Yes it would. But who was suggesting that in the first place?
What is it with reading comprehension? Someone suggests racial profiling, and it never fails, certain other people always think we're somehow saying Let's IGNORE all non-Arabs at airports!
That's not what anyone is saying. "Ignore"? Please. No one is "ignored" and that's not even on the table.
Everyone stops at the desk, has to show a valid ID, and answer lamebrained questions.
Everyone puts their carry-on luggage into an X-ray machine and empties their pockets of keys and change.
Everyone has their possessions confiscated if they even resemble a weapon, to scale or not (Swiss army knife, nail clippers, Medal of Honor... )
And finally everyone walks through the metal detector. Everyone who sets it off is pulled aside for the wands, more pocket emptying, and perhaps much, much more.....
So again, why can't you comprehend what is being said? No one wants to "ignore" any air passengers. Just this: When it comes to extra screening efforts (extra! That is: in addition to what is already done to everyone), let's focus our (inherently FINITE) resources and time on likely terrorists, and not WASTE it by body-cavity-searching grandmas and little Trevor.
For some reason, whenever I say this someone writes back under the impression that I want to IGNORE Grandma and little Trevor, and apparently just wave them into the plane from the street curb. But why? Why is it so hard to understand what is actually being said by the profiling proponents?
Is it because it's simply easier to attack the pro-profiling position if you get to pretend that we're saying something we're not? Let me know,