Few post-9/11 security measures have proven as enduring as the creation of the Transportation Security Administration, which effectively nationalized airport security and dramatically increased screening procedures on flights. In a matter of months, flights went from something you could arrive 30 minutes to an hour beforehand and be fine to something you needed to budget two hours for, what with the shoe removal and the liquids and the possibility of a random pat-down.
It's annoying, but it's also worse than annoying. The TSA's inefficiency isn't just aggravating and unnecessary; by pushing people to drive instead of fly, it's actively dangerous and costing lives. Less invasive private scanning would be considerably better.
Why the TSA falls short
The TSA is hard to evaluate largely because it's attempting to solve a non-problem. Despite some very notable cases, airplane hijackings and bombings are quite rare. There aren't that many attempts, and there are even fewer successes. That makes it hard to judge if the TSA is working properly — if no one tries to do a liquid-based attack, then we don't know if the 3-ounce liquid rule prevents such attacks.
So Homeland Security officials looking to evaluate the agency had a clever idea: They pretended to be terrorists, and tried to smuggle guns and bombs onto planes 70 different times. And 67 of those times, the Red Team succeeded. Their weapons and bombs were not confiscated, despite the TSA's lengthy screening process. That's a success rate of more than 95 percent.
It's easy to make too much of high failure rates like that. As security expert Bruce Schneier likes to note, such screenings don't have to be perfect; they just have to be good enough to make terrorists change their plans: "No terrorist is going to base his plot on getting a gun through airport security if there's a decent chance of getting caught, because the consequences of getting caught are too great."
#1: Cynicom To: Horse (#0)
This is patently false. Airline traffic continues to increase.
Cynicom posted on 2019-11-16 08:00:23 Reply Private Reply
#2: ghostdogtxn To: Cynicom (#1)
ghostdogtxn posted on 2019-11-16 08:11:13 Reply Private Reply
#3: Horse To: Cynicom (#1)
Horse posted on 2019-11-16 08:16:23 Reply Private Reply
#4: Cynicom To: ghostdogtxn (#2)
Agreed...
As are most Federal agencies.
TSA cannot stop terrorists or lunatics but does deter or make it more difficult. To do nothing, I nor most people would not fly.While I am driving I see police ensuring I obey the rules. Withdraw police and insanity would prevail on our highways.
Cynicom posted on 2019-11-16 08:29:57 Reply Private Reply
#5: BTP Holdings To: Cynicom (#4)
I was talking with a neighbor. I told him I was likely on the "no fly list". He said he could not afford to be on that list.
One time when driving big truck out of Chicago, I was on I-64 in Kentucky east of Louisville. this car ahead of me cut of another car and they ticked bumpers.
The car he hit was headed toward a guard rail. She over corrected and hit my trailer tandems. I saw the air bag blow in the mirror.
The sub frame of the trailer was knocked out and the trailer was junk. Lucky I was empty. They had to bring in a dolly to be able to tow the trailer from the rear.
We gave a description of the van to the cop that showed up. He said that guy almost hit him when he was up the road. Maybe the guy was hopped up on something to be driving like that. ;)
BTP Holdings posted on 2019-11-16 09:58:25 Reply Private Reply
#6: Darkwing To: Horse (#0)
Darkwing posted on 2019-11-16 10:39:27 Reply Private Reply
#7: Lod To: ghostdogtxn, former flyers, 4 (#2)
Same here. We used the airlines once after TSA Gestapo was installed.
Lod posted on 2019-11-16 11:11:39 Reply Private Reply
#8: Cynicom To: Lod (#7)
Gestapo is harsh.
TSA does not hire people for their social grace.
There is no alternative for the masses, grin and bear it, drive or walk.
Cynicom posted on 2019-11-16 11:26:12 Reply Private Reply
#9: Fred Mertz To: Cynicom (#8)
Fred Mertz posted on 2019-11-16 23:26:48 Reply Private Reply