A Radical Proposal for Airline Security
Jul 18, 2010 | 4:51 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
A Radical Proposal for Airline Security
There is a new column today from Steve Chapman, A Radical Proposal for Airline Security. Here is an excerpt:
So, TS/S gurus, are his ideas good or a non-starter?
But the whole idea behind the list doesn't make much sense. Supposedly, we have hundreds or even thousands of U.S. residents who are too dangerous to be allowed on a plane -- but safe enough to be trusted in all sorts of other places (subway trains, sports venues, shopping malls, skyscrapers) where someone carrying a bomb or a gun could wreak havoc.
If those on the list are truly dangerous, the government should arrest and prosecute them, with their guilt decided by courts. If they are not dangerous enough to arrest, they should have the same freedom to travel as everyone else.
If those on the list are truly dangerous, the government should arrest and prosecute them, with their guilt decided by courts. If they are not dangerous enough to arrest, they should have the same freedom to travel as everyone else.
Jul 18, 2010 | 6:47 am
#2
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: PHX
Programs: AA Ex Platinum & 1MM, DL PLT, Marriott LFT PLT, HH Diamond
Posts: 2,542
There is a new column today from Steve Chapman, A Radical Proposal for Airline Security. Here is an excerpt:
So, TS/S gurus, are his ideas good or a non-starter?
So, TS/S gurus, are his ideas good or a non-starter?
It speaks volumes that the TSA has never been able to come up w/a response to that question.
Jul 18, 2010 | 6:48 am
#3
Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
His suggestions and observations have been made here for years now - so yep, they are excellent.
It was good to read in the comments that the article changed one person's mind about ID. One person at a time - that is what it is going to take to force change.
It was good to read in the comments that the article changed one person's mind about ID. One person at a time - that is what it is going to take to force change.
Jul 18, 2010 | 10:04 pm
#5
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney (for now), GVA (only in my memories)
Programs: QF Lifetime Silver (big whoop)
Posts: 9,328
Some of his ideas are good.
+1 ^
-1e100 
-1
+1 ^
There's layers, and then there's layers, Steve. But nice try.
Originally Posted by Steve Chapman
...What no one seems to notice is that other improvements in security have made this one a needless burden.
The government required airlines to install reinforced cockpit doors to keep hijackers from taking the controls.
The government required airlines to install reinforced cockpit doors to keep hijackers from taking the controls.
Originally Posted by Steve Chapman
It tightened security rules -- banning penknives, lighters, ski poles, snow globes, and liquids except in tiny bottles.
Originally Posted by Steve Chapman
It initiated random pat-downs of travelers and gave extra scrutiny to those who did suspicious things. It deployed thousands of armed air marshals.
Originally Posted by Steve Chapman
Equally important, travelers changed their mindset, meaning that terrorists can no longer count on passive victims. On several occasions -- starting with United Flight 93 on 9/11 -- passengers have acted to foil attacks.
Originally Posted by Steve Chapman
With all these layers of protection in place, the rationale for the no-fly list has crumbled. Even if someone on the list can get on a plane, his chance of taking it over or bringing it down is very close to zero.
