An article that neatly explains air travel security theater...

[Leaper]

No matter, IMO, whether you think it does anything or not.

It exists because people demand it.

@CNN

Both groups say they learned about the policy change Tuesday, and charged that the TSA is forgetting about the terrorist attacks that led to the formation of the agency.

“It’s as if we didn’t learn anything from 9/11,” said George Randall Taylor, head of the air marshal unit of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA). “Flight attendants are going to be sitting ducks.”

Granted, these are occupational groups, not individuals, but I’d wager there are a LOT of people who agree with them.

[Boyo_Jim]

Knives on planes are fine. Just keep out that deadly shampoo!

[chappachula]

@Leaper

not individuals, but I’d wager there are a LOT of people who agree with them.

and I’d wager that there are even more people who disagree.

Imagine if some airport could advertize-“Easy travelling–No Lines!! We’ve cancelled our contract with TSA”.
The public would flock to such a place.
(It will never happen, but it sure is fun to dream about. )

[Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor]

Leaper–let go of your fear.

[Alley_Dweller]

@chappachula

Imagine if some airport could advertize-“Easy travelling–No Lines!! We’ve cancelled our contract with TSA”.
The public would flock to such a place.

Perhaps they would flock to such a place. And that would be fine for the people who voluntarily want to take on the risk of flying through a no-security airport.

But what about the people in skyscrapers or government offices when planes fly into them? They didn’t volunteer to be part of this. What about people on the ground under where the plane explodes or the plane crashes? They probably didn’t volunteer.

And what would all the people who flocked to this airport do once they got there? Having your planes blown up or hijacked represents a major inconvenience to the airlines and I’m sure the insurance costs would be astronomical. Do you really think any airlines would fly from such an airport?

But greed would overcome the airlines or new airlines would start up to serve the masses yearning to fly without security. Where would these airlines fly? No other airport is going to accept unscreened passengers into their terminals and even if they just usher the passengers directly out of the airport, the idea of having parked planes exploding in your airport is unsettling.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Security is totally incompetent and has never prevented a hijacking. In fact, hijackings have become so commonplace that the newspapers don’t even bother reporting on them any more, right? Or have all the potential hijackers retired and the kids just aren’t learning the craft any more?

[grude]

@Alley_Dweller

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Security is totally incompetent and has never prevented a hijacking. In fact, hijackings have become so commonplace that the newspapers don’t even bother reporting on them any more, right? Or have all the potential hijackers retired and the kids just aren’t learning the craft any more?

More like hijackings are now and probably forever off the table, it is a non issue. Pilot fly this plane into that building or I’LL KILL YOU!..wait stop laughing!

The fact is 9/11 changed permanently the threat assessment for hijackings, the passengers and crew will no longer allow it to happen.

And no one is arguing for totally unscreened passengers, we’re arguing for a return to sensible pre 9/11 screening prochedures.
Funny enough I’ve thought the same thing about the drug war/drug prohibition, any consideration of alternate action plans is shut down because “it feels wrong”.:smack:
I saw an interview in Der Spiegal with a former dirty drug cop in El Paso, this guy is totally corrupt and was at the point of ordering murders. When asked about legalizing drugs he said it will never happen because “it feels like the wrong thing to do”:smack:

[Leaper]

@Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor

Leaper–let go of your fear.

Huh?

[LawMonkey]

I do love the first link in the article: “Former TSA chief backs ‘knife’ decision; suggests axes and machetes, too”.

[Sailboat]

@LawMonkey

I do love the first link in the article: “Former TSA chief backs ‘knife’ decision; suggests axes and machetes, too”.

Heh. He waxes on in detail:

“They ought to let everything on that is sharp and pointy. Battle axes, machetes … bring anything you want that is pointy and sharp because while you may be able to commit an act of violence, you will not be able to take over the plane. It is as simple as that,” he said.

“So my position would be, bravo on the 2.6 inch knife. But why not take it all the way and then really clean up the checkpoint where officers are focusing on bombs and toxins, which are things that can destroy an airplane. And it would smooth the process, cost less money, and be better security.”

Asked if he was using hyperbole in suggesting that battle axes be allowed on planes, Hawley said he was not.

“I really believe it. What are you going to do when you get on board with a battle ax? And you pull out your battle ax and say I’m taking over the airplane. You may be able to cut one or two people, but pretty soon you would be down in the aisle and the battle ax would be used on you.”

[Double_Foolscap]

How hard would it be to cause significant structural damage to a plane, from the inside, with an axe?

