
