Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This post is occasioned by innocuous events of the last several weeks that points to some glaring problems, all involving over-regulation. These rules and procedures are costly, inefficient and provide few benefits.
Security desks and entrance regulations at schools - A few days ago I went to drop a cell phone off for my son at his high school. He had called and I said I would leave it at the principal's office. I was greeted at the front door by a friendly and pleasant security guard. I had to leave it with him. We got to talking. I pointed out that back in the day I visited my high school alma mater and went right to teachers' offices, and to my old club offices. Now that would be impossible. He pointed out that there used to be all kinds of entrances and exits that people could use. Now every entrance is a cluster and a delay, all because of the one-off incident in Sandy Hook. We went centuries before Sandy Hook without such rules; are there suddenly hundreds of monsters out there that would kill children? Remember most such tragedies, such as Columbine, involve current students, not outsiders.
Cell phone and texting restrictions while driving - I get that people can be distracted by such activities. But wouldn't it be better if people could alert their destination that they were running late rather than speeding?
Security at office buildings - Right after 9/11 we began seeing almost all office buildings having restricted access for "security" reasons. Any reason a terrorist bent on making a statement couldn't just blow himself up anywhere he sees a line, such as a theater entrance or subway station? We have made it impossible for people such as myself, for example, who are looking for jobs to simply show up, hand in a CV and demonstrate motivation and drive. Or for spouses to surprise each other at work? Or close friends similarly? How many terror attacks are really prevented this way?
Security at airports - We have made air travel cumbersome. Thus, for example, I am planning to travel to Washington, DC a few weeks from now from the New York City area. Train travel is ridiculously expensive for a trip of about 5 hours. If I take a plane, back in the day it was a shuttle that was about a one hour flight. Now, adding security time at airport, it's 3 hours. Maybe I'll just drive. Heck, gas is cheap these days. Imagine the financial impact this must be having on the air industry? It would make far more sense to do spot checking, behavioral profiling, and the random use of sky marshals. But hey, it's racist to target people at war with us.
Low speed limits - See this thread (link). Low and arbitrary limits are only selectively enforced on a "shooting fish in a barrel" basis. They contribute nothing to safety since in general traffic flows at around 70 on highways, and 40 or 45 on most secondary roads.
All of these rules, and more that other think of, are annoying at best. At worst, they detract from productivity and waste valuable time and resources.
With no disrespect intended, I think this thread is poorly titled. It would have been very helpful if your title specified that your gripes particularly covers an area involving security and safety. I had followed the link expecting to see something about OSHA and labor laws, EPA rules, finance & banking rules or even FDA standards.
That being said, I have some mixed thoughts about the specific points that you list.
1. I agree that there's something wrong with this. Statistically, schools simply aren't in that much danger from outsiders. Checkpoints are at best superficial band-aids over a wound and any problems that they appear to "solve" are just symptoms of deeper problems that are better off directly addressed.
Still, a single incident opens the schools to litigation. The response is therefore at least understandably rational given our current culture of blame.
2. Some disagreement. In principle I would agree but in practice, too many people are irresponsible with this and it attracted enough public attention for lawmakers to act on it.
This partly links with your point #5 about speeding: Personally I think it is better for people to speed with their full attention on the road than driving erratically (even if slowly) while taking too long with their phones. Quick button presses to access a map or address book for a call don't bother me too much but it is still better if people would get used to pulling over somewhere safe to do that. At any rate, just having the law provides a framework for making it possible to punish excessively irresponsible drivers who don't understand that just because they are allowed to, doesn't mean that their incompetence is okay.
3. Agreed with these points. But some places probably preferred to close themselves off to visitors anyway and now can do so under the guise of security, avoiding a social penalty from an image of unfriendliness.
4. Mostly agreed. Airport security has made air travel a lot more cumbersome and inconvenient.
In addition, problems in execution of said security has increasingly turned off travelers/tourists from many foreign nations as well as increased instances of luggage theft for domestic and foreign travelers alike. But like the schools (point #1), it only takes one event to ruin everything and the airports and government implementing the security are probably better off going with it, to our detriment. Of course, the origin of all blame falls on those terrorists who want to ruin it for the rest of us but security theater could use a lot of streamlining. Also, do something more about luggage thieves and publicize it well.
5. Agreed. Or rather, it is hard to disagree with the idea that speed limits should be appropriate to their location and should not be altered merely for political or financial gain. I tend to drive at or below the speed limit in the residential streets that are off of any pass-through arteries but often feel that speed limits for arterials and freeways to be lower than they can be.
The thing about discussions such as this is that for many of the things written, I can just nod my head in silence and grit my teeth in aggravation about so many of the assumptions people have about security. It would be vastly irresponsible for me to say what could and couldn't work on an open forum.
However, to illustrate some of what I know without pointing out directly what it addresses, I provide this *Advertisement
(news article about Ben-Gurion Airport)
This post is occasioned by innocuous events of the last several weeks that points to some glaring problems, all involving over-regulation. These rules and procedures are costly, inefficient and provide few benefits.
Security desks and entrance regulations at schools - A few days ago I went to drop a cell phone off for my son at his high school. He had called and I said I would leave it at the principal's office. I was greeted at the front door by a friendly and pleasant security guard. I had to leave it with him. We got to talking. I pointed out that back in the day I visited my high school alma mater and went right to teachers' offices, and to my old club offices. Now that would be impossible. He pointed out that there used to be all kinds of entrances and exits that people could use. Now every entrance is a cluster and a delay, all because of the one-off incident in Sandy Hook. We went centuries before Sandy Hook without such rules; are there suddenly hundreds of monsters out there that would kill children? Remember most such tragedies, such as Columbine, involve current students, not outsiders.
