U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-28-2010, 05:11 PM
 
14,303 posts, read 24,091,411 times
Reputation: 20158

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacq63 View Post
Arriving at LAX, I always hear Australians in particular beeyatching and moaning about what they percieve as paranoia on the part of the U.S government. It's probably mostly frustration at delays caused by all the checks, but all that kvetching annoys me more than whatever it takes to make flying as safe as possible. I personally don't see it as 'bothering' people; if I felt like that I just wouldn't travel.
Isn't that what Australians usually do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-28-2010, 07:56 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 41,492,551 times
Reputation: 10958
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAK802 View Post
I have never been at an airport in the US more than 45 minutes before my flight. And, never missed a flight. Before moving to San Diego, I lived on the East coast, where Newark, JFK and LGA were my home airports. As busy as they were, we were there 45 minutes before a flight and never missed one. Now, if I have a 9am flight, I have the taxi pick me up at 8am, and arrive at 8:10. Still never missed a flight. Maybe you just take longer than most to get through the security and to your gate?
I wasn't stating a fact, I was making a query. As long as I can check my bags and run off to the departures gate, I'm happy. Even if it's fifteen minutes to spare. But I'd like both me and my bags to get to the place at the same time. I haven't flown since...'98? Flew out to California for a conference involving college. Before that, hadn't flown since '90, going to Florida from the Navy. When I got out for good, they put me on a train instead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2010, 12:17 PM
 
162 posts, read 354,488 times
Reputation: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptrjakson View Post
Though I am sure we all find the security checks at the airport are a bit of a nuisance, I think we all understand the reasons behind them.
Do you think its good thing to bother people in the name of security at air port.
Absolutely. I'd rather be inconvenienced than dead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2010, 12:42 PM
 
2,024 posts, read 2,995,004 times
Reputation: 1813
I love to travel. I'd like to live at least a couple of more decades so go ahead and perform all the security checks needed to keep me and my loved ones safe. No bother.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2010, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
5,198 posts, read 13,416,305 times
Reputation: 7375
See, I don't believe that any of this is keeping us "safe"...sure...it makes us THINK they're doing something, but it sure didn't stop the underwear bomber!

They need to focus on the real threat...and that means....you guessed it...PROFILING!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 11:09 AM
 
9,269 posts, read 9,335,891 times
Reputation: 29109
My problem with this question is that it is asked poorly. The question is: Do you think it is a good thing to bother people in the name of security at airports? Like virtually everyone else here I have to answer that question "yes" or in the affirmative.

The real questions that should be asked though are these:

1. Are TSA security screening measures effective?
2. Are there ways to screen as effectively as TSA currently does that would be less costly and less obtrusive to the public?
3. When we consider the current system in place do the benefits of that system outweigh the costs imposed?
4. Is the system more about security or is more about things like "political correctness"?

I will answer my own questions:

1. I think the measures are reasonably effective in that we have not had an airplane hijacking since 9/11 occurred. However, there are cases where people have gotten prohibited items through airport security an onto a plane. Experts will also say that terrorists can surmount the current screening system if they are innovative enough.

2. TSA does some things in screening that I find just mindboggling. Ever been to an airport security line and had to watch several white Caucasian women with babies in strollers go through security? Its very slow as TSA makes everyone take the baby out of the stroller, load the stroller onto the conveyor belt, screen the stroller, etc. I would submit that white Caucasian women with babies are extremely unlikely to bomb an airplane. I would call for a relaxed process to allow them on board more quickly. Other passengers who by "profile" pose less danger than others should be given a quicker screening and sent on their way. Perhaps, some people could be "pre-screened" before they get to the security line and simply allowed to pass through.

3. Cost benefit analysis is a tool that is used in many situations. Its used by insurance companies, corporations, and government to make many decisions. The current security system in place at every airport in the country is costly. But we don't even see some of the costs. If 50,000 people who earn $300 an hour are forced to spend one additional hour in airport lines there is an indirect cost of $15,000,000.00 for each day this occurs. The reality is that decisions are made everyday in every sector of our country that have an impact on the number of people who live and die. The amount we invest in automobile safety will be reflected in deaths in car accidents every year. The amount we invest in workplace safety will be reflected in deaths from industrial accidents. I question whether we can justify the huge amount of money that this system costs us because nine years ago we had an experience like 9/11 happen one time.

4. The system seems more about political correctness than about security. I would argue that an effective system ought to employ racial and ethnic profiling rather than simply applying the same screening to every passenger who gets on an airplane. Some people are simply more likely than others to be dangerous.

I don't dispute that we have to have airport security. I do dispute the way that security is conducted and frankly I am really tired of people who will justify any security practice by saying "remember 9/11". Its time to stop the hysteria and talk rationally about this subject.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Colorado
4,308 posts, read 11,836,673 times
Reputation: 4425
But would profiling catch someone like Colleen LaRose (aka Jihad Jane) or Jamie Paulin-Ramirez? Two blue-eyed blondes in their early 40s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 05:25 PM
 
Location: Midwestern Dystopia
2,376 posts, read 3,068,469 times
Reputation: 2967
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb at sea View Post
See, I don't believe that any of this is keeping us "safe"...sure...it makes us THINK they're doing something, but it sure didn't stop the underwear bomber!

They need to focus on the real threat...and that means....you guessed it...PROFILING!
Bingo, everything they do is reactionary, not proactive.

and yes, although P incorrect, profiling is a better use of time and resources. But considering people nowadays I fully expect the resistence to that. How really concerned are some of these people about safety?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2010, 05:32 PM
 
Location: Middle Tennessee
187,058 posts, read 77,092,074 times
Reputation: 130338
Yes. The shame is the wake up call it took to get it started.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2010, 11:56 AM
 
Location: Houston, Tx
3,644 posts, read 5,574,139 times
Reputation: 1616
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post

2. I would submit that white Caucasian women with babies are extremely unlikely to bomb an airplane. I would call for a relaxed process to allow them on board more quickly.
Chilaili beat me to the Colleen LaRose reference so I'll just leave you with this one:
Terrorists 'could use exploding breast implants to blow up jet' - Telegraph

Quote:
4.I would argue that an effective system ought to employ racial and ethnic profiling rather than simply applying the same screening to every passenger who gets on an airplane. Some people are simply more likely than others to be dangerous.
You are partially right about profiling and 100% right about some people being more likely than others to be dangerous. However, as recent examples point out it is not race or ethnicity that needs to be profiles, but belief. It is Islamic ideaology that is the culprit here, not race or ethnicity. It is much harder to profile beliefe in Islamic Jihad, since it ican be any color, ethnicity, or gender, but that is what needs to be done. Also, we need a national discussion about who the enemy really is and what his beliefs are. Without that we can never win because too many people wil not even correctly identify the enemy. Neither our current president nor the last one (both Democrat and Republican) have been willing to have that discussion with the American people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top