Originally Posted by
cestmoi123
Sure it would. Politicians would talk about "necessary inconvenience" and "primary responsibility is to keep people safe," and it would sail through, because the opponents' argument would basically come down to "willing to accept a slightly higher risk to speed up the process," and that never works explicitly, only implicitly (i.e. speed limits).
You are waaayy underestimating the opponents. All we'd have to do is demonstrate that the liquid ban is nonsense and the liquids that we carry on a plane cannot be used to create an explosive. There is ZERO explosive risk in toothpaste, nail polish, perfume, water, medicine, etc. no matter how large the bottle. If we were allowed to have a public debate on this, it would be obvious how silly it is.