Bill criminalizing TSA pat-down procedures introduced in Alaska

I fly a lot. I went threw the scanner once, and immediately remembered I forgot to take off my belt.

Of course, I got the full pat-down treatment. What was most enraging was there was one person doing the pat-down who was apparently a trainee, and the supervisor. The supervisor was adamant that the trainee check under my belt -- he of course, asked why. "Because that's where he could be hiding a triggering device."

I'm sure the look on my face as I stared right at her conveyed the message that I thought she was probably one of the dumbest ********ing people on the face of the earth.

Because, of course, if there was a triggering device under my belt, I would have turned all three of us into a giant cloud of pink mist.

TSA loves to play at security theater, because it's the only thing they know how to do.

 

Good. Time for a federal law on the same topic.

 

I'm trying to think of post 9/11 security measures that actually make sense from a security point of view. The War on Moisture does little except to hugely inconvenience with medical needs or small children. The War on Footwear simply slows he lines down. It's utterly pointless - there was one, just one, shoe bomber and that plot was DOA because pre-9/11 security measures rendered it powerless. Likewise for the underpants bomber. Random searches piss people off, either by randomly selecting old ladies and toddlers, or by not-randomly selecting dark people. Again, there's nothing to suggest that, when properly executed, pre-9/11 methods can't prevent hijackings any better.

The more effective measures are the non-theater stuff: locking the cockpit, not allowing non-ticketed passengers past security, subtly creating unpredictability in the security procedures, and surveillance of terrorists before they get to the airport (and better coordination between agencies).

 

Not to mention the fact that the days of passengers just sitting there being sheep during a hijacking are completely over.

The only thing that let the 9/11 attacks succeed as well as they did was that the passengers assumed it was an old-school hijacking in which the hijackers had demands and the plane would land safely somewhere.

Yeah, that's not going to happen again.

Besides, if terrorists want to blow up a plane, all they have to do is turn some of the baggage handlers or caterers. Those folks have completely access to the planes and they don't go through any physical security screening at all beforehand.

 

I think a Madrid or London style attack is a lot more realistic than another 9/11. The absurd measures for air travel are just farcical performance theater.

 

Agree. Blowing up a mall, commuter train or car bridge should be much easier than doing any damage with an aeroplane.

 

Even scarier is how unguarded most of nuke plants and urban chemical factories are. "Homeland Security", indeed. *snort*

 

Gathering up enough explosive materials to damage or destroy a bridge is going to be extremely difficult, particularly in an area where purchases of materials to make an ANFO devices are not common.

They're built exceedingly well and it's extremely difficult to get the explosive into an area to cause enough damage to destroy a support and/or drop a span.

Further, the types of explosives that were used in the London/Madrid bombings are going to be somewhat difficult to both buy and/or steal. Materials for pipe bombs with anti-personnel screws/bolts are going to be most readily available and would be the easiest to acquire and place, but really wouldn't pull off the catastrophic effect they're looking for.

Now, Propane cylinders, those really give you a bang for your buck, the problem is that they're big and kinds freakin' hard to hide.

 

This always summed up my thoughts on air security.

 

Not entirely related, but....

TSA airport checkpoint left unattended in Sacramento, causing shutdown

 

Does anybody know why TSA requires passengers to remove shoes, belts, and sweaters? I've never been to another country that does that. India is so paranoid that it won't let you into the Mumbai airport unless you are a ticketed passenger with a flight within the next 3 hours, not one foot into the entire building, and the taxis are blocked with a fence and inspected Godfather-style before driving onto a hotel property. But even India doesn't make its passengers strip down before the metal detectors.

 

I don't know if belt removal is mandatory, but I do it anyway because I tend to wear belts that set off the metal detector without fail (i.e. big buckles, studs, etc).

The shoe thing is just an overreaction to the failed shoe bomber. They actually did the same thing in Japan, but only because the flights were going to the US. It's supposed to be go away with the introduction of "new technology", but that announcement was back in September and I haven't heard anything about it since.

 

Yes you are right the belt is not mandatory but the detectors are so sensitive that you've got no choice. My everyday ordinary belt sets off a U.S. metal detector but not non-U.S. detectors.

 

That's downright criminal. Who the hell eats pizza with knife and fork?

 

It's all so stupid. I can't take a nail file into the airport, but I can buy a case of wine duty free, break the bottles, and create 12 weapons that are far more dangerous than a tiny nail file.

 

I recieved a nice happy ending, I mean pat-down in PBI on Saturday morning as my reward for standing on the TSA line for 40 minutes (beginning at 5:45 AM).

This supplanted the $.05 bottle return machines in NYS as my most hated thing.

As Alan said in "The Hangover", "Thanks a lot Bin Laden."

 

I brought my bicycling stuff with me on vacation last week so I could rent a bike in Florida. Purposely left at home my cycling multi-tool with little screwdrivers and wrenches on it just knowing it would be confiscated.

 

If the crust doesn't hold, it may be needed.

 

It's your fault for flying out at a peak time.

My advice would be to not eat crap airport pizza.

 

Trouble is, this is one of those things that a Dem can't fix. It's like Nixon going to China or Ronnie negotiating with Gorbachev, only a tough guy Republican is permitted to do it. The moment Obama relaxes airport security in any way he's a terrorist-loving Muslim seeking to undermine America.

So yes, as usual, this is the Republicans' fault.