2 ms·

But there's little if any evidence that there's any real threat of mentally unstable people, or not particularly smart terrorists, wanting to carry out attacks

But there's little if any evidence that there's any real threat of mentally unstable people, or not particularly smart terrorists, wanting to carry out attacks either. If these people existed, they'd be attacking trains/metros today. The Madrid and London bombings show how devastating these can be - and on a train, you could do it with a pretty high chance of getting away uninjured - just leave your bag on the train and get off before it's due to explode. Yet despite the ridiculous ease, low risk and effectiveness of such an attack, they still very, very rarely happen.

wtvanhest 13y ago
Please take a look at the list of airline hijakings which prompted the creation of airport security. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings Without security, you can bet that this list of American Hijackings would continue to present day. Not everyone needs to blow up a plane to cause mass havoc.
- prof_hobart 13y ago
  "this list of American Hijackings"? I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. From that list, there were 2 involving the US in the 90s and 4 in the 80s. Is the huge increase in disruption, inconvenience and intrusion for every traveller really necessary to cut that level of threat down? And how many of the attempted hijackings since 2001 had anywhere near the impact of Madrid or London's train/bus bombs? If there's really terrorists trying to cause havoc, why aren't they taking this easy option?
  - wtvanhest 13y ago
    I'm talking about the time period before security screening started at most airports... when hijackings were common. Look at the 50s-70s. An attack on an airplane is simply too challenging for the vast majority of people to execute. It is currently difficult to execute. It won't be if we had no security. Search for "Security screening" on this wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_detector http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_detector You will notice that they were rolled out in the 70s as security screening started at airports. It was proven effective and unless you can make an argument why people wouldn't pose security threats now with no security checkpoints you won't convince any actual decision maker anywhere.
    - prof_hobart 13y ago
      From that list :- 50s - none involving America. 60s - 5. 70s - 14 (3 of which, as far as I can tell with any fatalities). However, I'm not really arguing against zero security at airports. What I'm arguing against is the ludicrous increase in security procedures since 9/11. >It is currently difficult to execute. It won't be if we had no security It's not difficult to execute bombings on trains, and they are hugely impactful when it happens. Yet they rarely happen. You seem to be ignoring this.
  - Spooky23 13y ago
    The 70s are the decade where there were many hijackings. That's also when air travel became more commonplace and huge jets were more widely in service. In the 60s if you weren't a military person, foreigner arriving from or headed to home, or white guy with a suit, you'd be picked up on pretty quickly, security checkpoints or no. Also, we weren't exporting trillions of dollars to and fomenting unrest in the Middle East in those days. In the 90s, I used to fly to Baltimore on Southwest to get drunk for $30 with friends for the weekend. If I couldn't make it, I'd give the ticket to someone else or sell it. Totally different universe and threat model than ye olden times.

wtvanhest 13y ago

Please take a look at the list of airline hijakings which prompted the creation of airport security. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings Without security, you can bet that this list of American Hijackings would continue to present day. Not everyone needs to blow up a plane to cause mass havoc.

prof_hobart 13y ago
"this list of American Hijackings"? I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. From that list, there were 2 involving the US in the 90s and 4 in the 80s. Is the huge increase in disruption, inconvenience and intrusion for every traveller really necessary to cut that level of threat down? And how many of the attempted hijackings since 2001 had anywhere near the impact of Madrid or London's train/bus bombs? If there's really terrorists trying to cause havoc, why aren't they taking this easy option?
- wtvanhest 13y ago
  I'm talking about the time period before security screening started at most airports... when hijackings were common. Look at the 50s-70s. An attack on an airplane is simply too challenging for the vast majority of people to execute. It is currently difficult to execute. It won't be if we had no security. Search for "Security screening" on this wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_detector http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_detector You will notice that they were rolled out in the 70s as security screening started at airports. It was proven effective and unless you can make an argument why people wouldn't pose security threats now with no security checkpoints you won't convince any actual decision maker anywhere.
  - prof_hobart 13y ago
    From that list :- 50s - none involving America. 60s - 5. 70s - 14 (3 of which, as far as I can tell with any fatalities). However, I'm not really arguing against zero security at airports. What I'm arguing against is the ludicrous increase in security procedures since 9/11. >It is currently difficult to execute. It won't be if we had no security It's not difficult to execute bombings on trains, and they are hugely impactful when it happens. Yet they rarely happen. You seem to be ignoring this.
- Spooky23 13y ago
  The 70s are the decade where there were many hijackings. That's also when air travel became more commonplace and huge jets were more widely in service. In the 60s if you weren't a military person, foreigner arriving from or headed to home, or white guy with a suit, you'd be picked up on pretty quickly, security checkpoints or no. Also, we weren't exporting trillions of dollars to and fomenting unrest in the Middle East in those days. In the 90s, I used to fly to Baltimore on Southwest to get drunk for $30 with friends for the weekend. If I couldn't make it, I'd give the ticket to someone else or sell it. Totally different universe and threat model than ye olden times.