WITHOUT

Having a grasp of mathematics, I would say without. I do far more dangerous things every day.

Nonetheless, I agree with other posters that even a minuscule risk can be made substantially smaller by pre 9/11 style security. Pre 9/11 security was there to benefit the airlines, not the passengers, and I think that is fair.

I don't think that's good analysis. The math is based on current security measures. We don't know what the math would look like with no security. @:-)

WITHOUT


if the missing option of pre 9/11/01 was available I could go for that. Either is better than the current process of virtual disrobing and/or groping, deshoeing, dewatering and delousing and the rest of the BS.

I think we can get pretty close. You can extrapolate all the successful attempts on currently unprotected assets to potential attempts on air travel, then factor in the total number of historic attacks overall (USS Cole, et al.)

I just love when people use big words.

Oh, Without.

Without.

Without.

really?
 

WITH


ppl in this forum cannot answer a simple question... no ones going to take ur what ever "right" away if u answer with a simple with or without... its just a question.. :)

And I have often said, "offer air travel with realistic security, Let's say 01/01/2001 style." Then if you are afraid to fly like that......."well, take the bus!"

Because sometimes "a simple question" is a setup. Here's a simple question: Is it better to take a gunshot to the head, or through the heart? What do you think? I mean, it's just a question, right? :rolleyes:

The answer is: neither one of those is a good option. If you insist that people choose one or the other, and more people say "head", does that mean you can then report that "most people like getting shot in the head"?

The OP is likely setting up to use this thread to say "most people on TS&S don't want any airport security at all". Which is not true. TSA uses polls where people are offered the choice between the body scanner and an invasive patdown to claim that that "most people like the body scanners." Also not true.

My vote: this poll is flawed.

Impossible! Surely a plane without TSA screening would immediately explode? :rolleyes:

Bump for poll added.

I prefer a 1 in 500 million chance of being victim of a terrorist attack to a 1 to 1 chance of being x-rayed and/or groped.

Besides, the real security from terrorism comes from investigation and intelligence, not looking at naked hotties or groping grandma.

Poll is flawed, but medal detector is good enough for me, no groping please.