He has. He already stated that he was referring to PROFILING being more effective than RANDOM searching.
Besides, I'm not so much defending Chuzzlewit as defending what I have been saying WAY BEFORE this thread was even posted.
Everyone seems to be jumping on the "Don't grope me bro" bandwagon, and missing the REAL POINT.
That point being, we should be searching those MOST LIKELY to be carrying a bomb, not those LEAST LIKELY.
If it requires a body search, too bad. Accept it, or stay off the plane (it might save your life).
Those who think they have a RIGHT to fly, without being searched, also believe they have a RIGHT to drive, without a license, or vehicle tags, or insurance, or even be a citizen of the United States.
Instead of trying to STOP THE SEARCHES, we should be trying to stop the RANDOM searches.
How many bombs have been found by this PC-RANDOM SEARCH method?
There are still other alternative solutions that can be considered.
These searches are being carried out at airports by the government in violation of the everyone's constitutional rights, not by the airlines. If a plane does blow up, shouldn't it be the responsibility of the airline to ensure that they are providing a responsible and safe service?
Why do you think it is up to the government to declare everyone guilty until proven innocent just because they want to fly on an airplane, when the airlines are private businesses and the airplanes are private property?
I've been to airports in Europe (such as Schiphol in Amsterdam) where the screening is done at the gate, and the airport is essentially an open-air mall. I can't say whether it was the Dutch government or the airline itself that ran the gate-specific screening areas, but pushing the screening out to the airlines would take the government out of the equation, and it would be up to each airline to decide how invasive they wish to be without making it a federal or constitutional issue.
-PJ