Difference between revisions of "Airport security"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Links: airport security goes too far)
(updates; study shows no proof of benefit)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
[[category:United States issues]][[Airport security]] has stiffened greatly in the past few decades, and most noticeably in the {{USA}} since the [[2001-09-11 attacks]]. It is not clear, however, that the inconveniences imposed have in fact been improving safety for anyone; they often seem less like rationally-designed attempts to improve safety while minimizing inconvenience and more like publicity-minded attempts to ''increase the public impression'' that security has been tightened, often ''maximizing'' inconvenience for the sake of appearance while in fact overlooking serious flaws in the system that potentially undermine any real security gains.
 
[[category:United States issues]][[Airport security]] has stiffened greatly in the past few decades, and most noticeably in the {{USA}} since the [[2001-09-11 attacks]]. It is not clear, however, that the inconveniences imposed have in fact been improving safety for anyone; they often seem less like rationally-designed attempts to improve safety while minimizing inconvenience and more like publicity-minded attempts to ''increase the public impression'' that security has been tightened, often ''maximizing'' inconvenience for the sake of appearance while in fact overlooking serious flaws in the system that potentially undermine any real security gains.
  
For example, passengers now must remove their shoes, presumably in order to demonstrate that they are not concealing any non-metallic weapons there; however, anecdotal evidence is strong that small weapons such as pen-knives can be left on one's person (in one's pants pocket, for example) without detection. Mechanical pencils, which are certainly more dangerous than plastic knives ''(are plastic knives actually prohibited, or is that just a rumor?)'', are allowed through without comment. Knitting needles are supposedly banned, which is perhaps understandable, but so are crochet hooks, which is much less so.
+
For example, passengers now must remove their shoes, presumably in order to demonstrate that they are not concealing any non-metallic weapons there; however, anecdotal evidence is strong that small weapons such as pen-knives can be left on one's person (in one's pants pocket, for example) without detection. Mechanical pencils, which are certainly more dangerous than plastic knives ''(are plastic knives actually prohibited, or is that just a rumor?)'', are allowed through without comment. <s>Knitting needles are supposedly banned, which is perhaps understandable, but so are crochet hooks, which is much less so.</s> ''(These items are currently not banned, though there were persistent rumors that they were; is there a reference for changes to the official policy? I seem to recall that a lot of things were banned at first, but that the rules were gradually relaxed for many items, only to be stiffened again after each new threat (e.g. the shoe bomber) hit the news. {{woozle.init}})''
  
The lack of any clear reference for what is prohibited and what is not prohibited only adds to the confusion.
+
The official list of prohibited and permitted items appears to be on the [[US Transportation Security Administration]]'s web site:
 +
* [http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm Permitted and Prohibited Items - air travel]
 +
** The earliest version of this page at [http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm archive.org] is dated [http://web.archive.org/web/20060820185006/http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm 2006-08-20]; there are links on earlier versions of the site to a "prohibited items list" with a different URL, but none of these seem to have been archived (although I didn't search exhaustively).
  
'''Question''': on what basis are these gradually stiffening security measures imposed? Do they really do any measurable good?  
+
* '''Question''': on what basis are these gradually stiffening security measures imposed? Do they really do any measurable good?
 +
** [[2007-12-20 study says no proof airport security makes flying safer|One study]] says there's no evidence they do, because no studies have been set up to determine one way or the other. This supports the hypothesis that the stiffening of airport security is largely [[policy theatre]], in particular [[scaremongering]] designed to ''increase awareness and fear'' of the threat of terrorism, and hence gain support for the [[US-Iraq War]] and other power trips.
 
===some historical notes===
 
===some historical notes===
''Back in the 1960s and early 1970s, when RDU was a non-international airport with one terminal, you could walk out onto the tarmac to meet arriving passengers. Later in the 1970s (or possibly early 1980s) this was prohibited, but you could still go out to the gate to meet passengers as they filed into the terminal. Finally, after 9/11 (or possibly before), they were only letting ticketed passengers into the arrivals/departures area (where the gates are). Then, after a planned terrorist attack was apparently thwarted in 2006 (can anyone find specifics on this?), nearly all fluids were banned from both carry-on and checked luggage -- including basic essentials such as toothpaste, shampoo, etc.''
+
''Back in the 1960s and early 1970s, when [[Raleigh-Durham Airport|RDU]] was a non-international airport with one terminal, you could walk out onto the tarmac to meet arriving passengers. Later in the 1970s (or possibly early 1980s) this was prohibited, but you could still go out to the gate to meet passengers as they filed into the terminal. Finally, after [[9/11]] (or possibly before), they were only letting ticketed passengers into the arrivals/departures area (where the gates are). Then, after a planned terrorist attack was apparently thwarted in 2006 (can anyone find specifics on this?), nearly all fluids were banned from both carry-on and checked luggage -- including basic essentials such as toothpaste, shampoo, etc.''
  
