Sober Thread: Assume the Position!

This is a pretty damn boring thread topic so I'll keep my opinion short and sweet.

1. Why would anyone really care about this? Granted, I only fly a few times a year, but it's not like this is going to make getting on a plane some massive chore.
2. I am baffled that so many people are posting as if airport security is worthless. Do you people have any idea what would happen if it was elminated? Seriously, it's as if you think the reason we aren't having mass amounts of flights hijacked is because people just don't feel like doing it.

 

If there were a faster way for someone to declare that they have no idea what they're talking about on this subject, I'd be impressed by the economy with which its writer uses language. Go read some reports or documentaries exposing the lack of security where it counts in airports. Did you know you can send packages via airmail on commercial flights that are virtually never scanned? Do you have any idea how easy it is to hop a fence and get onto airport grounds? The up-front stuff that we see going through the gate amounts to little more than bluffing. And for that matter, even entirely unarmed and without toothpaste, it wouldn't take much for a small group of trained and motivated people to take over a plane. So yes, if people actually wanted to hijack flights en masse, they'd be doing it. As Jon Stewart wisely points out, between the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber, the only new idea terrorists have had was to move the explosives three feet up.

The funny thing is that, ultimately, what is putting pilots through a security scanner going to do? They're already flying the fucking plane. All told, them carrying a bomb on the plane and blowing it up mid-air is probably the least bad possible scenario.

My least favourite airport security rule has to do with duty-free booze and transfer flights. I had to pack away 5 litres of fine German beer into my checked baggage in Montreal after discovering, on my way back from Germany, that security doesn't honour that sealed bag for duty free goods when connecting between flights. Those Germans do build stout beer bottles, though - not a single one of them broke.

 

1) I'm in an airplane, 35,000 feet above the ground. I want to be fucking safe.

2) If someone got onto the airplane with a weapon, they could turn it into a guided missile insanely easily. I'm sure everyone remembers what happens then.

3) It takes, what, maybe another 5 minutes for the extra security measures? Get to the airport five minutes earlier, and deal. Plus, I'm sure the majority of you sick fucks like people grabbing your cooters; it's probably the closest thing to action y'all've had in a while.

4) Yes, the TSA people may be angry, bitter, and rude to you. That's because they're having to deal with dipshits who automatically hate them just because they're sending them through a fucking scanner for their own protection. You'd be angry, bitter, and rude as well if that's all you did all day.

5) Again, just to repeat myself, we have THOUSANDS of potentially GUIDED MISSILES flying over the US every fucking second. Do you really want one of those to be taken hostage? It's a risk/cost assessment. There's very little risk to increasing the security, but the cost if something does happen is astronomical.

6) There's way more invasive shit that the government does/tries on a daily basis. People bitching about the TSA are just swinging at the most visible target.

7) There's assholes in every profession. Don't assume that all airport security people are dipshits just because of a few sour grapes. I've met some really cool TSA people, and it's amazing how much cooler they are to you if you're nice and friendly and listen to their instructions. They're looking to get the criminals, not you.

8) Criminals don't get customer service. If they aren't automatically assuming everyone is a threat unless proven otherwise, they're not doing their job. The human mind/vulnerability is the weakest link in any security system, and all it takes is one smooth-talking criminal to hijack a plane.

9) It's more of a risk driving in your car to the airport, than it is going through one of those scanners.

 

You're right, I don't spend my free time reading about airport security. Shame on me. If there's all these documents out there, go ahead and link them. I don't really follow why you think some retard jumping a fence is going to be able to sneak on a plane. It doesn't seem impossible that a small group of trained terrorist could hijack a flight, but you really don't believe making sure they don't have weapons makes this more difficult? As for the packages, I've heard stories like this, but I haven't heard about packages intentionally being unscanned. I'm not calling BS, but I'd like to see the source.

 

What if we give people the option? If you don’t mind paying the money for the extra personnel to execute these procedures or taking the extra time to go through the process then you are allowed whatever piece of mind this gives you. If, on the other hand, you feel the security measures are ineffective, costly and time-consuming then you have the option of going to an airport or taking a flight that does not have them. That way if you get blown up or you have to spend X amount of extra money or time it was your choice and stop bitching.

