GLEN36

Check this link, for info on current Threat to U.K.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/counter...-threat-level/

Spiff

Meaningless drivel from a government concerned with retaining power through scaring/terrorizing its own people. We have a similar Ministry of Truth in the USA. Both agencies should be disbanded.

Wally Bird

CYA essentially, although TBF a domestic attack in the UK (of some scale) is considerably more likely than in the US where, for all intents, it's virtually zero.

Often1

1. Need to be goal-oriented. Arguing with low-level employees working on the "line" about policy and procedure is a waste of time. All things being equal, it slows down the process by the amount of time you spend interrupting a process which you know that they are going to finish. All things not being equal, they slow it down and it takes longer.

2. If your goal is to get to your next flight, the bar or whatever, let the process go and bite your tongue.

3. If you are offended by the process, write a letter to someone who can do something about it. I can assure you to a near moral certainty that t here is no person physically present at LHR who is going to change the procedures for you, so "manager" or not, it's not worth 10-seconds.

4. Taking photos and the like is just silly. The issue at hand is simple to describe, the powers that be know what the issues are and what you are trying to avoid is easily accomplished if those powers want to.

The most effective approach is never to engage the little guy. It doesn't work.

pacer142

As a general point of UK law...

It is certainly not *permitted*, and unlike the US there is not a constitutional right to photograph on private property (which an airport is). (It is legal to photograph on public land e.g. on the street, but an airport is not a public place for those purposes).

Assuming no other law exists, which it may well do, the situation would be that as soon as you took photographs on private property having been told not to (there are almost always no-photography signs in airport screening areas) you would be trespassing, and thus reasonable force may be used to remove you from the premises as you are no longer welcome.

Neil

TheGolfWidow

If you want to leave the US and travel to a country where your return trip through security at the airport can be just as much hassle as if you had never left the US, I wholeheartedly recommend flying through LHR. Not a fan.

Wally Bird

Assuming such a person exists, otherwise this too is a waste of your time.

Guess which.

N830MH

I have keep avoided at U.K Airport. I never go through British security. Because it's worst. The behavior that doesn't change. I never gone through British security. They doesn't have a capable enough.

Often1

Then, do nothing. Doesn't change the fact that it's, at best, pointless to engage people in debates who, even if they were motivated to effect change, won't.

kebosabi

So why are you living in the US still? We have just as the same idiocy called the TSA.

celle

So you know nothing about it.

How do you know it's the worst if you haven't experienced it? You're not qualified to judge.

GLEN36

Drivel ? America had 9/11 U.K had 7/7

Spiff

BFD.

(Big Furry Deal)

Stuff happens. I don't want to be "protected" from such exceedingly low-probability events by having my liberty destroyed.

GLEN36

What do you base the assumption of Low Probability on?
I suggest, that the intelligence services know a lot more than we do.

Spiff

Current and past events. Terrorism is and will be very, very rare.

Then they should act to prevent, not harass the innocent.

The procedures used by TSA and DfT demonstrate they know little or nothing.