The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

[CasterTroy]

Originally Posted by pauldun170

In order to do that here, they would need trained professionals.
Trained professionals, preferably officers and not some private company chosen because it was the lowest bidder.

Politicians and tea baggers would bitch and complain and demand that such jobs be handled by private free market blah blah blah not by career professionals or highly trained lifers.

Thats why we try and avoid this argument by saying robots and technology will do it better.

100%

I've never flown and NOT had my checked luggage opened, and shuffled thru.

When I came back from Honduras I had a machette for my son and we left Honduras with no problem...but ATL they searched the bag twice

[Homeslice]

Originally Posted by KSGregman

Not this



Or this

Why don't you feel chemical sniffers would be valuable (assuming they worked and could be set up to operate continuously)?

And I'd say I've probably only had my bags checked 2-3% of the time.

[derf]

I've had my bag checked for chemicals a few times, and it always comes up positive. BUT i use my bag for work, and I carry ammunition (live and blanks), clips, and other stuff exposed to gunpowder and explosives in it on a regualr basis. They check it, ask for a reason my bag has those chemical, rummage through it and move on. I also always carry a disposable razor, big toothpaste bottle, lighter, nail clippers, and once in a while a cheapo knife and generally whatever I feel like bring on.

The system doesnt work now, so why not take a new and different approach to it? Or should we just continue to throw money at something that is already broken?

[CasterTroy]

Originally Posted by derf

The system doesnt work now, so why not take a new and different approach to it? Or should we just continue to throw money at something that is already broken?

See court system, See also Congress, Senate, Presidency, DMV, DOT & prison & school system

[KSGregman]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

Why don't you feel chemical sniffers would be valuable (assuming they worked and could be set up to operate continuously)?

I didn't say they wouldn't be valuable....as much as I believe that the "softer" security measures such as profiling, behavioral and otherwise, would be FAR more effective in identifying WHO the problem people really are while leaving the VAST majority of people moving through the airport far more free than they (we?) are currently.

[Homeslice]

I have no problem with the "softer" approach you suggest, looking for people acting suspicious......AS LONG AS how someone is dressed or what color their skin is isn't one of the factors used.

I also think the backscatter machines, at what, $300,000 a pop last I heard? Are a waste of taxpayer dollars, when the only thing they would have prevented was the Underwear bomber. They would NOT have prevented someone from carrying something up their ass, or more importantly, in their bag.

[Kaneman]

Originally Posted by KSGregman

that paying more attention to the types of people who have attacked us in the past might make sense?

You mean like Govt' officials?

[derf]

Originally Posted by CasterTroy

See court system, See also Congress, Senate, Presidency, DMV, DOT & prison & school system

So what you are saying is that there is a historical presedense for this?

I totally agree, its beaurocricy at its worst. Its the traditional government excuse, lets throw money at this and it will fix itself.

[KSGregman]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

You mean like Govt' officials?

[pauldun170]

http://wdbo.com/localnews/2010/11/sa...pt-out-of.html