The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
When's the last time airport security did something worthwhile?
Jinnigan
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So we have all these airport security measures in place, and I'm just curious when's the last time airport security actually stopped a terrorist attack? I believe the gel bomb incident was stopped due to police investigation, and did not involve airport security in any way, did it?
I'm trying to figure out if airport security is actually worth anything. I'm still walking through the logic, so work with me here.
I suppose airport security might be worthwhile in a preventative sort of way - at least it becomes a hassle for bombers so they can't just stroll on. How effective is this, though? After all, if you want to kill a bunch of people, just bomb a cinema. Or a mall. Or times square. The airport isn't the only place that can be bombed.
One thing that bothers me about airport security is that it's a stopgap measure. It's a treatment of symptoms (which do need to be dealt with, yes), but what you don't see is any kind of effort to deal with the cause. It seems to me that the best way of preventing bombings is to work towards becoming a nation that people don't want to bomb. This, obviously, is a stupidly complicated problem - what are we going to do, negotiate with Bin Laden? Disassemble the CIA? But, at least in the abstract, it seems like the best thing to do.
Anyways. Those are just some of my thoughts. What do you think?
I'm trying to figure out if airport security is actually worth anything. I'm still walking through the logic, so work with me here.
I suppose airport security might be worthwhile in a preventative sort of way - at least it becomes a hassle for bombers so they can't just stroll on. How effective is this, though? After all, if you want to kill a bunch of people, just bomb a cinema. Or a mall. Or times square. The airport isn't the only place that can be bombed.
One thing that bothers me about airport security is that it's a stopgap measure. It's a treatment of symptoms (which do need to be dealt with, yes), but what you don't see is any kind of effort to deal with the cause. It seems to me that the best way of preventing bombings is to work towards becoming a nation that people don't want to bomb. This, obviously, is a stupidly complicated problem - what are we going to do, negotiate with Bin Laden? Disassemble the CIA? But, at least in the abstract, it seems like the best thing to do.
Anyways. Those are just some of my thoughts. What do you think?
Jinnigan on
0
Posts
I think that if we raised the living conditions in those countries instead of bombing the shit out of everybody, America would have fewer problems. Unfortunately, our version of help involves aid and then bombing and then some more aid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Glasgow_International_Airport_attack
They're not the TSA, but I'm guessing it's similar enough...
Take that for what you will.
My sweet, untouched Miranda
And while the seagulls are crying
We fall but our souls are flying
Poverty is not the cause of fundamental extremism in Islam. At least, not anymoreso than it is in Christianity. (I wouldn't call Pat Robertson poor) There are a variety of causes, most of them personal, and simply assuming that there's a universal cause if foolhardy. Of course, helping decrease poverty for poverty's sake and the humanitarian concerns it entails is a pretty good idea regardless.
Woman walks into Logan Airport with a fake bomb. State troopers stop her.
Well, they did the right thing, even if it was fake.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
it certainly isn't hurting anything.
B.net: Kusanku
Or, here's an idea... call Israel, ask them what the fuck they do, then copy it.
Also - jobs?
I'm more concerned about the number of security measure that don't actually make us any safer but do erode some civil liberties in order to get the illusion of safety. Terrorists, hell anyone trying to subvert the system, are going to be more inventive than the system if only because they're just trying to find the loopholes that will inevitably exist since we can't exactly cavity search everyone and rummaging through their luggage.
Well, sure, it's a deterrant to airport bombings, but again - it's not like bombings can only happen in airports.
So um...what else is airport security supposed to do besides protect airports and airplanes?
Did anyone ever argue that beefing up airport security would stop terrorism on the whole, vs. help stop terrorist acts on planes and in airports?
The last time I went to E3 I was stopped by security for carrying a PlayStation 2.
I take it we're all familiar with this:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/02/cya_security_1.html
tl;dr: Most modern security is there so that the people running the security don't get blamed when something inevitably slips through.
Every time I haven't carried high explosives with the exception of my flights to and from PAX I have been removed from line and personally searched. Well, since I joined the military at any rate.
I got really, really lucky.
