Is the government being too reactionary with airport security?  

Before 9/11, people couldn't imagine hijackers would be using planes as missiles. The hijackers used box-cutters and other small, crude weapons. Passengers up to then were advised not to fight hijackers.  On flight 83, once the passengers knew what was up, they overwhelmed the hijackers easily.  Unfortunately, by that time, the hijackers had control of the cockpit.  It wouldn't have happened if the passengers immediately had swarmed the hijackers, or if the cockpit had been sealed.

The tactic worked only because it was a surprise attack. We can't be surprised by it anymore. IMO, much of the countermeasures we're taking are probably moot and expensive.  We're defending against a threat that would not succeed again.

They can still bomb a plane, though, but that was a threat before. For the most part, successful bombings were rare.  

What I propose: screen checked luggage, put more limits on carry-on luggage, (with better handling) but let us take our toe nail scissors on and lighters on. Sniff for explosives or suspicious chemicals. Install chemical sniffers on plane cabins, advise passengers to police themselves. Put undercover agents or air marshals on planes at random, and in air terminals, advise passengers to be vigilant for suspicious behavior (like lighting shoes and so on.)

Moreover, I suggest profiling high-risk people, and having undercover agents watch them in the terminal and alert uniform security take them aside if they notice suspicious behavior. Perhaps strike up conversations and watch the subject's reactions.    

Reason being that any discrimination has to be weighed for risk of hundreds of people dying. And yes, they are police-state tactic, but a very specialized one. Not to be used for smugglers, but just for hijackers and bombers.

I think this approach would be more efficient and effective than what we're doing now.            

Afterthought: lost luggage being such a problem, maybe airlines should compensate passengers for it, a lone in an amount that could get passengers through the next couple days while luggage is found, to be paid back immediately when it's returned. I'm trying to figure out how to do this and minimize fraud. Cons will try to take advantage of this, but it will give incentives to airlines to be more efficient about handling luggage.  

-- Modified on 4/23/2007 3:41:53 PM

As in the case of the "flying Imams" the passengers did police the plane themselves... and they are in for the lawsuit of their lives.  Z!  your plan is fine, IF you know what to look for.  Previously, we looked for what?  A gun,or a large knife...etc.  Now, what do we look for?  as for the technology to sniff the explosives?  Well that is not quite there yet... best we have? K-9s...  and while I agree with you about the checking the luggage and limiting carry ons - it is not for the same reason, it is because I am tired of the 400 lb dude with the two full suitcases and the hag of a wife who is also 400 lbs getting on... and sitting down on either side of me - sweating and driping body juice on me!  ugh... can I get a deodorant here?  How about a body-antiperspirant?

but to tell you the truth, we don't really know what we are looking for...  yea, they tried the box cutters... but know what?  next time, what will they use?  we just don't know.  But hey, you and JB can do some nice statistics on it.... OK?  

What works?!   The Israeli system seems to work well - TALK to the passengers, and look for abnormal behavior... but have you seen who screens?   they are not the brightest bulbs in the marquee!  Yes there are exceptions such as Jose Melenez-Perez who stopped an al Qaeda operative during a routine interview at the Orlando airport, but let's face it, the jobs are boring, the pay is less that great, and for the most part, there is a level of discomfort being a screener.  but this tactic seems to work better than most.

We really don't know what they will do next.  Quite frankly, whatever it is, I would rather we screen than not.  that way, we have a shot, but if we don't well?!   no shot whatsoever.



With respect to loosing baggage... yea, that happens - with or without terrorists.

-- Modified on 4/23/2007 4:32:32 PM

study a problem when the solution can be more easily pulled out of your ass?

First, I didn't mean to imply that we could take the current TSA employees and transfer them to being agents.  For those agents, you could recruit police detectives, criminal justice/psychology graduates, discharged Navy Seals, or even recruit from Israel.

As for what we look for, first you use intelligence, but on top of that, remember that we could brainstorm that just as well as any terrorist.  We could be proactive about it by studying case histories.  We can be pro-active on it.

I'm talking about "passenger policing" in terms of eminent threats.  Pulling out knives or connecting wires. You might get a past that reduces the chance of lawsuits over it.    