 
''I find it ironic, also, that the list of prohibited items only seems to get longer as the detection technology improves; the reverse should be true. --[[User:Woozle|Woozle]] 16:36, 12 April 2007 (EDT)''
 
''I find it ironic, also, that the list of prohibited items only seems to get longer as the detection technology improves; the reverse should be true. --[[User:Woozle|Woozle]] 16:36, 12 April 2007 (EDT)''
Line 17: Line 20:
 
===Reference===
 
===Reference===
 
* [http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm Transportation Security Administration: Permitted and Prohibited Items]
 
* [http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm Transportation Security Administration: Permitted and Prohibited Items]
 +
===Filed Links===
 +
{{links.tagged}}
 
===News===
 
===News===
 
* '''2007-09-30''' [http://www.silive.com/newsflash/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-28/1191167953205120.xml&storylist=simetro Daughter-in-law of NYC politician dies in Ariz. police custody] by Karen Matthews, Associated Press: "The stepdaughter-in-law of [New York] city's public advocate, found dead in a police holding cell in Arizona, was a "wonderful" woman and mother, Betsy Gotbaum said. .. Carol Anne Gotbaum was found in the cell where she had been taken in handcuffs after being arrested at an airport."
 
* '''2007-09-30''' [http://www.silive.com/newsflash/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-28/1191167953205120.xml&storylist=simetro Daughter-in-law of NYC politician dies in Ariz. police custody] by Karen Matthews, Associated Press: "The stepdaughter-in-law of [New York] city's public advocate, found dead in a police holding cell in Arizona, was a "wonderful" woman and mother, Betsy Gotbaum said. .. Carol Anne Gotbaum was found in the cell where she had been taken in handcuffs after being arrested at an airport."
 
===Humor===
 
===Humor===
 
* ''I Drew This'' (webcomic) by D.C. Simpson: [http://www.idrewthis.org/d/20070410.html 2007-04-10]
 
* ''I Drew This'' (webcomic) by D.C. Simpson: [http://www.idrewthis.org/d/20070410.html 2007-04-10]

Revision as of 03:56, 26 December 2007

Overview

Airport security has stiffened greatly in the past few decades, and most noticeably in the United States since the 2001-09-11 attacks. It is not clear, however, that the inconveniences imposed have in fact been improving safety for anyone; they often seem less like rationally-designed attempts to improve safety while minimizing inconvenience and more like publicity-minded attempts to increase the public impression that security has been tightened, often maximizing inconvenience for the sake of appearance while in fact overlooking serious flaws in the system that potentially undermine any real security gains.

For example, passengers now must remove their shoes, presumably in order to demonstrate that they are not concealing any non-metallic weapons there; however, anecdotal evidence is strong that small weapons such as pen-knives can be left on one's person (in one's pants pocket, for example) without detection. Mechanical pencils, which are certainly more dangerous than plastic knives (are plastic knives actually prohibited, or is that just a rumor?), are allowed through without comment. Knitting needles are supposedly banned, which is perhaps understandable, but so are crochet hooks, which is much less so. (These items are currently not banned, though there were persistent rumors that they were; is there a reference for changes to the official policy? I seem to recall that a lot of things were banned at first, but that the rules were gradually relaxed for many items, only to be stiffened again after each new threat (e.g. the shoe bomber) hit the news. W.)

The official list of prohibited and permitted items appears to be on the US Transportation Security Administration's web site:

  • Question: on what basis are these gradually stiffening security measures imposed? Do they really do any measurable good?
    • One study says there's no evidence they do, because no studies have been set up to determine one way or the other. This supports the hypothesis that the stiffening of airport security is largely policy theatre, in particular scaremongering designed to increase awareness and fear of the threat of terrorism, and hence gain support for the US-Iraq War and other power trips.

some historical notes

Back in the 1960s and early 1970s, when RDU was a non-international airport with one terminal, you could walk out onto the tarmac to meet arriving passengers. Later in the 1970s (or possibly early 1980s) this was prohibited, but you could still go out to the gate to meet passengers as they filed into the terminal. Finally, after 9/11 (or possibly before), they were only letting ticketed passengers into the arrivals/departures area (where the gates are). Then, after a planned terrorist attack was apparently thwarted in 2006 (can anyone find specifics on this?), nearly all fluids were banned from both carry-on and checked luggage -- including basic essentials such as toothpaste, shampoo, etc.

I find it ironic, also, that the list of prohibited items only seems to get longer as the detection technology improves; the reverse should be true. --Woozle 16:36, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

other effects

The increased security-presence in airports has also spilled over into other venues, such as hospitals, which now sometimes also prohibit items such as knitting needles. (At one hospital here in Durham, the emergency room had a metal-detector and security guard, but other entrances had no security at all; knitting needles were not allowed, but it was fairly easy to smuggle them in via other entrances with relatively little research, including one entrance less than 50 feet from the security guard. How does this make sense, and who is it really benefiting? --Woozle 16:36, 12 April 2007 (EDT)) Are these common symptoms of the same thing, e.g. a rising level of fear in the general public or among administrators, or is airport security being taken as a model for other types of security?

Links

Reference

Filed Links

  1. redirect template:links/smw

News

  • 2007-09-30 Daughter-in-law of NYC politician dies in Ariz. police custody by Karen Matthews, Associated Press: "The stepdaughter-in-law of [New York] city's public advocate, found dead in a police holding cell in Arizona, was a "wonderful" woman and mother, Betsy Gotbaum said. .. Carol Anne Gotbaum was found in the cell where she had been taken in handcuffs after being arrested at an airport."

Humor

  • I Drew This (webcomic) by D.C. Simpson: 2007-04-10