Let's get this straight.
May 26, 2005 | 9:51 pm
#17
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL: 3.8 MM, Marriott: Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 24,575
Originally Posted by Anastassia Florine
I guess the only reasonable solution is the Rapiscan that doesn't let the tissue show, and even then that's not reliable because someone could have a knife made out of human bone. It still makes it more safe though... but alas, that could only be for awhile before people start digging up graves and then more security would be needed for the graveyards in order to make the airports perfectly safe... forget that, more security would also be needed for hospitals and morgues for that reason... so I guess it's an all-or-nothing type thing like you say.
PS: Hey, this is not out of the question!!
May 27, 2005 | 11:08 am
#18
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
I have an idea -- let's spend 60% of GDP on a "bad thoughts detector". Then we won't need to scan carry-ons and things like that, because ultimately it is bad thoughts that should be banned, not ultra-dangerous household objects like lighters.
I suggest dedicating 60% of GDP on this project because a bad thoughts detector is not something that even remotely exists at this point, and we do not have the luxury of time. Developing such a machine will be very expensive, but when it comes to safety in the air, costs be damned. The reason for the 60% figure rather than anything higher, such as 80%, is because government consumes 40% of GDP already, and we wouldn't want to impact any other government functions.
I suggest dedicating 60% of GDP on this project because a bad thoughts detector is not something that even remotely exists at this point, and we do not have the luxury of time. Developing such a machine will be very expensive, but when it comes to safety in the air, costs be damned. The reason for the 60% figure rather than anything higher, such as 80%, is because government consumes 40% of GDP already, and we wouldn't want to impact any other government functions.
May 27, 2005 | 11:33 am
#19
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 72,646
Originally Posted by JS
I have an idea -- let's spend 60% of GDP on a "bad thoughts detector". Then we won't need to scan carry-ons and things like that, because ultimately it is bad thoughts that should be banned, not ultra-dangerous household objects like lighters.
May 27, 2005 | 1:12 pm
#20
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: GEG
Posts: 217
Originally Posted by Anastassia Florine
Hey, I didn't mean because the keys can be used as weapons; I meant so that the terrorists can't get into the cockpit! lol
Nov 15, 2006 | 2:43 pm
#21
Join Date: Mar 2005
Programs: Blah Airlines Executive Beige, DYKWIA Uranium, TX Propane Commission Blue Flame of Valor
Posts: 7,276
Originally Posted by Wiirachay
Personnel should have the right to machine-scan the baggage at any time they please. However, should the bag need to be physically searched, the passenger should be paged for authorization for search, instructions on how to unlock and relock the bag, and given the option to view the search either in person on via video in airports. This should be done in an bomb-proof area. Should the passenger not respond show up, the passenger is denied boarding and the luggage is subject to quarantine or DETONATION.
..or to have bags blown up. that'll work.
Nov 15, 2006 | 2:53 pm
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2006
Location: DTW, but drive to/from YYZ/ORD
Programs: Hilbert Hotel Infinity Platinum
Posts: 39,439
Originally Posted by JS
I have an idea -- let's spend 60% of GDP on a "bad thoughts detector".