Airport security - when do we say "enough"?

[JRDelirious]

I was already forecasting that first class would stop at the cavity searches but the rest of us peasants would then proceed to be seated in Buck Naked Class, years ago.

We’ve ALWAYS been at risk. Bomb, hijacker, suicidal pilot, cartel hitmen with a machine gun below the approach, asshole with hi-power laser pointer. Can’t stop them all, only take reasnable precautions to minimize.

Also may I point out from the security theater POV that if the threat is that serious why should the limiting the carrying of the devices apply one-way only to inbound flights… that sounds like a put-down on the security capabilities of everyone else, or an overrating of our own. What keeps a terror cell from assembling their tablet bomb IN THE USA and then using it in an outbound flight.

@Sunny_Daze

That said, what would push back look like? A refusal by the public to fly overseas and a hit to the economics of those airlines, one would imagine. Is anyone going to refuse to fly because they can’t have their laptop?

The pushback, if any, is going to come from businesses and agencies who are going to say, wait, not only do you want my employee to remain non-productive for several hours, but you want him/her to put the company laptop with company software and information* in checked luggage?*

(Remember, friends: for ever and a day you’ve been advised to NOT put valuable or essential items in checked luggage; now you’re going to announce that the checked baggage room is going to contain even more goodies for the undocumented shopper)

This is gonna be a huge business opportunity for rent-a-laptop/rent-a-tablet outfits to enable people to work on the road.

[Richard_Parker]

I doubt people will accept real inconvenience like a domestic laptop ban.

The thing about irrational fears is that they will drive a lot of stupid behavior right up until you’re forced to actually make a tough choice that hurts you, and then (collectively) people tend to wise up.

[Ramira]

For the reflection as the DAESH likes to recruit from the prison population.
The long article about drug smuggling, from its page five

The key to stuffing, as in so many things, is practice. Accomplished rectal stuffers, many of whom can be found in our prison system, work both to expand their rectal capacity and, at least as importantly, to train their bodies to suppress the urge to defecate. I spoke to Dr. William Whitehead of the University of North Carolina, an expert on the movements of the gastrointestinal system, who says, “There are a lot of circumstances in which people develop a much larger rectum, or a megarectum.” A megarectum is just a large rectum, generally defined as having a capacity of more than 1,500 mL, and Dr. Whitehead is used to seeing it from those with severe constipation. “Through repeated retention of stool the rectum becomes enlarged,” he says, but when I asked if manual effort–practice, basically–could also enlarge the capacity, he said “I think it could.”

The maximum capacity of a normal rectum–meaning, before the patient is overcome by the urge to defecate–is about 350 to 500 mL, or about a pint in volume. That’s a lot; the first urge to defecate comes at about 100 mL, so if you’re storing five times that amount, you’re probably pretty uncomfortable. But repeated stretching of the rectum can increase that size markedly. “We do know that it’s not rare for people to have larger capacities,” says Dr. Whitehead. “We have certainly tested people for whom it’s 800 mL. With practice the capacity becomes larger.”

The rectum is a fantastically powerful, stretchable part of the body. The problem I kept running into in trying to figure out how much cocaine you could fit in your butthole is that, well, there isn’t really an upper limit. It’s all about conditioning and practice. That said, let’s take that 800 mL as an example upper limit. Given the density of cocaine hydrochloride, that converts to about 0.97 kilograms of cocaine, or very nearly the size of one of those big bricks you see confiscated on the news. And that 800 mL isn’t unheard-of; it’s probably on the low end for someone who performs a lot of rectal stretching activities.

Of course for this laptop ban to keep the americans frightened of the foreign calm, it is not hard at all to imagine the terrorist checking several of the laptops or devices for the remote detonation in the cargo hold for the fire failure.

It is not to mind the elevation of risk from the then becoming frequent of having hundreds of the laptops and the ipads in the cargo storage and the lithium battery oridinary failure with the cascading heat effect from the fires subsequent.

But some can feel illogically safer

[mikecurtis]

@JRDelirious

. . .The pushback, if any, is going to come from businesses and agencies who are going to say, wait, not only do you want my employee to remain non-productive for several hours, but you want him/her to put the company laptop with company software and information* in checked luggage?*. . .

The TSA is a govt agency. The pushback comes at the ballot box. As a child agency of the Department of Homeland Security, the TSA now resides under the jurisdiction of the Transportation Security Committee , a subcommittee of the Committee on Homeland Security. Talk to your representatives.

mc

[thelurkinghorror]

@igor_frankensteen

I personally have no sympathy whatsoever, for people who think they must remain electronically connected or entertained at all times. And I do NOT find the notion of reading a book to be the horrific experience that you seem to fear it is.

It wouldn’t be for a few hours. Laptops already can’t be checked due to fire risk. If you can’t carry on, then how do you bring a laptop at all? Ship it? Force airlines to maintain a controlled “laptop storage,” which defeats the purpose.

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

[Weisshund]

@Lemur866

The thing is, a bomb small enough to fit into a laptop isn’t going to be big enough to take down the plane. Yeah, a few people might get killed. So what? A big strong guy could probably kill a couple passengers with his bare hands before being subdued. We’re not going to ban big strong guys, are we?

The threat should be: can this take down the plane? If it won’t take down the plane, then there’s no point in banning it. And that’s why bans on nail clippers are so stupid. Can you kill someone with nail clippers? Yes. So what?

Actually, a laptop full of C4 is pretty much enough to take out an airplane.
But they Xray your laptop phone and tablet etc, so you would notice right off that the motherboard battery etc are missing and it appears to be filled with play-doh i would think?

So while i do think it is dumb to ban laptops and tablets, dont underestimate the bomb you could make with a gutted laptop, you could stuff a claymore in one pretty much.

