Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Joke of Airport Security
www.lizmichael.com | Sept. 11, 2001

Posted on 09/12/2001 11:30:51 PM PDT by Lizavetta

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 09/12/2001 11:30:51 PM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
bump
2 posted on 09/13/2001 7:42:27 AM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
bttt
3 posted on 09/13/2001 8:06:36 AM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
Turning American airports and airplanes into an extended police state which maximally distrusts their own customers is the single stupidest thing the industry can do. For one thing, people just won't fly the planes as often. People will drive, instead. Or they won't travel at all. They will vote with their feet. There are a great number of us in the country already who refuse to fly, or fly very rarely, for two reasons: one, we don't like being treated like Soviet citizens instead of American citizens, and two, we know the security measures are a joke.
I've already cancelled a trip I was planning next month. I will not show up 2 hours early for the flight. And I won't fly without my trusty knife. And if the airline tries to refuse to refund my fare, they can expect a big fight. The only way I'll fly is if they honor the conditions in place when I bought the ticket. I will fight for a refund.

It's a shame that these regulations are being put into place. There's a lot of places I flew to on business that I can drive to in 4-6 hours. If the flight is an hour, and I have to allow 2 hours or more for the anal probes and complete search of my underwear and toothbrushes, I'll just drive. It's more convenient to leave when I want instead of when the airline flight is scheduled. That's worth another hour or two.

This is going to kill the short hop commuter airlines. Any flights on routes less than 400 miles will probably shut down within a few months. These aren't worth the trouble, even to business travelers.

4 posted on 09/14/2001 4:52:34 AM PDT by cc2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
"Stupid federal regulations which disarm the customer require that any arms brought onto a plane be inserted in secure suitcases, and those suitcases flagged with a special FFF tag."

I was under the impression that baggage containing a declared firearm CANNOT be labeled as such. Someone please correct me if I am wrong -- am searching for a source, but if this is an error, it damages the credibility of the article.

5 posted on 09/14/2001 5:04:41 AM PDT by Eugene Tackleberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cc2k
I quit commuting by air five years ago. I drive and I've never been hijacked or lost my luggage, I kinda miss the great airport food though!
6 posted on 09/14/2001 5:14:56 AM PDT by orlop9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eugene Tackleberry
I was under the impression that baggage containing a declared firearm CANNOT be labeled as such. Someone please correct me if I am wrong -- am searching for a source, but if this is an error, it damages the credibility of the article.
I'm not sure what the federal regulations are (or whether they've been changed for "security"). I know that Delta requires that you check the bag with a firearm. You must have the rifle or shotgun or pistol in a hard sided, locked case, and you have to sign some special paperwork, declaring that the case contains a gun, that the gun is unloaded. I believe that you have to show the agent that the gun is unloaded (take it out of the case and show that the magazine is out or empty, or whatever depending on the type of gun) when you check the bag. Then, they watch you lock the case to make certain that it's locked. There's no question that some (low wage) airline employees know which bags have guns in them.
7 posted on 09/14/2001 5:31:40 AM PDT by cc2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
The greatest deterrent to hijacking is the knowledge that you will never elude authorities once you've committed the crime. Obviously, this was a non-issue for these particular terrorists. The next deterrence step is to give would-be terrorists the knowledge that they'll be killed in flight while doing little harm to passengers or crew.

Increasing security is fine in the short-term, but long-term it's just like gun control. You prevent any honest person from defending themselves, while the dishonest ones continue to find ways around any regulations in place. Forcing everyone on a plane to carry a knife would be a better measure than not allowing anyone to do so.

8 posted on 09/14/2001 5:31:47 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
Instead of banning pocket knives - how about banning arabs?
9 posted on 09/14/2001 5:39:22 AM PDT by The Raven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
The greatest deterrent to hijacking is the knowledge that you will never elude authorities once you've committed the crime.

First, the events of Tuesday were not typical hijacking's. They were suicides. Secondly, the best deterent to hijackings in general (which we have very, very few of) would be to have SECURITY PERSONEL on each flight in combination with tight physical security at the airports.

In this case, one person with a gun or a tazer on each of these flights would have prevented any of these planes from being taken over. However, the federal government in it's infinite wisdom could not find the money out of a 2 trillion dollar budget to provide security to more than a handful of flights, nor could it see the clues that pointed to this type on incident taking place.

Let's face it, the federal government is incompetent in just about everything that it does and is indirectly responsible for these events.

---max

10 posted on 09/14/2001 6:07:29 AM PDT by max61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: max61
Let's face it, the federal government is incompetent in just about everything that it does and is indirectly responsible for these events.

They're pretty good at taking our money and wasting our money.

11 posted on 09/14/2001 7:24:39 AM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cc2k
Well, even before the latest stupid regulations were in effect, I planned on driving from Dallas to Spokane, Washington next weekend.

Now others who were going to fly have called and wanted to ride with me.

There goes the airline industry customer base! Soon, we won't need the FAA bureaucrats who came up with these stupid policies as there won't be an airline industry to regulate.

I guess there might be some good to come out of this afterall.

12 posted on 09/14/2001 7:28:59 AM PDT by rollin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rollin
Just spoke to my neighbor. His daughter has been in Iowa and was headed back to Kansas City to fly to Dallas. At the Avis check-in, they told her to keep the car and return it to Dallas if she wanted to get home sometime soon.
13 posted on 09/14/2001 7:32:23 AM PDT by rollin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
The greatest deterrent to hijacking is the knowledge that you will never elude authorities once you've committed the crime

How can you say this? Did this deter the b@st@rds the committed Tuesday's atrocity? Of course not. They couldn't care less about "eluding authorities" They planned on suicide along with mass murder.

For that matter it doesn't deter a lot of ordinary street crime. Most criminals have a long record. This implies that they have failed to elude authorities repeatedly. This never seems to do much in the way of deterence.

14 posted on 09/14/2001 7:44:10 AM PDT by from occupied ga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lizavetta
Airliner security will continue to be a joke as long as security is an overhead cost to the airlines, rather than a function of the government. The free market has ABSOLUTELY FAILED here. No one despises big government or the police state more than I, but I have seen this travesty from the inside.
15 posted on 09/14/2001 7:51:19 AM PDT by j_tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cc2k, Eugene Tackleberry
I was under the impression that baggage containing a declared firearm CANNOT be labeled as such.

I travel on United with firearms frequently. Same precautions as Delta, but the "firearms" tag is to be placed
with the gun inside the baggage. Federal Air Reg (FARS) 108 is the governing regulation.

16 posted on 09/14/2001 7:53:19 AM PDT by dbbeebs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cc2k
You are correct, and it is clear that the author of this piece has never traveled with a firearm and likely possesses little "real world" knowledge about that which he/she writes. But, then again, that never stops thousands of journalists from unknowingly disseminating incorrect information.

That said, the rest of the article, IMO, was on target and put forth a number of points that really need to be emphasized over and over -- until the "security experts" employed by the government, airlines, and airports get the message.........

17 posted on 09/14/2001 7:59:31 AM PDT by tracer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: Lizavetta
How would you improve airport/airline safety?

HOTLINK ==>> AIRLINE SAFETY- Freeper suggestions- Do's and Don't's

19 posted on 09/14/2001 8:03:51 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
Airliner security will continue to be a joke as long as security is an overhead cost to the airlines, rather than a function of the government. The free market has ABSOLUTELY FAILED here. No one despises big government or the police state more than I, but I have seen this travesty from the inside.

We want the very cheapest airline fare, but don't think about what is being cut to allow that cheap fare to exist.

Now we know.

20 posted on 09/14/2001 8:31:59 AM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson