View Poll Results: Which security would you take?
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll
Poll: two flights NY to DC, with and without security
Dec 2, 2010 | 5:19 pm
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,788
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.
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.
Dec 2, 2010 | 5:44 pm
#33
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: NYC (formerly BOS/DCA)
Programs: UA 1K, IC RA
Posts: 60,745
Dec 2, 2010 | 6:02 pm
#34
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: AVL and Almond, NC
Programs: Earthling, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 914
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.
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.
Last edited by Oxb; Dec 2, 2010 at 6:04 pm Reason: more stuff
Dec 2, 2010 | 6:14 pm
#35
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,788
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.)
Dec 2, 2010 | 7:00 pm
#40
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 230
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!"
Dec 2, 2010 | 8:09 pm
#41
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney (for now), GVA (only in my memories)
Programs: QF Lifetime Silver (big whoop)
Posts: 9,322
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.
Dec 2, 2010 | 8:11 pm
#42
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: BOS,PIT
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Platinum, JetBlue Mosaic-2, AA Platinum
Posts: 562
Dec 3, 2010 | 12:41 pm
#44
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Colorado
Programs: Frontier EarlyReturns
Posts: 82
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.
Besides, the real security from terrorism comes from investigation and intelligence, not looking at naked hotties or groping grandma.