5 ms·

With all do respect, that's not the best deterrent. The best deterrent is the door. Anyone who knows anything about the Germanwings crash (https://en.wikipedia

With all do respect, that's not the best deterrent. The best deterrent is the door. Anyone who knows anything about the Germanwings crash (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525) knows this. The pilot used an axe on the door for minutes while knowing he was going to die. He didn't get in. Everyone died. The risks of hijacking are slim to none, unless you're going to hack the plane. If you're going to hack the plane you just need a laptop. The TSA is a federal jobs program. A nice joke I heard is to disband the TSA and have them be the workers building the wall. Sure it would be useless, but at least it wouldn't inconvenience law abiding citizens just trying to go about their day, treating them like criminals.

Gibbon1 8y ago
We could in theory draft them into the Army Corps of Engineers and make them push wheelbarrows full of sand and gravel around in the Sonoran Desert. I like this idea.
- verelo 8y ago
  While it might just make me feel better about all the times they made me remove my laptop from my bag, or take off my shoes, I would almost rather see them given real skills so they can be a useful part of humanity.
verelo 8y ago
If you’re talking hijacking sure, i still think someone claiming “i have a bomb” will get commands through the door without it ever opening if they’re smart enough about it. The door is a good defence from immediate physical harm for sure, and probably the best change the industry has made in a long time, but i still think the security through stated obscurity element of the TSA could be improved to socially influence those considering any act against an air crew.
- Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
  So the choice is: 1. Open the door and the person uses the plane as a big bomb. 2. Don't open the door and the person uses a smaller bomb. You die either way. What's the choice here?
  - verelo 8y ago
    That’s kind of my point? The door while having an impact doesn’t really change much.
    - Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
      I'm not really at all sure how to even begin to respond to that. I mean surely you think that flights AA 11, ua 175, and AA 77 were materially different than UA 93. So I really don't get your point.
      - verelo 8y ago
        You mean that one made it to it’s target and the other didn’t? Maybe I’m misunderstanding your point because it doest really feel like a discussion, rather an interview? Like, sure, if that’s success then ok...again I’m just saying i think there are alternative ways to improve security, and while a locking door is one of them, the TSA is probably another great place to look for improvements. It feels like the US airport security situation is stuck in the world of “look busy and sound strict, people will behave and respect the security of planes”, but really it’s just a giant pain in the ass for most people and meanwhile mostly ineffective at stopping actual risks from passing through to the aircraft. Real question: do you work for the TSA or airport security in some way?
        Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
        I mean I feel like it's obviously true that a successful hijacking means using the plane as a bomb. If you want to just kill a lot of people there are far cheaper and more effective ways. Check out the concerts being attacked. So the door is all you need.

Gibbon1 8y ago

We could in theory draft them into the Army Corps of Engineers and make them push wheelbarrows full of sand and gravel around in the Sonoran Desert. I like this idea.

verelo 8y ago
While it might just make me feel better about all the times they made me remove my laptop from my bag, or take off my shoes, I would almost rather see them given real skills so they can be a useful part of humanity.

verelo 8y ago

If you’re talking hijacking sure, i still think someone claiming “i have a bomb” will get commands through the door without it ever opening if they’re smart enough about it. The door is a good defence from immediate physical harm for sure, and probably the best change the industry has made in a long time, but i still think the security through stated obscurity element of the TSA could be improved to socially influence those considering any act against an air crew.

Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
So the choice is: 1. Open the door and the person uses the plane as a big bomb. 2. Don't open the door and the person uses a smaller bomb. You die either way. What's the choice here?
- verelo 8y ago
  That’s kind of my point? The door while having an impact doesn’t really change much.
  - Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
    I'm not really at all sure how to even begin to respond to that. I mean surely you think that flights AA 11, ua 175, and AA 77 were materially different than UA 93. So I really don't get your point.
    - verelo 8y ago
      You mean that one made it to it’s target and the other didn’t? Maybe I’m misunderstanding your point because it doest really feel like a discussion, rather an interview? Like, sure, if that’s success then ok...again I’m just saying i think there are alternative ways to improve security, and while a locking door is one of them, the TSA is probably another great place to look for improvements. It feels like the US airport security situation is stuck in the world of “look busy and sound strict, people will behave and respect the security of planes”, but really it’s just a giant pain in the ass for most people and meanwhile mostly ineffective at stopping actual risks from passing through to the aircraft. Real question: do you work for the TSA or airport security in some way?
      - Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
        I mean I feel like it's obviously true that a successful hijacking means using the plane as a bomb. If you want to just kill a lot of people there are far cheaper and more effective ways. Check out the concerts being attacked. So the door is all you need.