I  have about how  he profiles (yes that is NOT a dirty word).  and second... all the passengers with the flying Imams did was complain about their odd behavior.  which WAS odd.  why do we have to watch the bomb timer count down to 001 before we are allowed to act?  

Me - I would rather report the suspicious behavior, especially given how these guys acted and reacted.  and in case you've not noticed, we just quite frankly do not have enough incidents for statistical analysis... oh, well according to you and JB - then we cannot study anecdotal evidence... too bad!

Bizzaro, this is one of the uncommon political posts where you haven't cited your life experience as being your principal evidence. Doing that occasionally is okay; I don't expect that any of us can ignore personal experience, but it's fair to say that you cite them so frequently that you do rely excessively on anecdotal evidence.

People can get Congress to make changes in the civil law to accommodate passenger policing.  If you want, in this hypothetical proposal, you could imagine acting 10 seconds before the bomb timer goes off.  Or one minute.  It's hypothetical, okay?  Imagine we could alter the system we have to implement this approach.  Make changes till you think it will work, find flaws where you can, but don't cross it off completely unless the flaw is fatal.

from various news papers and journals (as I have) that is not my personal experience!  That is data that is collected, analyzed, reduced to information and reported by others.  

In any case, sorry dude, each of us brings to the analysis in these discussions our experiences as bias.  Yes, I do have biases, but I admit them and by way of presenting my experience attempt to provide my specific background for thinking a specific way.  All too often - in these discussions - specific assumptions are made - example, that I could never understand the plight of those with a psychological disorder - when in fact, I can.  Why? Close friends who have them!  And I just visited with one, and buried another this past week.

As far as making changes in the law, when has that ever stopped anyone from sueing (or for that matter committing a crime)?  but my comment about waiting for the timer to reach 001 before we react was an allagory!  Witness our "late" entry into WWII.  Witness our late acknowledgement that we are under systematic attack by radical Islam.  

After you "pulled it out of your ass", what did you do with the solution, shove it back in?

You've digressed to your own family life often.  I've restrained myself from one-upping you with experiences in my own life, because I've thought it better not to take it down that track.  If you want, I can go back and list the times you've digressed to you autobiography. I wish you wouldn't make me do it.

When we were discussing Cho, and you brought up how sensitive you were because your bipolar friend died-- why were you on that thread at all Bizzaro?  

And I know you give data too, Bizzaro.  You think you could understand a psychiatric disorder, I won't go into it, but you can't match my understanding of it.  I'd rather not go there.    

 

Talk about airing personal Stuff!  dude, wha???  you think that is hidden?  You think that is not read?  YOU put it out there.  Kinda like the pot calling the kettle black!  lol!!!  

You wish to make a point, do it where you commit the least offense.... I don't put half of what you put online.

While on topic, yea, your life is pretty tame, but dude, don't begrudge me mine.  That really is sort of pathetic.  I've witnessed personal jealousies and know what, you've gotta let that go.  

When meeting people - with richer lives than my own, I learn from them - soak it up!  revel in their success!  cause it says to me - that I can do it too.... but you?  you seem to wallow in self pity, and disdain those who live more fuller lives....  ask yourself why, cause I got no answers for you.

-- Modified on 4/25/2007 4:59:58 AM

That was on the GD board, Bizzaro, where such things are appropriate.

And here you haven't projected exuberance about your life either. How much money you've given your ex?  How much you've witnessed depraved professors. Don't preach to me about your better life. From what you've said, I don't believe it for a second from what you've been saying about it.

For myself, I'm recovering.  I'm doing quite well.

This argument was over anecdotal evidence. Now that you know you're beaten on that, you simply bring distract with another topic.  

Really, Bizzaro, the more you've argued here, the more condescending, sneering and manipulative you've sounded.  I used to respect you, but now I'm on the border to disliking you.  

security!  yuk yuk.... but ya know I guess ya just had to start commenting 'bout me... your third post down... yea, I am pretty interesting... and I could see why you would wish to stop posting about the topic and talk about me.... ya wanna be me....!!!  hee hee!  I know, you're jealous.... you'll get over it.... lol!!!  but you really shouldn't flatter me so... I could get a complex...!!!  Then I'd have to take what?  they grey and pink ones?!  or is it the yellow and black ones... they are all just so confusing.!!!! lol!!!