4 ms·

I think the problem is that the 'pat down' is the most ineffective security measure used in the airport. The real reason for the pat down is actually to find dr

I think the problem is that the 'pat down' is the most ineffective security measure used in the airport. The real reason for the pat down is actually to find drugs concealed on a persons body. Why on earth do they believe they'll find a razor blade on a persons body? They don't, because they're not looking for weapons because every real weapon known to man is detectable from a metal detector, and the majority of improvised weapons still use metal detectable parts. Considering I've walked through a metal detector with literally a fistful of change and it hasn't gone off, I question the usability of all airport screening. I frequently have like $10 in small change on me.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
because every real weapon known to man is detectable from a metal detector, and the majority of improvised weapons still use metal detectable parts. Lets not get hyperbolic. I found a real weapon with less metal than my jeans in about 2 minutes with google. http://www.flickr.com/photos/isotope/492829645/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/isotope/492829645/ (Presumably a terrorist could do it with no metal, but a prisoner has limitations on materials available.)
- Tamerlin 16y ago
  The right type of wood can also make for quite an effective weapon, especially in the right hands.
  - electromagnetic 16y ago
    I'd say most people would be far less afraid of someone with a wooden weapon than someone with a steel knife, when a wooden weapon would be far more harmful. A wooden mallet with tapered ends could easily crack a skull or break joints and limbs if used properly and would be easily concealable compared to a high density knife blade. Considering that a war hammer is still likely the most dangerous weapon to an armored soldier today, there are worlds of weapons that are not routinely used or thought of that could be deadly in the right circumstances.
    - Tamerlin 16y ago
      It doesn't even need tapered ends, as long as it's sturdy. Heck, a well-trained person's hands can be quite deadly to someone not wearing armor... and if you know what you're doing, armor won't stop you from ripping someone's arm apart and spiking them into the ground with their own weight + that of the armor -- and yours, if you're feeling particularly aggressive :)

yummyfajitas 16y ago

because every real weapon known to man is detectable from a metal detector, and the majority of improvised weapons still use metal detectable parts. Lets not get hyperbolic. I found a real weapon with less metal than my jeans in about 2 minutes with google. http://www.flickr.com/photos/isotope/492829645/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/isotope/492829645/ (Presumably a terrorist could do it with no metal, but a prisoner has limitations on materials available.)

Tamerlin 16y ago
The right type of wood can also make for quite an effective weapon, especially in the right hands.
- electromagnetic 16y ago
  I'd say most people would be far less afraid of someone with a wooden weapon than someone with a steel knife, when a wooden weapon would be far more harmful. A wooden mallet with tapered ends could easily crack a skull or break joints and limbs if used properly and would be easily concealable compared to a high density knife blade. Considering that a war hammer is still likely the most dangerous weapon to an armored soldier today, there are worlds of weapons that are not routinely used or thought of that could be deadly in the right circumstances.
  - Tamerlin 16y ago
    It doesn't even need tapered ends, as long as it's sturdy. Heck, a well-trained person's hands can be quite deadly to someone not wearing armor... and if you know what you're doing, armor won't stop you from ripping someone's arm apart and spiking them into the ground with their own weight + that of the armor -- and yours, if you're feeling particularly aggressive :)