Cell phone and texting restrictions while driving - I get that people can be distracted by such activities. But wouldn't it be better if people could alert their destination that they were running late rather than speeding?
Security at office buildings - Right after 9/11 we began seeing almost all office buildings having restricted access for "security" reasons. Any reason a terrorist bent on making a statement couldn't just blow himself up anywhere he sees a line, such as a theater entrance or subway station? We have made it impossible for people such as myself, for example, who are looking for jobs to simply show up, hand in a CV and demonstrate motivation and drive. Or for spouses to surprise each other at work? Or close friends similarly? How many terror attacks are really prevented this way?
Security at airports - We have made air travel cumbersome. Thus, for example, I am planning to travel to Washington, DC a few weeks from now from the New York City area. Train travel is ridiculously expensive for a trip of about 5 hours. If I take a plane, back in the day it was a shuttle that was about a one hour flight. Now, adding security time at airport, it's 3 hours. Maybe I'll just drive. Heck, gas is cheap these days. Imagine the financial impact this must be having on the air industry? It would make far more sense to do spot checking, behavioral profiling, and the random use of sky marshals. But hey, it's racist to target people at war with us.
Low speed limits - See this thread (link). Low and arbitrary limits are only selectively enforced on a "shooting fish in a barrel" basis. They contribute nothing to safety since in general traffic flows at around 70 on highways, and 40 or 45 on most secondary roads.
All of these rules, and more that other think of, are annoying at best. At worst, they detract from productivity and waste valuable time and resources.
Are you being serious, or just stirring up trouble?
1. Of course it wouldn't, unless they expand the secure area (which would work besides in the case of say the Texas sniper.) The NFL does that with the Super Bowl compared to regular games. But how far should we expand the secure area to?
3. I don't know if it was the TSA being inept, malfunctions of the TSA scanning devices (at the time) or terrorism being one step ahead of the TSA. All of these options are possibiities in this situation or even combinations.
1. The "secure area" didn't work at Columbine, Virginia Tech, or NWA flight 253 - among many others. It's time we abandon this failed idea and let citizens carry arms, 1 as a disincentive to would-be troublemakers, and 2 for immediate response if/when trouble does arise.
3. Terrorism being one step ahead of the TSA is TSA ineptness. TSA has never caught a bomber, but they did miss one, the underwear bomber. Their record of 0-1 suggests that new methods, if not a new organization, is needed.
I highly doubt that a crazed individual can really be stopped by a security guard. A few things you ignored. Sandy Hook was a rare case where someone who didn't belong in the school was the perpetrator. Usually (Columbine is a great example) the killer is someone who is a student and thus had the right to be there. Short of operating the school on lockdown Columbine would not have been prevented by security. One cannot have screening on school buses, points of assembly outside the school or even at the inevitable conga line created to obtain legitimate access. In short there is no solution other than urging people, at all times, to be alert to other people acting oddly.
Are we now going to post security at every house of worship?
I highly doubt that a crazed individual can really be stopped by a security guard. A few things you ignored. Sandy Hook was a rare case where someone who didn't belong in the school was the perpetrator. Usually (Columbine is a great example) the killer is someone who is a student and thus had the right to be there. Short of operating the school on lockdown Columbine would not have been prevented by security. One cannot have screening on school buses, points of assembly outside the school or even at the inevitable conga line created to obtain legitimate access.
Are we now going to post security at every house of worship?
Or now at every beach? And on how many inches of sand? Links to story about Tunisia beach massacre (Link #1)(link #2). As much as we'd link there is no alternative but to go to war against Radical Islam. If it can't be targeted with precision, let them sort out the mess.
Living is fraught with danger. We need to stay in bed and have safetyness certified people help us with frightening things like cooking and bathing. Hopefully we can soon be fed intravenously and bathed without leaving the safetyness of our beds. Perhaps baby wipes would be safe enough? Oh dear...what about using the bathroom? Will need safetyness aids 24/7 for sure. Robotics had best get busy.
Mostly its a sign that voters do not trust others to self police. Remember suits are often based on lack of security knowing a possibility exist. Started with stickers on everything to even coffee is hot markings.
Security at office buildings has increased not just because of 911 but because of the string of people shooting up their ex-employer. My employer has training on this subject we have to do every year.
Cell phones/texting while driving it should never be done I installed an app on my phone where it texts you back tells you that I'm driving ill call you back when I reach my destination. This activity needs to be banned there is no excuse for it. I don't want to talk to anyone while driving. It's easy enough to pull over and talk to someone about being late.
Airport security I welcome this Aircraft have enough to go wrong already I don't want to be trapped in a plane with a guy that has a bomb. I think we were well overdue to change out airport security.
Mostly its a sign that voters do not trust others to self police. Remember suits are often based on lack of security knowing a possibility exist. Started with stickers on everything to even coffee is hot markings.
Some of that is gross negelence. Take the McDonald's coffee lawsuit. On the surface we think we are sorry that the woman burned herself as the lycra melted to her skin, but McDonald's will not be on the hook. HOWEVER McDonalds was quite a bit above the average coffee temperature so it made it a bigger risk. Say it happened at Starbucks which was say average, it wouldn't have been a win for the woman.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
