A knife is no longer a credible weapon with which to hijack an airplane. It can kill, but it can kill on the ground, too. A person wanting to kill a few sleeping travelers could just as easily break their necks. Possibly even more easily since the person with the slit throat may run/flail for awhile before bleeding to death, thus alerting other potential victims to the assassin.
Deterrence should be accomplished by good, reliable technology, competent people operating said technology, and the promise of a quick, violent response against anyone stupid enough to try something like hijacking an airplane. "Random security" is an example of the ends not justifying the means. Hassling people without probable cause is not worth the possibility of a microscopic bit of additional safety. At least that's an American (or
some Americans') point of view.
I do not welcome the prospect of your photographic security expanding outside the UK. I doubt our US government would discard all pictures taken of passengers who are not criminals and retain only a small database of known criminals.
Bomb mules can be dealt with in exactly the same manner as terrorists: through effective use of technology.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by beergut:
I figure a knife is a weapon and after 911 I'm sure boxcutters are considered so in the US. Football hooligans over here have used them for years as weapons.
Red eye, dark cabin, terrorist/madman with a knife, people asleep. Rather you than me, doesn't take long to slit a few throats.
Don't know about in the US but in the UK security ( including random searches ) are a way of deterring an attempt in the first instance not just stopping one that's planned.
What about my earlier post Spiff ? About being photographed at security and then the picture being viewed at the gate. Also my thoughts that the picture is compared with known suspects on a central database, Would that be a breach of rights ?
One more thing while I'm here < G >. In the case of people that don't agree with the security as it is, whether it's unconstitutional or they just don't like it what would you put in its place ?
Oh and bear this in mind, 10% of the Female prison population in the UK consists of Jamaican drug smugglers. They are paid/threatened/ their families threatened until they agree to smuggle into the UK. They are also told that the UK authorities will just deport them back to Jamaica ( wrong ).
Most of the drugs are swallowed but some is hidden in fruit, tourist trinkets, strapped to the body or just packed in a suitcase hoping not to get pulled at UK customs. Now, what if one is given a bomb instead of drugs ? they're hardly going to unwrap it and check first particularly if it's strapped onto the body.
Nigel
</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry