3 ms·

> I won't fly to most places any more. ... I would have really liked to visit places like the US and Japan some time in my life (I live in the UK). I wonder ab

> I won't fly to most places any more. ... I would have really liked to visit places like the US and Japan some time in my life (I live in the UK). I wonder about this. Do many people outside the U.S. think the way you do? It appears to me that many do. And yet, we don't hear the U.S. tourism industry screaming about people staying away. Why not? I can only conclude that people are, by and large, not staying away. And again, why not? Possibly the decline in the U.S. dollar vs (say) the Euro in recent years has offset the above problem somewhat, so that, while tourism is less than what it would be, it is about what the industry is used to (?).

Silhouette 17y ago
Perhaps those of us who object to the security theatre do shout louder than most. So far, the visitor stats for the US show a dramatic reduction in US tourism post-9/11, but over time the level has returned to what it was before or a little higher. It's impossible to say from those figures alone whether it would have been higher still except for the people deterred by the kinds of measures we've been talking about. Then again, a recent survey that hit a lot of the tabloids over here in the UK predicted that about 90% of our people would still fly despite airport body scanners. We're still in the fear stage with that one, and of course most people haven't experienced it yet and there haven't been too many high profile stories of abuse so far. Also, some people prefer the virtual strip search to the alternative of a physical search, so given the choice they would rather take the scanner. The wording of that survey was interesting, though, as it did seem to imply that around 10% of our population would simply refuse a body scan or avoid making arrangements where they might be required to have one. It was also interesting that in other countries, a much higher proportion of the population objected, in some cases a heavy majority. Of course, for now there are still alternative flights from the UK to many destinations that don't involve using airports like Heathrow where the scanners are, so those who object can mostly just avoid the scanners and go from elsewhere. It remains to be seen what the effect would be if the scanners became compulsory at all airports.
tome 17y ago
I think the answer is either that Silhouette has had a number of unusual experiences or he's overstating the case. In the last six months I have flown from the following airports: Heathrow Stansted Ben Gurion Cologne Vienna Edinburgh I have had to take my belt off at all of them, and my shoes off once. The "worst" experience was in Israel where I had to go through my bag with the very polite security guards, and it took about half an hour. They were very nice about the whole situation though. Basically it was inconvenient, but I don't feel it was a big deal and I don't feel like my humanity has been debased. I've also travelled once on Eurostar and the security process was exactly the same.
- Silhouette 17y ago
  > I think the answer is either that Silhouette has had a number of unusual experiences or he's overstating the case. My experience, and those I am reporting from other people I know, obviously only represent a small drop in the ocean of all air travel. It's certainly possible that we have collectively been "unlucky" and others have a much better experience. In any case, I look at this more as a matter of principle. Clearly for at least some people air travel has become very unpleasant, very inefficient, or both, as a result of all the security theatre. This is a purely negative effect on our society. It has absolutely no merit whatsoever, except for politicians who can now say they are "doing something" about "fighting terrorism". As with much done in the name of fighting terrorism, the measures initially only catch a few people. As long as this represents only a relatively small proportion of travellers, it doesn't cause a huge public outcry and a lot of people carry on oblivious. That doesn't mean those people would be happy with the way they were treated if their number came up. I'm happy that you have, so far, been one of the lucky ones. I wish everyone was guaranteed the same experience you have had so far. However, as a result of the inconvenience I have experienced and the much nastier things that have happened to other people I know, I am quite sure that I wouldn't like it if my number came up, so I now choose not to fly on routes where that is a significant possibility.

Silhouette 17y ago

Perhaps those of us who object to the security theatre do shout louder than most. So far, the visitor stats for the US show a dramatic reduction in US tourism post-9/11, but over time the level has returned to what it was before or a little higher. It's impossible to say from those figures alone whether it would have been higher still except for the people deterred by the kinds of measures we've been talking about. Then again, a recent survey that hit a lot of the tabloids over here in the UK predicted that about 90% of our people would still fly despite airport body scanners. We're still in the fear stage with that one, and of course most people haven't experienced it yet and there haven't been too many high profile stories of abuse so far. Also, some people prefer the virtual strip search to the alternative of a physical search, so given the choice they would rather take the scanner. The wording of that survey was interesting, though, as it did seem to imply that around 10% of our population would simply refuse a body scan or avoid making arrangements where they might be required to have one. It was also interesting that in other countries, a much higher proportion of the population objected, in some cases a heavy majority. Of course, for now there are still alternative flights from the UK to many destinations that don't involve using airports like Heathrow where the scanners are, so those who object can mostly just avoid the scanners and go from elsewhere. It remains to be seen what the effect would be if the scanners became compulsory at all airports.

tome 17y ago

I think the answer is either that Silhouette has had a number of unusual experiences or he's overstating the case. In the last six months I have flown from the following airports: Heathrow Stansted Ben Gurion Cologne Vienna Edinburgh I have had to take my belt off at all of them, and my shoes off once. The "worst" experience was in Israel where I had to go through my bag with the very polite security guards, and it took about half an hour. They were very nice about the whole situation though. Basically it was inconvenient, but I don't feel it was a big deal and I don't feel like my humanity has been debased. I've also travelled once on Eurostar and the security process was exactly the same.

Silhouette 17y ago
> I think the answer is either that Silhouette has had a number of unusual experiences or he's overstating the case. My experience, and those I am reporting from other people I know, obviously only represent a small drop in the ocean of all air travel. It's certainly possible that we have collectively been "unlucky" and others have a much better experience. In any case, I look at this more as a matter of principle. Clearly for at least some people air travel has become very unpleasant, very inefficient, or both, as a result of all the security theatre. This is a purely negative effect on our society. It has absolutely no merit whatsoever, except for politicians who can now say they are "doing something" about "fighting terrorism". As with much done in the name of fighting terrorism, the measures initially only catch a few people. As long as this represents only a relatively small proportion of travellers, it doesn't cause a huge public outcry and a lot of people carry on oblivious. That doesn't mean those people would be happy with the way they were treated if their number came up. I'm happy that you have, so far, been one of the lucky ones. I wish everyone was guaranteed the same experience you have had so far. However, as a result of the inconvenience I have experienced and the much nastier things that have happened to other people I know, I am quite sure that I wouldn't like it if my number came up, so I now choose not to fly on routes where that is a significant possibility.