Security measures and risk - keep in context
 

Clearly, the additional security measures put in place post-9/11 will act as a deterrent and thus increase safety. Clearly, the additional scrutiny of human beings, by human beings, will cause friction at times - as will arise in many other forms of human contact.

What is perhaps missing the point, when people complain about long lines and over-attentive security staff etc, is that the overall quality and effectiveness of security measures in the US is extremely good.

Many would be horrified to see some of the wayward and corrupt practises that go on in a significant number of international airports - airports with flights going to the US. What is in the bag that a corrupt airport security/Customs/baggage employee has put in the hold in Islamabad? Drugs, weapons, explosives? Take it from me, there are some incredibly shoddy practises out there and I would never presume to get complacent about the need to keep looking.

That isn't very clear to me.

Also, in the United States, "the need to keep looking" is often unacceptable from a civil liberties, Constitutional or both standpoint.

I agree with Spiff - it's not so clear to me. In your opinion, perhaps. But your post does little to convince me of that which is so clear to you.

I willingly and gladly submit to other countries' security measures (some of which can be annoying) when I visit, but that does not mean that we need to live with it here in the USA. :)

Welcome to FlyerTalk. :)

Yes. Let's keep it in context. The risk that any of us will die as the result of an airplane-related terrorist act is miniscule. The kind of money the US government is spending on countering this miniscule risk is absurd considering the other terrorist risks that go unaddressed. And it is outrageous that US citizens are asked to slowly surrender their rights in order to counter a statistically insignificant risk, especially considering that tens of millions of tons of cargo flies in passenger jets with no screening.

Welcome to FlyerTalk damorgan!

Well try taking the measures away and see what happens.
I understand your second point and perhaps I was referring to the need for vigilance rather than intruding into personal liberties. 'Looking' doesn't necessarily mean searching people at x-ray machines or analysing their payment/travel/eating habits to decide if they are a risk or not (the recent fiasco with Cat Stevens makes a good commentary on that).

Now your premise is that these measures are the only solution.

I remain unconvinced. :)

I'm not surprised, and I'm not concerned because apparently it isn't a problem. If it were, we would've had some trouble resulting from that.

The screening was there on 9/11/01 and it didn't stop anything (of course it wasn't TSA then, but with the exception of shoe carnival and grope-a-thon there was little difference). And between 9/12/01 and whenever shoe carnival started there were no incidents in the US (Richard Reid boarded at CDG). And between 9/12/01 and the beginning of grope-a-thon there were no incidents. And we know from media reports that weapons are getting through anyway. Yes, taking shoe carnival and grop-a-thon and pointy pointy no no away will introduce anarchy and nonstop terror. :rolleyes:

only limited new technology in airports, you still have people doing the job trying to fill the gaps.

flying to other countries, i've found that my shoes with a large metal shank do not set off the alarm. that's for convenience. i'd assume that most would accept that and the result. disregarding large metal shanks, which could show up as large metal knives.

how far down does the collective want to bring the bar? instead of striving for something more stringent, what level is low enough to appease the masses?

but sorry for the digression.

best not to have any extra measures until some technology is brought on-line?

Spiff,

Not the only solution, but like many other problems, it takes a mixed bag of counter-measures. I'm a natural cynic and I do not believe that any country's security measures provide total safety in the air (or go any way near it) but I'm still prepared to support the effort being made.

Some comfort, I suppose, to know that the hour-long queue through Security, the rummaging through my luggage, the number-crunching checks on my booking details, all meant that my plane-load was completely free of weaponry. Just as the handheld rocket-propelled grenade slams home on take-off.

Is someone wants to take a plane down, they will, but surely we must all work to make it as hard as possible for them?


Thanks for the welcome(s), by the way. Believe me, I come in peace!

Agreed! However, by focusing myopically on non-credible threats and using policies of harassment instead of scientifically-sound threat mitigation, we actually make it easier for the terrorists, not harder.

If a terrorist wants to bring explosives on board, he/she can do it very, very easily, thanks to the current policies of harassment.

1)Put explosive up butt (in protective container) or in your underwear.

2)In laptop place: one small blasting cap. Place it near the densest components (like a transformer) and try to make it look like a capacitor or resistor, or possibly a diode.

3)Make sure your BP doesn't have SSSS printed on it. If it does, don't worry, they probably won't find anything, but make sure that you did not handle the explosive yourself, if at all possible. Dress appropriately. Don't wear anything that does alarms the WTMD. Take offf your shoes, since that is the only place explosives can possibly be hidden and clear security.

4)On the plane, or better yet in the airside bathroom, "unpack". In addition to the blasting cap and explosive, you'll need some wire (from laptop power bus) and a voltage source (bathroom, lights, ife, DC power port, etc.) If you're willing to go down with the ship, just wait until you're alone or go to the bathroom. Boom.

Why is this so easy? Because the TSA thinks that harassment = deterrent. It's no deterrent. It's a bloody joke, one that should get the leaders of the TSA thrown into the brig or deported to North Korea.

Or just ship a package with a bomb in it.