 

I'm with Procter, Ghetto and the other people who think this is a bunch of shit. We're spending boatloads of cash and wasting a ton of time just for the illusion of security. Bad people who want to do bad things will find a way. Shit, even if we were successful in creating 100% safe flying, they'd find another way to hurt us, be it bombing buildings or mass shootings.

I'll file this information under "save for later"

Edit: Oh and by the way, like most governmental efforts, this one was also pushed in the private interest of a person/entity

 

I'm conflicted. I disagree with the reasoning behind implementing these body scanners for a multitude of reasons-- "security theater" being a large part of my argument. I have seen proof that the idiots operating these things save the images and have the ability to distribute them at will, which is beyond fucked and I still haven't seen any real solution for stopping that particular problem.

But I've smuggled a fuckton of shit onto airplanes. The pat-down is a joke. Because I'm not the demographic that usually tries to put a Boeing 747 through the Oval Office, TSA really doesn't give a shit. Sure, I got caught when I tried to get away with a wrench, ball peen hammer, and a couple of screwdrivers in my purse. I wasn't really trying to hide that, though. But they've missed the marijuana and the firecrackers, which are arguably more dangerous.

I just don't know. I think a complete security overhaul is long overdue, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

Good plan, lets let only rich people bomb planes.

 

I think you missed the point. This is not about rich and poor (not sure how my statement meant only rich could bomb planes anyway, unless only rich people are the ones flying now), this is about the fact that for all their bitching, people would not opt out of the security measures we have in effect now. If given the choice to go through the hassle of security or get on a plane without those measures they would choose our current, albeit still not perfect, system.

 

I'm going to give you the beneift of the doubt here, but just in case, you do realize that building two airports near each other to 'give people the option' would waste a shitload more money than it would save, right?

 

I am going to give you both the benefit, but just in case, you do realize I never mentioned buildling a second airport. I will admit I did not give the implementation of the "give the people" process much thought as it was more the idea, again, that people would choose the security even if given the choice. So, no worries, Kamp Trinker and Primer, two airports would not be necessary because people will not choose to use them.

 

There are plenty of documentaries kicking around (the CBC had a good one - <a class="postlink" href="http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/content/2010/01/fasten-your-seatbelts.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/content/2010/01 ... belts.html</a> ) with the testimony of security experts pointing out various holes (i.e. the airmail thing - Canada Post mail is frequently shipped on Air Canada). The concern with people hopping the fence isn't getting onto a plane and hijacking it, but has to do with things like posing as groundcrew or baggage handlers. In said documentary the people left with the ultimate responsibility for checking a plane for bombs were the custodians who clean the plane before the passengers board. Of course, they were neither trained nor paid extra for it.

Making sure people don't have weapons and making it difficult for them to carry explosives is just common sense. But the way it's done is ineffective. Metal detector sensitivities vary - I've known people who fly frequently enough that they know to take off their belt depending on which airport they're in. The Israelis have a good system going - they screen everyone coming through and if they raise any red flags, they are screened more thoroughly, sometimes to the point of every sock in their checked luggage being turned inside out as the situation warrants. And despite a very clear and present threat, how often are planes hijacked coming out of Israel? Although I'm rather loathe to recommend some of Bill Maher's ideas, he has a good one for airline safety: rather than a bunch of people who are untrained and unmotivated being responsible for keeping dangerous people off of planes, have a smaller number of highly trained professionals who know what they're doing and what to look for.

 

Fuck it, I don't give a shit. I'd much rather all the effort of complaining was put into fixing missing my flight because I got bumped by a carrier who overbooks every damn flight.

The whole security thing makes life interesting though. Slightly different, but my brother nearly got unstuck by the biometric scanner type things in Hong Kong recently. They're the ones that work on body heat, and were brought in after SARS. Basically, if you're running a temperature then you've got shit all chance of getting into the place.

He'd been to the Philippines and was going to Hong Kong on the way back to Australia. He'd been adhering to the "don't drink the water" in the Philippines until one night where he got drunk, forgot himself and ordered a scotch. It came with ice and he spent the next few days exploding at both ends. He arrived in Hong Kong on the tail end of it, got caught by the scanners and spent several miserable hours convincing the authorities that he didn't have "flu like symptoms"

I guess achieving a 3:1 ratio of ass squirts and technicolor yawns to sneezes got him a pass, or something.

