Air travel security is retarded - why?

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
I never understood why IDing people is so important on domestic flights within Canada/US/etc. - does this really do anything?

I mean, if someone wanted to blow up a [censored] of stuff and cause a huge ruckus there are a million things easier and more effective than tossing a plane into a building

edit: my 2 paragraphs don't seem to correlate at all...

[/ QUOTE ]

"Hello Mr Grando. I'll be glad to show you to your seat. Oh! And what a nice turban you are wearing today. Jeez! Is that semtex you've brought to share with us on today's flight? Hey, and your 5 checked pieces of luggage seem to be making some noises but, hey, that's cool. We e flyin the friendly skies today"

Later that day:

"And in breaking news. A 747 just flew into Coors Field. The estimates of the dead are in the thousands including the passengers onboard the flight. Of course, we have no idea who was actually on the flight but I guess they'll figure it out by counting up the millions of people who flew today and are still alive and work backwards."

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
I never understood why IDing people is so important on domestic flights within Canada/US/etc. - does this really do anything?


[/ QUOTE ]

On a serious reply note. Passenger manifests are required to be correct for several reasons. The most basic ones are "bag to passenger matching" for secuirty purposes AND knowing who just died when the plane crashes for insurance/family notification purposes.

Can you propose another way to assure the passenger manifests are accurate without ID checks?

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

TWP,
i cant believe you missed a flight. usually, if your baggage is already loaded, they wait FOREVER for you to show up because they don't want to have to take it out of the plane. it was pretty depressing the last flight i took when we were delayed for 30 minutes waiting for this retarded family who boarded the plane with a bunch of shopping bags from the airport.

[TheWorstPlayer]

that's actually closer to what happened in the most recent instance. security took so long that the flight was delayed and i missed a connection. in any case, NTB, fantastic post - thank you. that's basically what i've been looking for. i will now once again go back to my constant flying in peace.

[niss]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hear you sort of, but 3000 people dying when terrorists crash planes into buildings >>>>>>> any inconvenience to anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

putting this in appropriate context, it is an absurd statement

[/ QUOTE ]

Short, condescending posts like this, with little substance, usually arise when the poster has little confidence in whatever it is that underlies his opinion or his ability to express it. So he says something short and aggressive in the hope that he can make is probably incorrect point without being called on it.

So unless you care to explain what you mean by this in some detail, you're terribly wrong.

[Josem]

one of the important roles in air security is to almost entirely eliminate the cost/benefit calculation.

eg, i've heard a story of a car tyre manufacturer that allegedly knew of a problem with their tyre*; they didn't fix it, 'cause they figured the cost of a recall would be greater than the cost of damages in a court. the judge discovered this, and made such huge penalties to apply to totally blow any cost:benefit analysis out of the water.

the same thing applies here - the "inconvenience" of no liquids is totally inconsequential compared to the cost of an airline crashing into a building. thus, the probability is not overly relevant.



*the detail of the story isn't important, but the point is; it might even be a fiction - i don't know

[TheWorstPlayer]

that's all well and good if you know the measures being taken are actually deterrents. but if you're not doing any cost benefit analysis, then how you can you ever justify anything? how can you compare two mutually exclusive options? doesn't someone somewhere need to do some analysis to show that the outcome of the measure is as intended?

what if tire manufacturers didnt stop doing cost-benefit analysis, they just became much more careful in hiding it. and all the judge's penalty did was stir up millions of frivolous lawsuits trying to strike it megarich? shouldnt someone be looking at this type of thing?

so, i guess there are some people looking at this when it comes to air travel security, but i def never saw any published reports...

[renodoc]

how bout the puffer machine you sometimes have to go through in Vegas? ion scanner. total crap. wtf they looking for that they cant find otherwise?

if they really turned it up, half of 2+2 would be busted for weed at the airport.

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
so, i guess there are some people looking at this when it comes to air travel security, but i def never saw any published reports...

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, for the most part, the flying public is, for lack of a better word, dumb. That means their focus is almost entirely on getting themselves from point A to point B with minimal annoyance or mistakes. That said, oftentimes a simple public reasoning for whatever security measure is going into effect is enough to allow the measure to succeed even at the cost of pissing off flyers incrementally.

Additionlly, as I discussed earlier, you don't necesarily want all of the measures and their exact reasons to be public domain for the simple fact that they become less effective when everyone knows what they are. EX: I worked in the field rather deeply and I officially (as in doing red cell type testing) got handguns throught 8 major western international ariport security checkpoints, both pre and post 9/11. Could I still do it today? Not sure. Would I ever tell you or anyone else not associated with CT/security how I did it? Never!

For the latest in the public dissemination of reasons you can always stop by the DHS website. I doubt they will provide anything as detailed as I did, but you can at least get the official word.

[TheWorstPlayer]

cool. air travel still sucks, but now i'll just continue to blame the airlines and i'll lay off the tsa for a while. you did your good deed for the day.