4 ms·

Because it isn't about being effective, it's about doing something, or rather, appearing to do something. It's all about appearances, as many things in life ar

by pmorici 17y ago

Because it isn't about being effective, it's about doing something, or rather, appearing to do something. It's all about appearances, as many things in life are for better or worse.

potatolicious 17y ago
Not sure why you're being modded down - but you're right, airport security won't be "fixed" because most people are not aware that it is broken. I'm Canadian, and airport security in Canada, while we still have the ludicrous liquid rules, is still considerably less asinine than it is in America (e.g. I get to keep my belt AND shoes on). I had a chance to discuss this with my American coworkers last year (a bus full of them), and I was surprised that most vehemently defended the need for the "security". When I remarked that another 9/11 was more than remote, due to the fact that passengers can no longer be subdued by hijackers (knowing that certain death awaits), I felt as if the entire group was ready to lynch me. Like it or not, these security measures make people feel safer, and as such there's not a chance in hell of them disappearing anytime soon.
- yhnbhjiuok 17y ago
  Try having a British passport and traveling in America. I was put into a little glass room, so my pockets could be searched, along with the other major threat to America - an old Hasidimic guy with an Israeli passport. Simple logic, terrorists are the enemy, the enemy are not us - therefore all foreigners (and only foreigners) are potential terrorists.
  - tomsaffell 17y ago
    Generalizing from a small data set is always dangerous. But seeing as you have, I will counter: I am British, I have traveled a lot in America, in the company of other foreigners, and I have never seen a shred of evidence that airport security is anti-British, nor that they suspect foreigners (and only foreigners) are potential terrorists. Are you being as fair to them as you expect them to be to you?
    - yhnbhjiuok 17y ago
      It was a definite - all foreign passports = extra security policy. I have hit this at a bunch of airports, including well known terrorist targets like Salt lake city. Wether it was the individual airport policy or DHS were at alert level fuchsia they didn't say. I'm just saying that as an intelligence led response it's a bit like Heathrow searching everybody who's surname begins with A because of Gerry Adams.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  When I remarked that another 9/11 was more than remote, due to the fact that passengers can no longer be subdued by hijackers (knowing that certain death awaits) Good point. Now passengers will fight to the death rather than cooperate with hijackers. United 93 was a very inspiring movie about ordinary people in very unexpected circumstances.
  - grandalf 17y ago
    Yes... the solution for preventing another 9/11 was discovered, ironically, on 9/11 by the passengers of flight 93. All the rest of the measures such as cockpit doors, removal of shoes, etc., have been theatre.
    - ggchappell 17y ago
      Actually, Schneier says that reinforced cockpit doors are a good idea. A quote: "I've said there are two things - reinforcing the cockpit doors, and convincing passengers they have to fight back. Everything else has been a red herring." (From http://www.schneier.com/news-071.html http://www.schneier.com/news-071.html )
      - grandalf 17y ago
        Well they are an OK idea... but the question to ask is whether they are likely to have a significant impact on safety. My guess is that the impact is slim, which is OK since they are cheap and easy to implement. But note that it took way longer to implement the cockpit doors than it did to nationalize airport security and start making people wait on 3 hour lines. Also note that the GAO was able to get bombs through security at most major airports without doing anything particularly sophisticated.

by pmorici 17y ago

Because it isn't about being effective, it's about doing something, or rather, appearing to do something. It's all about appearances, as many things in life are for better or worse.

potatolicious 17y ago

Not sure why you're being modded down - but you're right, airport security won't be "fixed" because most people are not aware that it is broken. I'm Canadian, and airport security in Canada, while we still have the ludicrous liquid rules, is still considerably less asinine than it is in America (e.g. I get to keep my belt AND shoes on). I had a chance to discuss this with my American coworkers last year (a bus full of them), and I was surprised that most vehemently defended the need for the "security". When I remarked that another 9/11 was more than remote, due to the fact that passengers can no longer be subdued by hijackers (knowing that certain death awaits), I felt as if the entire group was ready to lynch me. Like it or not, these security measures make people feel safer, and as such there's not a chance in hell of them disappearing anytime soon.

yhnbhjiuok 17y ago
Try having a British passport and traveling in America. I was put into a little glass room, so my pockets could be searched, along with the other major threat to America - an old Hasidimic guy with an Israeli passport. Simple logic, terrorists are the enemy, the enemy are not us - therefore all foreigners (and only foreigners) are potential terrorists.
- tomsaffell 17y ago
  Generalizing from a small data set is always dangerous. But seeing as you have, I will counter: I am British, I have traveled a lot in America, in the company of other foreigners, and I have never seen a shred of evidence that airport security is anti-British, nor that they suspect foreigners (and only foreigners) are potential terrorists. Are you being as fair to them as you expect them to be to you?
  - yhnbhjiuok 17y ago
    It was a definite - all foreign passports = extra security policy. I have hit this at a bunch of airports, including well known terrorist targets like Salt lake city. Wether it was the individual airport policy or DHS were at alert level fuchsia they didn't say. I'm just saying that as an intelligence led response it's a bit like Heathrow searching everybody who's surname begins with A because of Gerry Adams.
tokenadult 17y ago
When I remarked that another 9/11 was more than remote, due to the fact that passengers can no longer be subdued by hijackers (knowing that certain death awaits) Good point. Now passengers will fight to the death rather than cooperate with hijackers. United 93 was a very inspiring movie about ordinary people in very unexpected circumstances.
- grandalf 17y ago
  Yes... the solution for preventing another 9/11 was discovered, ironically, on 9/11 by the passengers of flight 93. All the rest of the measures such as cockpit doors, removal of shoes, etc., have been theatre.
  - ggchappell 17y ago
    Actually, Schneier says that reinforced cockpit doors are a good idea. A quote: "I've said there are two things - reinforcing the cockpit doors, and convincing passengers they have to fight back. Everything else has been a red herring." (From http://www.schneier.com/news-071.html http://www.schneier.com/news-071.html )
    - grandalf 17y ago
      Well they are an OK idea... but the question to ask is whether they are likely to have a significant impact on safety. My guess is that the impact is slim, which is OK since they are cheap and easy to implement. But note that it took way longer to implement the cockpit doors than it did to nationalize airport security and start making people wait on 3 hour lines. Also note that the GAO was able to get bombs through security at most major airports without doing anything particularly sophisticated.