Shots In The Dark
Friday, November 02, 2007
  The Nightmare of Airport Security
Every time I fly, I'm amazed at the idiocy of airport security. (Six years after 9/11, and they still haven't figured out a way that people can take off their shoes without hopping around on a bare linoleum floor, then shuffling through the metal detector like some prisoner of war?)

When I came back from Miami a couple weeks ago, I lost some toiletries because, even though the amount in the clear tubes was well underneath the permissible amounts (amounts which are, as far as I can tell, completely arbitary), the stated volume of the tubes was greater than that which is allowed.

So I love Patrick Smith's Ask the Pilot column in which he talks about the absurdity of it all.

...It's our own United States that retains the crown for loopiest behavior. Any argument was put to rest earlier this fall, when the U.S. Department of Homeland Security presented the latest version of its "Secure Flight" anti-terrorism program, requesting that governments hand over a docket of personal data on all foreign airline passengers bound for the United States. (This would affect not only commercial flights arriving in the United States but those merely overflying U.S. territory -- an Air Canada plane, say, flying between Toronto and the Caribbean.) This data may include, among other things, a flier's union affiliations, reading preferences and -- look it up yourself if you don't believe me -- sexual habits. What somebody's sex life might have to do with blowing up a plane is something I can't begin to fathom; how any government might actually get wind of this information is even more troubling.

...I'm continually startled by the number of otherwise smart and reasonable people who believe that concourse security actually needs to be more intrusive and rigorous.

Yes! And meanwhile, the average TSA employee still looks he's taken a few too many punts to the head.....
 
Comments:
I lost toiletries for the same reason. But you're not allowed to decant them into unmarked tubes--oh, no! They have to be in tubes with the original label on them, and those tubes have to have a capacity that is no greater than permitted by Security. Further, they have to be in a quart-size plastic bag. If they take up half the space of a larger-sized bag, you lose them also.
 
Airport security is capricious at best and still not necessarily safe. A few months ago, I got through airport security at Boston's Logan Airport with a "woman's" pocket knife, which included a vial of perfume hidden in one of the compartments. It was probably the most contraband item you could bring on a plane. (I completely forgot I had it on me.) Of course, they confiscated the knife at Dulles on the return trip.

Point is that the airport security techniques and procedures are not standardized. I'm know I'm not the only person to have this type of story, and I won't be the last.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home
Politics, Media, Academia, Pop Culture, and More

Name: Richard Bradley
Location: New York, New York
ARCHIVES
2/1/05 - 3/1/05 / 3/1/05 - 4/1/05 / 4/1/05 - 5/1/05 / 5/1/05 - 6/1/05 / 6/1/05 - 7/1/05 / 7/1/05 - 8/1/05 / 8/1/05 - 9/1/05 / 9/1/05 - 10/1/05 / 10/1/05 - 11/1/05 / 11/1/05 - 12/1/05 / 12/1/05 - 1/1/06 / 1/1/06 - 2/1/06 / 2/1/06 - 3/1/06 / 3/1/06 - 4/1/06 / 4/1/06 - 5/1/06 / 5/1/06 - 6/1/06 / 6/1/06 - 7/1/06 / 7/1/06 - 8/1/06 / 8/1/06 - 9/1/06 / 9/1/06 - 10/1/06 / 10/1/06 - 11/1/06 / 11/1/06 - 12/1/06 / 12/1/06 - 1/1/07 / 1/1/07 - 2/1/07 / 2/1/07 - 3/1/07 / 3/1/07 - 4/1/07 / 4/1/07 - 5/1/07 / 5/1/07 - 6/1/07 / 6/1/07 - 7/1/07 / 7/1/07 - 8/1/07 / 8/1/07 - 9/1/07 / 9/1/07 - 10/1/07 / 10/1/07 - 11/1/07 / 11/1/07 - 12/1/07 /


Powered by Blogger