5 ms·

> If it can prevent idiots or unstable from carrying a steel knife we should. Should we spend hundreds of millions and molest millions of passengers to prevent

> If it can prevent idiots or unstable from carrying a steel knife we should. Should we spend hundreds of millions and molest millions of passengers to prevent this? > Is TSA making people waiting? I often get to the airport two hours early so I think the waiting is fine. What is the cost in lost productivity of this? We are spending money to lost productivity to prevent a knives on planes??

yeukhon 13y ago
> Should we spend hundreds of millions and molest millions of passengers to prevent this? And talk about job creation too. Maybe. Often we use statistics. Well, we don't have good statistics or can't do experiment on whether or not the chance of surviving is higher or lower with/out the TSA screening. Can you? > What is the cost in lost productivity of this? We are spending money to lost productivity to prevent a knives on planes?? Losing how much time? An extra 10-20 minutes on average? You understand why terrorists like to plot terrorism on airplane right? Because we can't control an airplane once it is flying. On the ground you can run away or hope a rescue unit come to you in 5 minutes. So losing 20 minutes on average (which you should plan ahead for any air travel ANYWAY), versus keeping a sharp knife away from the mentally unstable passenger next to you is probably a good thing. Maybe the chance is very low, near zero. When that comes, your life might be over and that 20 minutes is negligible. Some people are happy to trade 20 minutes away but I am not.
- Xylakant 13y ago
  > Some people are happy to trade 20 minutes away but I am not. Do you step out of your flat each day, take a cab, bus, walk short distances? Cross the road? The death risk in all of theses activities is many times higher than dying on an airplane because a mentally unstable passenger manages to stabs you with a knife he deliberately brought on board.
  - yeukhon 13y ago
    I already said the risk is nearly zero. Read it carefully. Yet, if there is a risk, even if it is at 0.1%, precaution is required. And when this impacts the lives of hundreds of passengers, the risk is more than just me dying on the street tomorrow. -- edit -- whoever downvote is probably a kid.
    - PeterisP 13y ago
      "a risk exists" does not really imply "precaution is required" - there is a risk that you'll be fatally struck by a lightning tomorrow, but it doesn't imply that you need to stay indoors as a precaution. "Nearly zero" does not equal other "nearly zero" - most "nearly zero" effects are with very, very different nearness to zero. Me dying in a traffic accident tomorrow is a near-zero chance, and me dying of a lightning strike tomorrow is a near-zero chance, but they are very different chances. The sole fact of you mentioning 0.1% indicates a problem with such comparisons - risk of dying in any terrorist attack is orders of magnitude different than 0.1% and thus deserves uncomparably smaller attention than a real 0.1% risk. Your short trip from home to airport deserves more precautions than terrorists on the planes. Even taking into account 'hundreds or passengers', the risk is uncomparably much smaller than you simply dying on the street tomorrow - that's how the numbers work out in reality, even if it may feel otherwise emotionally.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > Well, we don't have good statistics or can't do experiment on whether or not the chance of surviving is higher or lower with/out the TSA screening. Can you? What? Unless you are suggesting that the TSA screening increases attacks, we can easily assume that the TSA screening does add some small amount of security (perhaps tiny). We can look at survival rates before and after TSA screenings to see how many people were killed by mentally unstable people. Surely there were mentally unstable people prior to the existence of the TSA? > You understand why terrorists like to plot terrorism on airplane right? Because we can't control an airplane once it is flying. On the ground you can run away or hope a rescue unit come to you in 5 minutes. What terrorists? Terrorists as we defined them post 9/11 liked airplanes because they could use them as a weapon to cause much more damage. Why would 5 minutes away from help on the ground matter if they are detonating bombs? You've shifted the goal posts from "getting to the airport 2 hours early" to "losing 20 minutes."
  - yeukhon 13y ago
    I have not shifted from 2 hours to 20 minutes. I was pointing out that even during a busy morning I would only expect 20 minutes to be added to the overall processing time. And since I already plan to arrive at the airport two hours before the time to take off, 20 minutes is nothing. In essence, the impact on productivity is little.

yeukhon 13y ago

> Should we spend hundreds of millions and molest millions of passengers to prevent this? And talk about job creation too. Maybe. Often we use statistics. Well, we don't have good statistics or can't do experiment on whether or not the chance of surviving is higher or lower with/out the TSA screening. Can you? > What is the cost in lost productivity of this? We are spending money to lost productivity to prevent a knives on planes?? Losing how much time? An extra 10-20 minutes on average? You understand why terrorists like to plot terrorism on airplane right? Because we can't control an airplane once it is flying. On the ground you can run away or hope a rescue unit come to you in 5 minutes. So losing 20 minutes on average (which you should plan ahead for any air travel ANYWAY), versus keeping a sharp knife away from the mentally unstable passenger next to you is probably a good thing. Maybe the chance is very low, near zero. When that comes, your life might be over and that 20 minutes is negligible. Some people are happy to trade 20 minutes away but I am not.

Xylakant 13y ago
> Some people are happy to trade 20 minutes away but I am not. Do you step out of your flat each day, take a cab, bus, walk short distances? Cross the road? The death risk in all of theses activities is many times higher than dying on an airplane because a mentally unstable passenger manages to stabs you with a knife he deliberately brought on board.
- yeukhon 13y ago
  I already said the risk is nearly zero. Read it carefully. Yet, if there is a risk, even if it is at 0.1%, precaution is required. And when this impacts the lives of hundreds of passengers, the risk is more than just me dying on the street tomorrow. -- edit -- whoever downvote is probably a kid.
  - PeterisP 13y ago
    "a risk exists" does not really imply "precaution is required" - there is a risk that you'll be fatally struck by a lightning tomorrow, but it doesn't imply that you need to stay indoors as a precaution. "Nearly zero" does not equal other "nearly zero" - most "nearly zero" effects are with very, very different nearness to zero. Me dying in a traffic accident tomorrow is a near-zero chance, and me dying of a lightning strike tomorrow is a near-zero chance, but they are very different chances. The sole fact of you mentioning 0.1% indicates a problem with such comparisons - risk of dying in any terrorist attack is orders of magnitude different than 0.1% and thus deserves uncomparably smaller attention than a real 0.1% risk. Your short trip from home to airport deserves more precautions than terrorists on the planes. Even taking into account 'hundreds or passengers', the risk is uncomparably much smaller than you simply dying on the street tomorrow - that's how the numbers work out in reality, even if it may feel otherwise emotionally.
darkarmani 13y ago
> Well, we don't have good statistics or can't do experiment on whether or not the chance of surviving is higher or lower with/out the TSA screening. Can you? What? Unless you are suggesting that the TSA screening increases attacks, we can easily assume that the TSA screening does add some small amount of security (perhaps tiny). We can look at survival rates before and after TSA screenings to see how many people were killed by mentally unstable people. Surely there were mentally unstable people prior to the existence of the TSA? > You understand why terrorists like to plot terrorism on airplane right? Because we can't control an airplane once it is flying. On the ground you can run away or hope a rescue unit come to you in 5 minutes. What terrorists? Terrorists as we defined them post 9/11 liked airplanes because they could use them as a weapon to cause much more damage. Why would 5 minutes away from help on the ground matter if they are detonating bombs? You've shifted the goal posts from "getting to the airport 2 hours early" to "losing 20 minutes."
- yeukhon 13y ago
  I have not shifted from 2 hours to 20 minutes. I was pointing out that even during a busy morning I would only expect 20 minutes to be added to the overall processing time. And since I already plan to arrive at the airport two hours before the time to take off, 20 minutes is nothing. In essence, the impact on productivity is little.