damorgan

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.

Spiff

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.

FWAAA

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.

Japhydog

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!

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).

Spiff

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

I remain unconvinced.

whirledtraveler

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.

Japhydog

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.

robodeer

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?

damorgan

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!

Spiff

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.

Japhydog

Or just ship a package with a bomb in it.

whirledtraveler

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.

TSASCRNR

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.

Japhydog

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.