5 ms·
While many of the Israel procedures might be kinda hard to implement in the States or Canada (or elsewhere), there's really a few that really should be looked a
by icegreentea 16y ago
While many of the Israel procedures might be kinda hard to implement in the States or Canada (or elsewhere), there's really a few that really should be looked at. Like the whole containment thing.
"First, the screening area is surrounded by contoured, blast-proof glass that can contain the detonation of up to 100 kilos of plastic explosive. Only the few dozen people within the screening area need be removed, and only to a point a few metres away.
Second, all the screening areas contain 'bomb boxes'. If a screener spots a suspect bag, he/she is trained to pick it up and place it in the box, which is blast proof. A bomb squad arrives shortly and wheels the box away for further investigation."
I mean... you gotta admit. That just makes so much sense.
- daten 16y agoConsider how many bottles of liquid the TSA confiscates in a day because they might be explosives. Now imagine actually treating each of those as if the agent really believed it was a threat in the style described in the article. Does this still make sense?
- bruceboughton 16y agoIt would make sense if they actually put some thought into identifying threats, rather than simply confiscating items previously used in thwarted attacks.
- hrabago 16y agoThis is the part that disappoints me the most, especially after the toner ban. I would expect this from the third world country I came from, where actors win elections because they play likable characters in movies, but not here in the US.
- Natsu 16y ago> I would expect this from the third world country I came from, where actors win elections because they play likable characters in movies, but not here in the US. In that case, I'm going to have to disappoint you about American politics by mentioning Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jerry Springer, Clint Eastwood, Howard Stern, Shirley Temple, Al Franken & co. were all both. I guess I'm less sure about the "likable characters" part, and at least one of those failed to actually get elected (but became an ambassador instead), but even so, I'm only mentioning the more famous ones. There are quite a few more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_actor-politicians http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_actor-politic...
- TravisLS 16y agoIn fairness, I get the feeling the TSA doesn't actually think any of these bottles of liquid are explosives, since they just throw them in the public terminal trash cans. If they did treat every water bottle as an explosive, then yes, this procedure would make a lot more sense than evacuating the terminal.
- aplusbi 16y agoExactly - if they don't really think they are explosives, then why are they confiscating them in the first place? Either dispose of them properly or just let people on the plane with bottled water.
- tzs 16y agoThey don't think they are explosives. They think they might be precursors to explosives.
- foobarbazoo 16y agoYou had it right when you said "They don't think." Should've stopped there.
- aplusbi 16y agoA fair point. I think it's safe to say that's not the case - they really think it's just water, but let's just say they do treat them as bomb ingredients. Even though binary explosives are inert when separate that still doesn't mean you can just throw them away.
- chris_j 16y agoIt's more subtle than that. They don't think they are explosives. They are merely ensuring that no liquids are taken through security. If no liquids are taken through security then no liquid precursors to explosives are taken through security. What's more, if it is known that no liquids can be taken through security then the bad guys won't even bother to take liquid precursors to explosives through security. This begs a number of questions but, in the meantime, security personnel can throw confiscated liquids into the trash without worrying too much about it.