I don't know how much you fly, but some people pay disproportionately for the efforts to make it harder. An hour security line? Not so bad for a casual traveler, but someone who flies several times a week, 40-50 weeks a year it is murder. Over a year, you've wasted whole weeks of productive work time or family time.

Remember, it is not a matter of making it as "hard as possible" for terrorists. The system leaks like a sieve. There are appear to be many equally easy ways to cause mayhem. Patch one and determined terrorists will just go to another. I don't think we'll ever get to the "hard as possible" point.

Someone please delete Spiff's post as it is a threat to national security at once.

Ideas of blowing up a passenger commercial airliner should not be allowed to be posted throughout the public internet.

Thank you.

I fervently hope this is a joke. I fear it is not. Someone please delete TSASCRNR's post as it is a threat to our intelligence. :mad:

Do you really think I am the first person to think of this cunning plan?

If dissemination of publicly-available infomation like this concerns you, then the agency for which you work should scare the hell out of you.

This simply amplifies my point: the TSA is a threat to airport security.

:D :D :D

You're joking, right?

Look, we've said it before - if frequent flyers (and frequent flying rocket scientists) can figure this stuff out, do you honestly think the terrorists haven't??

Surely you aren't that naive. :D

Of course i was kidding but still, ideas really should not be spreading over the internet like this.

Terrorists arent really the brightest beans as they think when they die they get 80virgins.

I agree. The things that Spiff posted are things that have been mentioned or alluded to countless times in the past on this forum. Doubtless, are the things that anyone who has an IQ over room temperature would think of in a minute or two if asked "gee, if a terrorist wanted to do something despite today's security, what could he do?" I suspect that most would-be terrorists have IQs above room temperature. I also suspect that TSASCRNR might be freaked a bit because he never hears passengers say those things at airports due to the general gag on "suspicious" conversation.

The terrorists already know about this and many, many other holes. Get over it.

It is a lot healthier to discuss such shortcomings than it is to play ostrich and pretend they don't exist.

Not all terrorists think this. And why do you need to criticize someone else's religious beliefs?

:D

Scares you when those pesky ideas go spreading out over the internet, huh??

:D

Public assemblies worry you, too? How about private meetings in homes?

Perhaps someone from the TSA should screen our posts before they appear here and elsewhere?

Who do you work for again? Oh, yeah, the US federal govenment. :rolleyes:

:D Every idea ever thought by a human will spread over the internet eventually. Most of them already have.

Whoa fellas, this one's going off all over the place.

If Spiff wants to publicise the pros and cons of getting on a plane with half a pound of high-explosive stuffed up the back-side (and risk the chemical reaction when encountering food on some airlines) then so be it. :eek:

I was just trying to generate a bit of debate, rather than TSA-bashing, about the effectiveness of security measures. I don't expect perfection, I do expect effort. I appeciate that there are arguments about whether the present measures are effective/relevant/necessary. I am realistic about how safe we really are should someone mount a concerted effort.

Frankly, I expect the terrorists are lapping it all up - watching the civilised world wrap itself up in procedure and red tape.

You've got that right.

I am sure Osama loves how un-American airports have become. :(

That's a fascinating statement. As a non-American, I find what is going on at your airports completely American. Not so much the things being done (much of which applies elsewhere in the world) but certaily the way it is done.

I'll articulate briefly. Problem perceived; immense machinery deployed; strict adherence to nth degree of letter of the law; total lack of subtlety.

Sorry if that sounds a bit caustic, but do you see the point that I make? There are analagies elsewhere.

When Spiff uses the term un-American, he is referring (please forgive me for presuming Spiff) to policies that are diametrically opposed to the principles of freedom and liberty upon which the US was founded. It's an unfortunate symptom of how much the US government has betrayed those principles that a non-American would associate the term American with the banal things you enumerated.

I definitely see your point.

Unfortunately, most other Americans do not travel abroad so they are just fine with the global definition of "American".

However, by the domestic definition of "American", the crap going on in our airports and elsewhere in the US is definitely akin more to the kind of nonsense one would expect to find in North Korea or in the former nation of East Germany.

THAT is not a religious belief, it is brainwash.

I'll bow to you guy's knowledge of the day-to-day reality of what's going on there. One man's liberty is another man's opportunity, I suppose. Getting the balance right between denying (criminal) opportunity and enabling individual liberty is probably akin to finding the Holy Grail. But then, who defines 'criminal'?

(Japhydog - there's nothing recent about the English perception of the American make-up. I don't refer to the, sometimes politically inspired, opinions of how a government performs).

By the way, you cannot seriously be comparing your country with North Korea? You might suffer some perceived indignities whilst travelling through an airport, but at least you have the freedom and choice to travel. Let's not get carried away.

I was referring to un-American (domestic definition) procedures at the airport and extremely un-American legislation such as the Patriot Act.

While the US might not be the same as North Korea, it is moving in that direction, rather than away from it.

This thread is spinning into a debate on the "Americaness" of America, therefore it is no longer a discussion about travel safety and security and it is also closed.