 

Oh, why thank you for that benefit. I feel so happy now, I was just acting all the fool and now I've been set straight.

You're suggesting that there are separate airplanes, meant for people who are not interested in having security - we get it - I'll take that award now.

I'll tell you why the TSA makes all these super safe, awesome, security measures and it's pretty simple if you think about it. People become scared of unknown and faceless things - like terrorists. They're especially scared of things like terrorists when the news and government start telling them who the real evil in this world is*. The TSA implementations might never actually find anything of use, maybe the lone gunman or someone like the shoe bomber but nothing of real significance. It's unlikely that the TSA will find any sort of real connection towards Al Qaeda; that's what government agents are for. The TSA implementations are there to make people feel safe; you know why? People love to have nice, neat order and they love to be told that everything will be okay - they want to be told that they're safe, even if it's not. They want to see some sort of tangible evidence that something is being done about the issues.

Average Joe doesn't want to think about Johnny Bombtits, making his jungle juice landmines or Mohammad the Tooth, running around Serbia buying all the worlds stolen Uranium. Building machines that look right through your clothing and arm wrestling peoples junk is just a few ways, even though it's over the top, of making Average Joe feel safe. Like it or not, this is how the world will work for quite some time. Or at least until a more effective method of making idiots feel safe comes around.

*In this case it's terrorists, duh. It doesn't even matter what it is, hell, if Fox news started a piece on how a bunny rabbit killed a dozen knights that were exploring a cave, who were looking for some religious cup and then tell the people that rabbits are the end of all humanity; the average idiot would slaughter those bunnies by the thousands.

 

See, I don't think that's true. I think most people recognize that the TSA is awful. Here's a poll in which the majority of people think the TSA is doing a 2/5 job of protecting travelers. It rates 1/5 on all other metrics. (Google for other polls, most of them are along the same lines.)

The short of it is that the TSA is just awful in every respect.

And, here's a blog post explaining why the Israeli model of airport security doesn't scale. Summary: The U.S. has too many travelers to make effective use of a small and highly-trained security team—they would simply be overwhelmed by the volume.

 

I only have a minor anecdote regarding airport security.

My last night in Ibiza was pretty crazy; I tried two new drugs that day, drank a ton with the Irish National Rugby team who I befriended while drunk and woke up in a bed on the other side of the island with a girl with a thick Serbian (I think) accent.

Needless to say I was hungover, the Irish only had Redbull Vodkas and I tried to keep up, but that plus the drugs really didn't do me any favors.

I walked through the Ibiza airport with sunglasses on and a large bottle of gatorade and a ton of redbulls in my hand bag. The security guy looked at the x-ray, smirked and told me to take off my glasses at the gate. I nodded back zombie-like and he pushed me through.

Side note: I entered the plane very very very hungover, exited it an hour later feeling completely rejuvenated. Did the air pressure do something to my bloodstream/hydration level? I hadn't drank the Gatorade or the redbulls so it couldn't have been those.

 

If I were a terrorist, I wouldn't even get on the plane. Just bring a duffel bag up to the security line, drop it, walk to a safe distance, and make a call on your cell phone. Boom, seventy-five casualties.

And what are they going to do about it? Make TSA-Approved Security Intervals and wrap the security line around the lobby to make sure that a bomb will only kill five people instead of fifty?

Shit, you don't even need to walk into the airport. Subways don't have any security at all, and a good explosion on a train during rush hour will kill a shitload of people. Madrid found that out the hard way.

If a terrorist wants to kill people, he will. The only defense against terrorism is stopping them at the source with intelligence. Finding the guys who are enabling them, going after the people who manufacture the bombs, and intercepting threats before they happen. That's done long before Johnny bin Jihad buys a ticket on Orbitz.

If a guy with a backpack filled with C4 is coming into the airport, we've already lost.

In a way, the TSA is the terrorists' victory. Think of the millions of hours of lost time that are spent in the airport going through the patdowns and searches. Millions and millions of dollars, all gone to the Security Tax. Millions more go to the TSA, from the same tax. And it isn't even doing anything.

If you were a CEO and were told by an executive that his chosen strategy would cost millions of dollars and wouldn't improve risk at all, you would probably tell him to start cleaning out his desk. So why are we letting the government do the exact same thing?