Nude flights could be amusing though:D

Last time a flew, i had to through away an eyeglass repair kit because of the tiny half inch long screw driver.
I mean really? you would almost have to help me kill you with it.

[igor_frankensteen]

@mikecurtis

But do they work? There is a considerable amount of skepticism regarding this. Even among the security community.

mc

Part of MY point, is that the fact that a given solution to a security problem is or isn’t effective, is entirely separate from whether or not A solution is needed. I fix stuff for a living and always have. I know VERY well that even the brightest people will sometimes come up with fixes to problems, that flat out don’t work, and which make things worse overall. But I also know that doing nothing about a problem sure as hell doesn’t make it go away.

As I was saying, today’s solutions, especially the temporary band-aid types (as this latest ban on laptops probably is) aren’t likely to remain as THE be all end all solution. Especially when the solutions are hard on our getting the rest of our lives going. But what we do is, we go with the temp fix for now, and then we find a long term work around, or a more permanent fix. We do NOT throw up our hands and say “enough! I fixed the first six things that went wrong, now I’m just going to sit here and let the seventh problem destroy me!”

[DSYoungEsq]

While I have condemned most of what passes for pre-flight security as mere theater designed to make us feel like “something is being done”, the recent intelligence regarding the effort to slip explosives on board masquerading as laptop computer batteries did concern me. I’m not particularly willing to be the experiment on whether that’s doable or not.

[Ramira]

Of course it is possible, it has happened on a Somali flight.

It is also can be remotely detonated. If you move all the laptops to the cargo hold you nicely give a concentration of explosive batteries for such an incident for internal fire and increase the daily exposure risk to the accidental battery ignition even without the terror attempt - a happening that has already occured.

[running_coach]

@Weisshund

Actually, a laptop full of C4 is pretty much enough to take out an airplane.
But they Xray your laptop phone and tablet etc, so you would notice right off that the motherboard battery etc are missing and it appears to be filled with play-doh i would think?

The TSA? Not a chance.

[Martini_Enfield]

@Siam_Sam

And they would be rubbing their hands with glee if they were allowed to slip bombs on planes easily. Don’t like security? Then don’t fucking fly anywhere.

A bit difficult when you live on a huge island continent that’s at least a six to 14 hour flight from anywhere more interesting that New Zealand.

I travel to the US for work enough for this potential new measure to be a problem - I work on my laptop and while I enjoy being able to be to watch movies and TV shows for 12 hours straight and not feel bad about it, there are times when I need to get some work done and that’s going to be difficult if I can’t use a laptop.

[Beren_Erchamion]

@Siam_Sam

And they would be rubbing their hands with glee if they were allowed to slip bombs on planes easily. Don’t like security? Then don’t fucking fly anywhere.

Except they can’t, because they scan for that shit. Either the scans work, in which case there’s no risk, or they don’t, in which case moving the laptop bombs from the cabin to the cargo hold doesn’t actually do any good because there’s still a bomb on the plane and so everyone else is inconvenienced to no advantage.

[Beren_Erchamion]

@Martini_Enfield

A bit difficult when you live on a huge island continent that’s at least a six to 14 hour flight from anywhere more interesting that New Zealand.

I travel to the US for work enough for this potential new measure to be a problem - I work on my laptop and while I enjoy being able to be to watch movies and TV shows for 12 hours straight and not feel bad about it, there are times when I need to get some work done and that’s going to be difficult if I can’t use a laptop.

Not to mention the potential for loss, damage, or theft if a laptop’s in checked baggage.

[Martini_Enfield]

@Beren_Erchamion

Not to mention the potential for loss, damage, or theft if a laptop’s in checked baggage.

Exactly. A broken laptop is no good to anyone at either end of the trip either.

[running_coach]

@Beren_Erchamion

Except they can’t, because they scan for that shit. Either the scans work, in which case there’s no risk, or they don’t, in which case moving the laptop bombs from the cabin to the cargo hold doesn’t actually do any good because** there’s still a bomb on the plane** and so everyone else is inconvenienced to no advantage.

That can be set off by the cellphone you’re still allowed(for now) to bring on board.

Maybe they’ll start collecting all the luggage going to a particular destination and send it all once a day on a separate cargo flight.

[Ramira]

@running_coach

That can be set off by the cellphone you’re still allowed(for now) to bring on board.

Maybe they’ll start collecting all the luggage going to a particular destination and send it all once a day on a separate cargo flight.

And it has the dozens, maybe hundreds of added laptop/ipad etc batteries from checked goods near it for added explosive fun…

[Beren_Erchamion]

@running_coach

That can be set off by the cellphone you’re still allowed(for now) to bring on board.

Hell, it could even be on a timer, or a barometer.

[AK84]

@DSYoungEsq

While I have condemned most of what passes for pre-flight security as mere theater designed to make us feel like “something is being done”, the recent intelligence regarding the effort to slip explosives on board masquerading as laptop computer batteries did concern me. I’m not particularly willing to be the experiment on whether that’s doable or not.

The intelligence was. *Gulf and other ME carriers are fucking US carriers in the ass with their far superior service, How do we help our airlines who are totally coincidentally big contributors to our campaigns…oh yeah right. *.

Yeah since the terrorists will never deign to fly an American or European carrier.

[Ramira]

@AK84

The intelligence was. *Gulf and other ME carriers are fucking US carriers in the ass with their far superior service, How do we help our airlines who are totally coincidentally big contributors to our campaigns…oh yeah right. *.

Yeah since the terrorists will never deign to fly an American or European carrier.

That was the MENA ban.

[even_sven]

I’d be ok with someone starting an airline with decreased security-- people should get to choose to take risks. But there is no way I would ever take it. Would you?