Over at De Novo,
someone asks what would happen if they published all the security holes
they saw. Liability for terrorist attack that exploits those holes?
PG's answer (which I think you can sum up as “hardly”) notwithstanding, I have to admit…
… in terms of airline flight security, does anyone think
that the rigmarole they put us through does anything at all? I mean, I
still don't understand what stops me from strapping a plastic box
cutter to my leg and walking through the little detector array thingy.
Aren't plastic box cutters what the 9-11 hijackers used?
The array of weapons that we have available to us, regularly, and on
planes, is staggering. Poisons, of course, are undetectable and easily
smuggled in, say, trial size shampoo bottles or the like. A broken off
beer bottle is as menacing as any switchblade, but it's my blunt pocket
knife that's banned, not bottles of expensive wine. Tableware in first
class includes metal forks but plastic knives.
Who imagines that a butterknife is more menacing than a fork? All we
know is that there was a rule — no metal knives — and it's being
applied in the most mechanical fashion ever. No vehicles in the park,
Your arsenal is limited by your imagination. There is no way to make
sure people don't bring weapons on your plane except to have no people
on your plane. Anybody who thinks about how to get a weapon on to a
plane for about five seconds will realize that it's dead simple.
So why are toenail clippers and sharp scissors banned? Why do we let
TSA ban some items which can be used as low-grade but not particularly
scary weapons, when it's essentially impossible to get such potential
weaponry out of the flight cabin? Why are we wasting valuable resources
confiscating scissors and knitting needles? Any thinking person
realizes that this will not stop terrorists.
Does anyone have a reason to propose besides “make unthinking people feel better”?