3 ms·

The rarity of plane hijackings is balanced by the decades of harm they can do, even beyond the obvious death and destruction. 9-11 for example led to 20 years o

The rarity of plane hijackings is balanced by the decades of harm they can do, even beyond the obvious death and destruction. 9-11 for example led to 20 years of ruinous war, trillions wasted, and many lives lost, not to mention geopolitical realities which led to even more death and loss of money. Taking extreme caution to prevent a recurrence of that, not to mention protecting lives and a whole industry, probably doesn't compare to upskirt shots.

r3d0c 3y ago
the extreme "caution" was the issue
timtom39 3y ago
Good point. I am sure the US won't just think of another reason to go to war...
lotsofpulp 3y ago
> 9-11 for example led to 20 years of ruinous war, trillions wasted, and many lives lost, not to mention geopolitical realities which led to even more death and loss of money. 9-11 led to cockpits being secured. The rest was politically motivated, and does nothing to prevent a recurrence of 9-11.
phpisthebest 3y ago
Yes locking the doors == good Making me buy over priced water == Security theater that does nothing for safety We do not need to be illogical about it, extreme government over reach should not be excused when a simple door lock was all that is needed
- sgift 3y ago
  The water ban came later for a different reason, namely the "Liquid bomb" plot, which involved bringing liquid bombs onto planes and detonating them mid-flight. I'm not saying the ban was an especially good reaction, but cockpit doors wouldn't have helped. You don't need to be in the cockpit to bring a plane down with a bomb.
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    Right but the original context was "another 9-11" that would lead to "decades of war". We have clear examples, right or wrong, where bringing down a single plane would not result in that response by a nation state. One of the reasons we have not seen another airplane based terror event, is not because of security, but because it simply would not invoke the response the terrorist desire. They want a nation to over react, to bomb things, to over all make the lives of the people they purport to be fighting for "freedom" on behalf of worse... This keeps them in power, and aids in recruitment. Taking down a single plane does not do that, using that plane as a missile did, which door locks prevents.

r3d0c 3y ago

the extreme "caution" was the issue

timtom39 3y ago

Good point. I am sure the US won't just think of another reason to go to war...

lotsofpulp 3y ago

> 9-11 for example led to 20 years of ruinous war, trillions wasted, and many lives lost, not to mention geopolitical realities which led to even more death and loss of money. 9-11 led to cockpits being secured. The rest was politically motivated, and does nothing to prevent a recurrence of 9-11.

phpisthebest 3y ago

Yes locking the doors == good Making me buy over priced water == Security theater that does nothing for safety We do not need to be illogical about it, extreme government over reach should not be excused when a simple door lock was all that is needed

sgift 3y ago
The water ban came later for a different reason, namely the "Liquid bomb" plot, which involved bringing liquid bombs onto planes and detonating them mid-flight. I'm not saying the ban was an especially good reaction, but cockpit doors wouldn't have helped. You don't need to be in the cockpit to bring a plane down with a bomb.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  Right but the original context was "another 9-11" that would lead to "decades of war". We have clear examples, right or wrong, where bringing down a single plane would not result in that response by a nation state. One of the reasons we have not seen another airplane based terror event, is not because of security, but because it simply would not invoke the response the terrorist desire. They want a nation to over react, to bomb things, to over all make the lives of the people they purport to be fighting for "freedom" on behalf of worse... This keeps them in power, and aids in recruitment. Taking down a single plane does not do that, using that plane as a missile did, which door locks prevents.