Originally Posted by TSAMGR

Come on, the only yellow cabs are in Manhattan. They are too yellow :D to go anywhere else. OK maybe bad example but the principle was right.

Originally Posted by GUWonder

Ownership of certain security processes does not concern me as long as they meet a certain standard and have measurable efficacy. Today, the measurability is not there and the efficacy is certainly in question as plenty of people can engineer ways around the current dog and pony show of security (especially in the key area of explosives).

Ok. Better technology then.

It's self-explanatory (almost) -- i.e., better than today in terms of efficacy and cost-efficiency with more measurable results and a measured calculation of costs and benefits. [I believe some people will die and some property will be damaged; the only way to prevent all death and destruction is to ban/encumber life and/or wholly restrict property ownership (rights). In other words, I am ready to let myself be one of the casualties because I don't believe in draining the public coffers of tens of millions of dollars from others for my personal self-interest and don't believe in health, safety and security regardless of the price.] A better checkpoint screening for weapons and weapons components, including explosives -- on persons or in carry-ons and in cargo -- is one that is better than the current dog and pony show we have today. Today's dog and pony show I label a dog and pony show because it has done little to stop the more intelligent and more dangerous sociopaths around. It is merely rewarding them to adapt faster. Unfortunately, systems are reactive (more often than not) and individuals proactive; so in the cat and mouse game, we know who will be ahead of the curve first. And our sorry excuse for "pro-active" security is little more than a wild goose chase and a lot of jumping the gun long before an incident and all its accessories are anywhere close to being netted properly and in total.

So I again see a call for better technology? Or is there something I am missing?

Unlinke many here, I like the FAM program but have some reservations about it. First, the weapons need to be personalized so no one else can use them. ;)

Originally Posted by law dawg

Originally Posted by GUWonder

Technology by itself is not the solution. Technology can fail and people can use it improperly or not use it at all (amongst a whole series of other issues). It's the combination of the people, processes and technology/tools that must be looked at in an integrated manner. Right now, the process is broken, regardless of the technology that currently exists (and in some cases is already paid for).

Technology improvements, process rationalization and people overhaul. In fits and starts we are moving in that direction but with the current people in charge, we will get little bang for the buck and a lot of nothing and a little of something.

Originally Posted by law dawg

You have just described every governmental process in the history of this country....;)

"Nothing to see here folks, move along." ;)