[Alley_Dweller]

@Double_Foolscap

How hard would it be to cause significant structural damage to a plane, from the inside, with an axe?

It would really suck if you broke out a window at 40,000 feet.

[Nunzio_Tavulari]

@Alley_Dweller

But what about the people in skyscrapers or government offices when planes fly into them? They didn’t volunteer to be part of this. What about people on the ground under where the plane explodes or the plane crashes? They probably didn’t volunteer.

Add up all of the people that have died this way. Then add up all of the people you expect will die this way in the future.

Now compare that to the number worldwide who die of heart disease every single day. Roughly 20,000 in 2011. They probably didn’t volunteer. I’ll make this easier on you and pick something with a lower death rate per day. How about diabetes; 3,500 people a day didn’t volunteer to die from something that we have good treatments for.

See how trivial the danger from pocket knives is?

[Alley_Dweller]

@Nunzio_Tavulari

Add up all of the people that have died this way. Then add up all of the people you expect will die this way in the future.

Now compare that to the number worldwide who die of heart disease every single day. Roughly 20,000 in 2011. They probably didn’t volunteer. I’ll make this easier on you and pick something with a lower death rate per day. How about diabetes; 3,500 people a day didn’t volunteer to die from something that we have good treatments for.

See how trivial the danger from pocket knives is?

Oh. I honestly never realized that carrying pocket knives on planes could prevent heart disease or diabetes. I guess that’s an important reason to have them in the passenger cabin rather than checking them in luggage. Thanks for pointing that out.

So are you saying that if something causes significantly fewer deaths than heart disease or diabetes we need not concern ourselves with it?

[Spiderman]

@grude

The fact is 9/11 changed permanently the threat assessment for hijackings, the passengers and crew will no longer allow it to happen.

This.
Even by the fourth plane on 9/11 the passengers attempted to fight back. In every case since where someone has gotten hinky, including the shoe bomber & the underwear bomber the other passengers & crew have dogpiled them & in some cases literally hogtied them or duct-taped them to a seat.
Why shouldn’t I be able to carry a small object that might save many lives if someone is hellbent on bringing another plane down? Give me a fighting chance against the guy who has smuggled a box cutter/gun/bomb on board.

[Dewey_Finn]

@Nunzio_Tavulari

Now compare that to the number worldwide who die of heart disease every single day. Roughly 20,000 in 2011. They probably didn’t volunteer. I’ll make this easier on you and pick something with a lower death rate per day. How about diabetes; 3,500 people a day didn’t volunteer to die from something that we have good treatments for.

Not really great examples, as the incidence of heart disease and diabetes are at least partly related to diet and exercise, so to a certain extent, people did “volunteer” to die from these things.

But I am happy that they’ve relaxed the restrictions on knives. I like to bring whole fruit with me and cut it up when I’m ready to eat it, so it would be nice to have a small knife with which to do so. Although given the scrutiny, I probably still won’t carry one with me. Next, can we eliminate the stupid restriction against carrying liquids on board flights?

[smiling_bandit]

Aside form which, while smal knives can cause unpleasant wounds, it’s actually quite difficult to kill or seriously maim someone with a short blade. You have to damage an artery in most cases, which isn’t all that easy, especially as such an individual would be outnumbered and almost certainly brought down.

That said, I have no issue with security theater provided that the actual inconvenience is limited (it’s too much at many airports right now) and that it covers for more effective and focused security (it usually doesn’t).

[Procrustus]

I’m no fan of security theater. I don’t see a real need to remove our shoes, for example. I fly a lot, and I must say that with a few exceptions, the hassle just isn’t that bad. A few extra minutes.

[aruvqan]

@smiling_bandit

Aside form which, while smal knives can cause unpleasant wounds, it’s actually quite difficult to kill or seriously maim someone with a short blade. You have to damage an artery in most cases, which isn’t all that easy, especially as such an individual would be outnumbered and almost certainly brought down.

That said, I have no issue with security theater provided that the actual inconvenience is limited (it’s too much at many airports right now) and that it covers for more effective and focused security (it usually doesn’t).

They would definitely work best as a surprise attack [as in stand up and cut the throat of the annoying asshat who is reclining his seat into your legs] rather than something more visible.

But then again, I could probably kill someone with 100 units of insulin jammed into their neck.

[lost4life]

I won’t be satisfied until we can board with assault rifles and large capacity shampoo bottles.

[SmellMyWort]

I doubt this will change my behavior but it will be nice for people who don’t check luggage or accidentally forgot that they had a knife in their bag.