3 ms·

It’s not useless, but it doesn’t have to be as slow as it is. The government could hire 10x the number of agents to minimize lines without changing their budget

It’s not useless, but it doesn’t have to be as slow as it is. The government could hire 10x the number of agents to minimize lines without changing their budget by more than a rounding error, but they don’t care to.

Retric 4y ago
It’s IMO worse than useless as terrorists can more easily kill people at the airport lines than destroying an aircraft. Holiday rush + luggage filled with even gunpowder and metal would make a huge statement that that everything we did was worse than useless. I was honestly expecting exactly that kind of follow up attack for years.
- School-Cotton 4y ago
  The main purpose of airport security is not to prevent people from blowing up planes (although that’s an important secondary purpose) — it’s to prevent hijackings. Read about hijackings in the 60s before airport security; they were extremely common and disruptive.
  - Retric 4y ago
    Yes and no. Airport security showed up after US hijackings had already peaked, based on timing it seems the Federal Air Marshal Service service may have had a larger impact. The airport screenings are really an outgrowth of a Supreme Court case making such in depth screenings legal. Also it was relatively frequent but not that serious in the late 1960’s. The first US fatality from aircraft high jacking didn’t occur until 1970. Attacking airports has also happened multiple times including a 2002 incident in LA and even quite deadly attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lod_Airport_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lod_Airport_massacre
  - hackernewds 4y ago
    why is a hijacking worse?
    - Kamq 4y ago
      You can fly the plane into a building and kill thousands of people (source: 9/11) As opposed to killing hundreds.
      - School-Cotton 4y ago
        9/11 probably killed millions of people if you consider the destabilizing effect on geopolitics.
      - zeven7 4y ago
        But can you really? The pilot doors are now locked from the inside and impenetrable.
        Kamq 4y ago
        That's a fair question, but I was answering why hijacking is worse, which implies that a hijacking can happen. I'm not saying that the current TSA theater is the most efficient way to stop hijackings.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
thatguy0900 4y ago
Why would they spend more money to make it faster when they can just charge people for the faster precheck line?
megablast 4y ago
> he government could hire 10x the number of agents to minimize lines without changing their budget by more than a rounding error, but they don’t care to. Don't be ridiculous. At every airport and terminal?? And then how many extra people standing around doing nothing when it is a quiet period??
- hattar 4y ago
  Roughly 10x as many as are standing around doing nothing now. Take a look at security from the raised view provided at Denver International. You’ll see at any given time roughly 1/2 the agents standing around chatting with one another.

Retric 4y ago

It’s IMO worse than useless as terrorists can more easily kill people at the airport lines than destroying an aircraft. Holiday rush + luggage filled with even gunpowder and metal would make a huge statement that that everything we did was worse than useless. I was honestly expecting exactly that kind of follow up attack for years.

School-Cotton 4y ago
The main purpose of airport security is not to prevent people from blowing up planes (although that’s an important secondary purpose) — it’s to prevent hijackings. Read about hijackings in the 60s before airport security; they were extremely common and disruptive.
- Retric 4y ago
  Yes and no. Airport security showed up after US hijackings had already peaked, based on timing it seems the Federal Air Marshal Service service may have had a larger impact. The airport screenings are really an outgrowth of a Supreme Court case making such in depth screenings legal. Also it was relatively frequent but not that serious in the late 1960’s. The first US fatality from aircraft high jacking didn’t occur until 1970. Attacking airports has also happened multiple times including a 2002 incident in LA and even quite deadly attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lod_Airport_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lod_Airport_massacre
- hackernewds 4y ago
  why is a hijacking worse?
  - Kamq 4y ago
    You can fly the plane into a building and kill thousands of people (source: 9/11) As opposed to killing hundreds.
    - School-Cotton 4y ago
      9/11 probably killed millions of people if you consider the destabilizing effect on geopolitics.
    - zeven7 4y ago
      But can you really? The pilot doors are now locked from the inside and impenetrable.
      - Kamq 4y ago
        That's a fair question, but I was answering why hijacking is worse, which implies that a hijacking can happen. I'm not saying that the current TSA theater is the most efficient way to stop hijackings.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]

thatguy0900 4y ago

Why would they spend more money to make it faster when they can just charge people for the faster precheck line?

megablast 4y ago

> he government could hire 10x the number of agents to minimize lines without changing their budget by more than a rounding error, but they don’t care to. Don't be ridiculous. At every airport and terminal?? And then how many extra people standing around doing nothing when it is a quiet period??

hattar 4y ago
Roughly 10x as many as are standing around doing nothing now. Take a look at security from the raised view provided at Denver International. You’ll see at any given time roughly 1/2 the agents standing around chatting with one another.