<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
My contention is that no hijacking will succeed with most of the "weapons" listed on the prohibited items list.</font>
That's a foolish and simplistic asumption.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">This un-American policy of random checks is something I have a huge problem with.</font>
Where do you get this idiotic idea that randomness equates to un-American?
EVERYONE is searched as EVERYONE must pass through the magnometer and have their carry on items Xrayed. The EXTENT of the search varies based on a number of criteria including the results of the magnometer and Xray inspections, profiling, and random selection.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">If we're going to spend billions preventing even one aircraft fatality, then we are truly a misguided society.</font>
There is an established figure which represents the value of one airline passenger's life which is used in doing the cost/benefit analasys which determines if saftey changes will be mandated. The problem with terrorist attacks is the multiplyer. Will it be one passenger killed on the airplane or 3000 people killed on the ground?
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">People get killed every day and we're spending practically nothing to prevent it.</font>
They get killed one or two at a time on the ground not 3000 all at once. People driving cars, using machinery, etc. have significant control over their own safety, people in an airliner or ground target do not.