Originally Posted by sbrower
Isn't a big part of the problem here that there isn't any measure of success?
"The FAM program (and the pointy object program) are clearly working because there hasn't been a single instance in which an elephant in pink tights has been seen flying on a domestic airline since 9/11."
Can anyone prove that if we didn't have FAM's, and if we didn't have the pointy object program, there would have been elephants in pink tights on airlines?
Everyone wants *some* form of rational security. But there is a big gap between perception and risk.
This is exactly right. No matter which view you take, there is no data that is conclusive one way or the other. The problem is, do you risk being wrong when the stakes are so high?