No, it's not a minor issue, but your perspective is warping things a bit. Airline security is a huge problem. The high potential for death and damage created by combining a pretty vulnerable airframe with the increasing destructive capacity of technology (multiplied by the thousands of flights every day) has a limited number of solutions. 1) You can make the airplanes themselves harder to damage or destroy. This isn't a fast solution, and very expensive. 2) You can try to prevent things and people from damaging the plane or the people on it. That's a faster fix, though arguably just as expensive in the long run.
(By the way, #2 is a lot more likely to be the reason that they shoved this into effect when they did. The holiday travel rush makes airplanes and airports really juicy targets for anyone interested in maximizing the damage from a terrorist attack. So, no, it's not an evil conspiracy. Yeesh.)
So how do you accomplish the second option? You intensify security screening. Ideally, DNA identity verification becomes practical, but that won't happen for a while. No database and the technology's too slow. Hell, we can't even manage that with fingerprint scans yet.
(Also by the way, this is a more likely contributor to the idea of the wealthy and influential undergoing less rigorous screening, if that is in fact a rule and not just exaggeration. I don't see anything on the websites exempting people from the scanners if they're flying business class, for example. People who are extremely successful and well-known are a lot less likely to try to blow themselves or their aircraft out of the sky. Aside from which, famous people, like the Speaker of the House, are obviously a lot easier to identify, which reduces their threat profile. Their checked luggage would be getting the same scrutiny, though, so that should make you feel better.)
Also, physical checks get more thorough and, consequently, more intrusive. And, yes, more insulting to those inclined to take offense, and there's more potential for mistakes and screwups. Combining inept TSA employees (and god I've met some dumb ones) with more complicated standards and procedures and then throwing it all into a high-volume, high-stress environment isn't always going to go well.
So it's a necessary exchange. You voluntarily (yes, it's voluntary) relinquish some privacy for the sake of convenience of travel. You shouldn't have to, but that's not the fault of the airlines or the TSA, it's the fault of the people trying to kill airline passengers and destroy the planes..
Unless they're all part of a conspiracy. Hmmm...
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 21/11/10 19:46 (UTC)(By the way, #2 is a lot more likely to be the reason that they shoved this into effect when they did. The holiday travel rush makes airplanes and airports really juicy targets for anyone interested in maximizing the damage from a terrorist attack. So, no, it's not an evil conspiracy. Yeesh.)
So how do you accomplish the second option? You intensify security screening. Ideally, DNA identity verification becomes practical, but that won't happen for a while. No database and the technology's too slow. Hell, we can't even manage that with fingerprint scans yet.
(Also by the way, this is a more likely contributor to the idea of the wealthy and influential undergoing less rigorous screening, if that is in fact a rule and not just exaggeration. I don't see anything on the websites exempting people from the scanners if they're flying business class, for example. People who are extremely successful and well-known are a lot less likely to try to blow themselves or their aircraft out of the sky. Aside from which, famous people, like the Speaker of the House, are obviously a lot easier to identify, which reduces their threat profile. Their checked luggage would be getting the same scrutiny, though, so that should make you feel better.)
Also, physical checks get more thorough and, consequently, more intrusive. And, yes, more insulting to those inclined to take offense, and there's more potential for mistakes and screwups. Combining inept TSA employees (and god I've met some dumb ones) with more complicated standards and procedures and then throwing it all into a high-volume, high-stress environment isn't always going to go well.
So it's a necessary exchange. You voluntarily (yes, it's voluntary) relinquish some privacy for the sake of convenience of travel. You shouldn't have to, but that's not the fault of the airlines or the TSA, it's the fault of the people trying to kill airline passengers and destroy the planes..
Unless they're all part of a conspiracy. Hmmm...