Thread: The Price of Security

Back in June 2009, by a vote of 310 to 118, both Republican and Democrat majorities supported an amendment offered by congressman Chaffetz (Rep. of Utah) to ban the use of an airport body scan device capable of detecting the type of explosive material carried by the recent airline passenger/terrorist. The legislation was passed due to concerns the scans were too revealing, and were akin to a strip search of passengers.
So what do we want? Increased security at the price of TSA and airport officials being able to virtually unclothe us? In theory, we could require every passenger to completely disrobe to make certain he/she is not carrying an explosive device. Are we willing to endure a virtual or actual strip search in the name of security?
Guess it depends on whose getting on the plane with you...

While I see merit in the principles behind Benjamin Franklin's famous quote, one of the few times those principles don't apply is when I'm hurtling at ridiculous speeds through the sky. Ol' Ben wasn't stupid, and I bet he might have felt the same way.

Here are my ideal characteristics for airport/airplane security:

• thorough - meaning sniffers, dogs, scanners, psychics, whatever.
• fast - the slowest part of the process should be the carry-on scan, IMO.
• professional - if I'm paying airport security less than I pay my mailman, something is wrong. These people should be the best security force I encounter in my day-to-day affairs, not simply the ones with the most authority.

Of course, all this presupposes that we need good security. Personally, I get anxious enough when I'm not the one driving the car, so you can guess how I feel on an aircraft. I don't want to be wondering if the guy two rows behind me has a ceramic knife taped to his leg, or about the contents of the carry-on or checked luggage.

Other random measures I support:

• law enforcement personnel who've had some kind of training course in air safety (or whatever you want to call it) fly for half-price.
• passengers who leave their seats without notifying/receiving permission from an attendant are immediately suspect.
• martial arts training for attendants/crew.
• the option to deplane troublemakers at 30,000 feet.

Originally Posted by northpaw

• professional - if I'm paying airport security less than I pay my mailman, something is wrong. These people should be the best security force I encounter in my day-to-day affairs, not simply the ones with the most authority.

I suspect they actually have little or no authority to apply judgment or make decisions. Probably everything is strictly "by the book".

Thanks for bringing this up. I was just reading Jack's comment over on the introduction thread, and his comments struck a chord with me... how "airline security" has evolved over the last eight years (and the quotations are used very intentionally).

To me, the entire purpose of security is to make me feel... well... secure. I no longer feel that way when I fly. When going through checkpoints at the airport, I mainly feel disrespected. While I understand that working airport security likely isn't the most rewarding job on the planet, a little respect and professionalism would go a long way.

I overheard the discussion on this morning's news debating whether airport security was truly about security or if it was more about a jobs program. Frankly, I think it falls somewhere in between. It seems mostly about the "show" and less about providing true security to travelers. Make a big show of force, make people remove their suit coats and shoes, and criminals will be deterred, right? Well, that isn't working so well...

I don't proclaim to have all the answers, but with the recent events in mind, how about we start by not allowing people on the terror watch list to fly? How was this nut job not on the no-fly list when he was a terror suspect? It boggles the mind.



For now, I'll be taking the train.

Originally Posted by MrDavid

I don't proclaim to have all the answers, but with the recent events in mind, how about we start by not allowing people on the terror watch list to fly? How was this nut job not on the no-fly list when he was a terror suspect? It boggles the mind.



For now, I'll be taking the train.

This is the sad part of it all. The way I see it we could take it to the level of first hand strip searches for all passengers or any other, to date, unthinkable level of individual scrutiny and these kinds of things would still happen when those in power either wanted such things to happen or let such things happen (initiating heinous acts or letting them happen is the same crime to me). Then we'd of course just get a dead end chain of inexplicable errors, glitches and lies.

My point being, you could strip search, body scan, etc people and that would not result in result in "security".

Chris L

The system we have now is largely security theatre. And the idea of reacting to past threats (no getting up 1 hr before landing) is idiotic--the crazies will then just try something at another time. Or try a different mode of transport.

They're not complete fools. If they know they won't be able to get out of their seats past a certain point, they'll just try something earlier. Anyone with half a brain can figure out how to defeat that. But no, we'd rather force old ladies out of wheelchairs & prohibit people from visiting the loo! All for show.

Interesting, the definition of terrorism: "1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization."

Isn't that what we have now? People willingly submitting themselves to being treated like cattle? Anyone remember what happened to the "Land of the Free"? Hate to say it, but to use a cliche, "the terrorists have won." [ends rant]

At one time the Kansas City International was one of the top 3 user friendly airports in the world, the other 2 were in Switzerland. The way KCI is/was set up you could get out of the car and in less than 50 yards / 5 minutes and be seated on the plane. You ought to see the mongosso theyve got there now. This guy should not have been allowed to fly and I just assume take my chances with the terrorists than deal with John Law wannabe's and burueacrats. I can probably kill the terrorist leagally. I used to love flying but these days I would rather walk.

You are dealing with bureaucrats. For instance the latest incident.

1. His father turned him into for being an extremist
2. He was on the no fly list
3. His place of origin would not give him a passport but the US did
4. He boarded the plane with no valid passport because someone either got paid off or was a fool

Don't look for reasons and solutions because no matter what they do they will never get it right. They just can't help it, they are faceless politically correct incompetent fools guided by incompetent fools above them and so on........all the way to the top gal that said everything worked correctly!


Later,
Richard

Originally Posted by TexasBob

I suspect they actually have little or no authority to apply judgment or make decisions. Probably everything is strictly "by the book".

I understand what you mean, but - not to be too crude - just try joking that you've got some plastic explosives stuffed where the sun don't shine and you'll quickly see what kind of authority they have!

(not speaking from experience, thankfully)

They actually have the authority to conficsate anything the individual officer "deems to be a threat". This is a level of authority the police don't have when dealing with a known felon.