3 ms·
Well, by regulation, an aircraft is a “national property”, so a blast in an aircraft is seen as “national incompetence”. The security check is just a filter, an
by n_ary 2y ago
Well, by regulation, an aircraft is a “national property”, so a blast in an aircraft is seen as “national incompetence”. The security check is just a filter, an attack there is seen as general terror. The stakes are very different. It is also easier to de-escalate someone with a gun or other dangerous objects at the security check, people at that location are well trained to handle such situation and extra support is just a radio away, in aircraft, not only is the situation extra dangerous because other people sitting will act immensely irrationally or panic, the crew is only trained in minor de-escalation, and it is difficult to call a backup security in mid air and any shots fired in that environment is 1000x more dangerous.
- echoangle 2y ago> Well, by regulation, an aircraft is a “national property” Do you have a source for that?
- n_ary 2y agoThat is AirportSecurity101 training for anyone working in aviation. I have performed the training in non-English, not sure I can quote it from somewhere online unfortunately. It is internal training material.
- tomohelix 2y agoFirst of all, I doubt TSA agents are "well trained". They are incompetent at their main task, which is screening for weapons in luggages and they are assisted by state of the art technologies. Second, I also doubt people waiting in lines at the airport will be anything but rational the moment someone take out a gun and or a bomb. At least on a plane, nobody can run anywhere. In the airport check in, there will be shoving and yelling and stepping on each other to get out faster. Also, it is harder to smuggle a rifle onto a plane. It isn't difficult to bring something extremely destructive to the check in gate.
- n_ary 2y agoYou can doubt, that is your prerogative. The closed nature of the aircraft induced twice as more fear than in a crowded open area. Also, even if we assume everyone is rational, the person holding the prohibited object is not guaranteed to be rational. The difficulty of bringing a rifle is exactly the security check(also mocked as security theatre here), and anyone willing to risk a destructive object has zero incentive to bring it through security checks because they are discouraged by the security theatre, finally the risk is well worth in the air or blowing up something close to a massively valuable(i.e an aircraft).