<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
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.
"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>
If the throat is cut correctly you take away the air supply which renders unconciousness as well as the blood. I recall reading an article about a hand amputation in Iran for a thief. Apparently the knife was slid between the wristbones, tendons cut and the hand popped off in about a second. Professional throat cutters would do a few **** quickly and even if they only managed one they've caused terror again. Sure they want to kill people but it's also about creating fear.
Anyway I'd still rather be attacked by a Man with an arm rather than a knife !!
We'll have to disagree on random security, if it's done right it's more cost effective than searching everybody or having no searches when under threat.
As for photographic security am I right in saying that 7 of the 911 hijackers were known ? Couldn't that have given a chance of stopping at least part of the tragedy ?
Drug ( rather than bomb ) mules are now being " sniffed " by machines at the airport of departure along with the other passengers but some still get through and are stopped by " random security " but others still make it to the UK. More are caught here but no-one knows exactly how many are successful You can't rely solely on technology, experience counts for a lot and the TSA will get that in time.
Had to go through those sniffing machines at the CN Tower in Toronto in July, you have to stand in there for several seconds while you're " sampled ", they also take photographs. Man was I worried about my breath
Spiff, I think that given time security will find its own level but first it needs the experience which means doing things wrong as well as right. Random searches will continue but not on the scale they are now and I expect the US Government is looking at all ways of protecting the public including photography.
People may not like it and may consider it a breach of their rights but it's there to stay in some form or other.
I belive that here in the UK we have one of the highest densities of CCTV in the World. Moves some crime into other areas, helps catch some criminals especially violent drunks and the ones that are definitely up to no good wear caps or hoods so they can't be recognised.
Long story but I was attacked by a bunch of drunk kids this year, they were too young to punch out and they weren't strong enough to even knock me over. Nevertheless I had cuts, bruises and a broken tooth but reckoned it had all been captured on CCTV. The cameras weren't working !!! Technology failed but I still want it there for the next poor bloke these gits go for.On the other hand I know several people who'd have no qualms about slapping a few 15 year olds around
Nigel