3 ms·

Not that I'm disagreeing with you but I wonder what the TSA could do to address the root of the problem?

ori_b 17y ago
What can the TSA do? Nothing short of measures that would normally be considered draconian would be any sort of reasonable solution. Screen everyone carefully. Careful tests of everything brought aboard, if any is allowed at all. Require background checks upon passport application (or application for plane tickets). Also, have a security officer on board, with orders to shoot to kill if anyone tries any funny stuff. Of course, organizations like local police forces are in a far better position to make a difference. Better detective work, with the goal of breaking up terrorist rings and locating individuals, would certainly be an effective step to combat terrorism. As this article points out - these people are often already suspects. A reasonable solution would be to give up on complete security. Put in the obvious deterrents - a security officer on board the plane, and reinforced cabin doors that don't open for the duration of the flight. Other than that, don't worry about it. When you look at other threats like drunk driving or heart disease you should realize that our panic is misplaced.
roc 17y ago
That's easy. Terrorists seize/destroy planes with weapons or explosives. So to the extent that the TSA can efficiently and effectively scan for weapons, explosives and known terrorists, they should. To the extent that they can't detect certain explosives (the theoretical binary liquid concern), it's reasonable to take measures to mitigate risk. (E.g. limit quantities when feasible) Beyond that? Nothing.
CWuestefeld 17y ago
Why ought the TSA do anything? (or really, why ought we to have a TSA?) There are scads of targets that ought to be attractive to terrorists: sports arenas, various tunnels and bridges, power generation and transmission, etc. None of these get anything like the security attention, despite their potential to cause far greater harm than the WTC attacks did. I have the mental picture of a building with many doors. We're putting solid steel doors, deadbolts, triple padlocks, etc., on one door, while the other entries are nothing but screen doors. This is ridiculously ineffective in cost and freedom.

ori_b 17y ago

What can the TSA do? Nothing short of measures that would normally be considered draconian would be any sort of reasonable solution. Screen everyone carefully. Careful tests of everything brought aboard, if any is allowed at all. Require background checks upon passport application (or application for plane tickets). Also, have a security officer on board, with orders to shoot to kill if anyone tries any funny stuff. Of course, organizations like local police forces are in a far better position to make a difference. Better detective work, with the goal of breaking up terrorist rings and locating individuals, would certainly be an effective step to combat terrorism. As this article points out - these people are often already suspects. A reasonable solution would be to give up on complete security. Put in the obvious deterrents - a security officer on board the plane, and reinforced cabin doors that don't open for the duration of the flight. Other than that, don't worry about it. When you look at other threats like drunk driving or heart disease you should realize that our panic is misplaced.

roc 17y ago

That's easy. Terrorists seize/destroy planes with weapons or explosives. So to the extent that the TSA can efficiently and effectively scan for weapons, explosives and known terrorists, they should. To the extent that they can't detect certain explosives (the theoretical binary liquid concern), it's reasonable to take measures to mitigate risk. (E.g. limit quantities when feasible) Beyond that? Nothing.

CWuestefeld 17y ago

Why ought the TSA do anything? (or really, why ought we to have a TSA?) There are scads of targets that ought to be attractive to terrorists: sports arenas, various tunnels and bridges, power generation and transmission, etc. None of these get anything like the security attention, despite their potential to cause far greater harm than the WTC attacks did. I have the mental picture of a building with many doors. We're putting solid steel doors, deadbolts, triple padlocks, etc., on one door, while the other entries are nothing but screen doors. This is ridiculously ineffective in cost and freedom.