I doubt any intelligent person would. But they sure got raked over the coals for banning it in the first place.
I can't say I equate the FAA with our troops either. That's rather ludicrous.
The FAA had years of experience with overseas flights and the anti-terrorism efforts by airlines such as El Al to know what terrorists are likely to do. These were not in effect domestically on 9/11 because there was no perceived need for it and the flying public would not have stood for it.
After 9/11, they overreacted and began banning things right and left. Some of their measures were perfectly sensible. Others, like banning clippers, were incredibly laughable and served only to make the whole thing look incompetant.
FWIW, I'm not deriding their decision to ban lighters. I'm asking "what took them so long?". Particularly when you look at some of the things they have banned (even if some have since been rescinded) you'd think somebody would have decided before 3-1/2 years later, that carrying on something with the ability to start a fire was a security risk.
"I can't say I equate the FAA with our troops either. That's rather ludicrous."
Let's see. Both are gov't programs and gov't funded.
Both are charged with defending the country, protecting the public. Both are trained to ID potential enemies. Both can be in dangerous or threatening situations from the enemy.
Both must receive training to carry out that charge.
Yeah, takes a big leap in logic to see the similarities.