My sweet, untouched Miranda
And while the seagulls are crying
We fall but our souls are flying
Is this something you can elaborate on without implicating yourself in any federal crime? My curiosity is piqued.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
Specifically, to go home on leave and then go back to Korea.
EDIT: It was not a large amount of explosives, but it was enough to say, blast open a cockpit door, or breach the exterior of the plane.
My sweet, untouched Miranda
And while the seagulls are crying
We fall but our souls are flying
It wasn't a fake bomb, it was a breadboard with some LEDs on it. In other words, it was "geek bling".
She thought it looked cool, and it didn't look anything like a bomb (unless there's some way to make bombs out of LEDs). But I guess anything with wires on it is considered a "fake bomb" these days (since that's what bombs look like in movies).
Of course, I still think she's a nutcase for wearing a breadboard around, but I really can't see how the security thought it was a bomb.
Well, I hadn't heard that she refused to answer about the circuit. That is stupid.
But, really, from a quick glance at a picture of the "fake bomb", and I could immediately see it was just a breadboard, a battery, and some LEDs (and I know almost nothing about electronics). I find it hard to believe that none of the security staff could recognise what it was.
Well, it's pretty clear that it's just geek bling, although the breadboard is stupidly big. And I agree that she should have had enough sense to not wear it to an airport while carrying play-dough.
But charging her with carrying a fake bomb? That just a bit crazy. She should be reprimanded for not co-operating and for refusing to answer questions, but I still can't see how that is a "fake bomb".
I mean, I carry a headphone amp with me all the time when I'm flying, and it's just a protoboard in a mint tin. I hope that someone doesn't think that it's a "fake bomb" too.
EDIT: I've updated with the new picture from the previous post. Also, just to make it clear, I'm more concerned with her being charged with carrying a fake bomb than her being asked questions by security.
...
Calgary international airport has a reasonable amount of security, with metal detectors, checking laptops/electronics and all that crap.
Now less then half a mile away using the same runways are a few different terminals used by smaller independant airlines such as canada north, i think central mountain air and a few others. When I used to fly up to a camp north of ft. Mcmurray we used canada north. There was non existent security. they would check your drivers liscence to see if you had a name matching the flight list. After that you got a coloured laminated piece of paper with no writing on it as your boarding pass. No metal detectors, we would wander around and would walk straight on the plane. I know for a fact (people i work with, not myself) would bring up rediculous amounts of contraband (drugs, weapons and such) without fear of consequences.
Keep in mind that these were not small planes, but instead 737's as well.
It has led me to the impression that airport security is as much about giving the impression of security then actually providing it.
It may be different in other countries, but talking with friends who worked at various small terminals in ontario as well they came to the same conclusion that security was a farce and did not even provide an illusion of competency.
I forget what comedian said it, but someone needs to figure out a way to blow up a plane that requires a long line at security.
Anyone doing international flights these days, how does US airport security compare to (say) EU non-US-flight security these days? I've not been to the US in 7 years.
Couldn't you use some explosives on the track? I'm not an expert on such matters so I don't know how feasible or easy that would be.
Terrorists, at least those of the current batch, seem most interested in killing people outside of their home territories in flashy ways. Airplanes are pretty flashy, as is mass transit although less so. There have been at least a few attacks or attempts on transit in the past decades, though not so much in North America. Attacking symbolic places also adds into the flashy and psychological aspects.
If they were sophisticated saboteurs simply intent on causing a lot of damage, then there are better places for them to target. I'm not going to go in to details, but there are definitely weaknesses in the systems of the western world such that if they put pressure in the right spots it will have a crippling and not immediately reparable effect on the economy. Fortunately, for whatever reason they haven't found or focused on such targets.
If you wanted to do it, that would definitely be the way.. I don't know about the US but in England there are stretches of rails going through areas which are virtually uninhabited so you wouldn't be seen.
As for the airport thing.. when I was going through Gatwick, Honk Kong and Perth airports a few years back, I had several bags and things that were never really checked.. and I was kinda unsavory looking at the time.. I really think its mostly for show, so they can say they are doing something.. although if you watch those documentary shows like Airport or Border Security, you see them catch alot of suspect people.
We're not really in danger until we have a truly intelligent enemy. :P