Aren't you committing an "argument from consequences"? The argument most people are making is that the TSA is security theatre, and they're not stopping any ba

Aren't you committing an "argument from consequences"? The argument most people are making is that the TSA is security theatre, and they're not stopping any bad guys. I don't think anyone would argue if the TSA's methodology had any basis or evidence of efficacy. Usually the stories take on some ridiculous aspect: Someone has handled some chemicals that set off the detector, and they're interrogated for twenty hours - can't they just check the luggage for a bomb?