Originally Posted by
Always Flyin
What difference does it make if you can't detect the explosive either way? The operational theory seems to be that remote detonation is not possible [yeah, right] so having the electronic device separated from the passenger eliminates the risk.
If they could bring down the place in 1985 from the checked area (Lockerbie) then you think it can't be done in 2017? I think this security ban is ridiculous.
I stand by my earlier observation - it's more likely that a suspicious device will be caught at security screening than in a checked bag. There are strong arguments why this type of equipment should not be in the cargo hold... fires can be more controlled in the cabin vs the cargo hold. So what we are doing here is trading one set of risks for another with a zero net effect but causing a huge amount inconvenience to hordes of people for no reason at all.
And I just went through Abu Dhabi US preclearance a few months ago and the security was about 10X tighter than anything I have seen anywhere... they made me turn on my cell and my laptop which has never happened elsewhere.
Edit - I have gone through various airports with absolutely ...... security heading to the US, somehow that does not seem to be an issue. What about some airports originating in places like Lagos, Nigeria which is a hotbed for terrorist activity? These rules are just arbitrary and totally useless.