Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 11:00:26 -0700
From: isher@SPRYNET.COM (Dean Weingarten)
Subject: Re: Guns and airport security
To: AZRKBA@asu.edu
Carlos,
I usually end up flying a few times a year, and I have observed pretty much
the same thing. If a person really wanted to highjack a plane, they would
only have to carry a lighter and have a ziplock bag of gasoline taped to
their chest. It would not set off any detectors. In fact this is the
method that some of the last Cuban hijackers used. Highjacking stopped
because there was no place left to go. All of this security idiocy is
nonsense, as I routinelymention to fellow travelers when I am waiting in
the security line. Many agree with me. I usually say "all of this extra
security because an accident happened to flight 800, but you notice they
didn't do away with the security after they said it was an accident."
Sowing the seeds of skepticism.
Dean
When you disarm your subjects, however, you offend them by showing that
either from cowardliness or lack of faith, you distrust them; and either
conclusion will induce them to hate you. Niccolo Machiavelli "The Prince"
> From: Carlos A. Alvarez <carlos@THERIVER.COM>
> To: AZRKBA@asu.edu
> Subject: Guns and airport security
> Date: Saturday, February 12, 2000 10:56 AM
>
> We have to put up with all kinds of privacy invasions when we travel by
> air, in the name of keeping guns off airplanes. The following story was
> written on a flight from Boston to Tucson, after I spent some time checking
> out security during a long layover.
>
> Airport security: If it wasn't for the metal detectors, x-ray machines,
> and the occasional anal probe (uh, I meant, "hand search"), planes would be
> blown up daily. The only thing standing between us and mass carnage are
> those highly skilled government workers looking after our safety.
>
> I've also just returned from New York, where I was inspecting some bridge
> property I'm considering putting on the market. Anyone interested?
>
> Actually I am writing this at 33,000 feet, having just left Boston
> Airport. I've been traveling for several days. I've had a few lengthy
> layovers, and spent some time observing airport security in action. Yeah,
> I'm sure that's some kind of federal crime. Felony Observation Of Us Being
> Stupid And Useless?
>
> Some people who are far more paranoid than I am have said that airport
> security is mostly unnecessary and pretty much useless. They say that it
> is all about control and getting us used to having to "show our papers" to
> travel. The FBI themselves, in a test of airport security last year, found
> that more than 50% of airports had security breeches bad enough that they
> were able to sneak in weapons.
>
> In the past, I myself have been able to circumvent security with articles
> large enough to contain a gun or bomb. The first time was accidental, but
> then it became a game to see if I could do it. I was only "caught"
> once. What did I do? During the winter months I always take a leather
> trenchcoat with me, and drape it over my arm while in the airport. I go
> through the detector, set it off, put down my coat and empty my pockets,
> then go through again. Of course, the detector doesn't go off this
> time. I then pick up my pocket contents and my coat from the "secure" side
> and move on. A full-length leather trenchcoat can hide a pretty large
> weapon.
>
> After this particular trip, there is no doubt in my mind that the whole
> thing is just a thin facade. When I first passed through security, I
> noticed that the items I put in the tray without passing them through the
> metal detector or x-ray weren't even looked at. These were a cellular
> phone large enough to contain a small firearm, and several rolls of
> professional film (120 size). This film comes in rectangular boxes about
> an inch across each way and about 2.5 inches long. Big enough to hold some
> ammo or one of the tiny .22 LR revolvers. I can see putting enough C-4 to
> take out a plane into an empty cell phone case.
>
> Hell, with the way they ignored these items completely, I probably could
> have put my S&W Model 29 in the tray and picked it up on the other
> side. So I decided to try a little test. I borrowed some tape from a
> ticket counter, and taped six of the film boxes tightly together. I now
> had a box that was about 3x5x1"; pretty big. This passed through unnoticed
> and uninspected.
>
> Since I had several hours until my flight, I decided to sit around and
> observe the security screening for a while. From this, I can think of a
> dozen ways to get a firearm or a bomb onto a plane. It was a very
> enlightening to watch these people in action.
>
> It was also interesting to see the people selected for a hand-search of
> their luggage and persons. A total of five were subjected to this in the
> hour that I watched. Three were black, one was probably Puerto Rican,
> another had a towel on his head. But I'm sure this is just anecdotal and
> certainly does not imply racial profiling. No really. That would be
> illegal.
>
> By the way, any idea what you'd like to offer on that bridge property?
>
> Meanwhile, some nice (white) old people in wheelchairs passed through
> virtually uninspected. They got a cursory pat-down, but not at all
> thorough. For example, they could have been sitting on a mortar for all I
> know, because the search was from the knees down and and arms out, no check
> around the waist or torso. The check was *not* done by security personnel,
> but by a young lady (18 or 19 maybe) in a "Passenger Assistance" uniform.
>
> My next observation was that this airport is a great place to check out
> beautiful women. The corollary is that if you are a 6' tall blond in a
> short dress, and flirt with the 18-year-old male making $6/hour to watch
> the metal detector, your boyfriend can bring in a Howitzer and a .50
> caliber belt-fed gun. It doesn't help that the woman supposedly working
> with him is facing the other way exchanging gossip with a stewardess. The
> attractive woman's boyfriend looked around puzzled, waiting for someone to
> check him out since he'd set off the metal detector. He finally just
> shrugged his shoulders, grabbed their bags, and they left.
>
> Tiring of watching this charade, I proceed to the gate. Next to that I saw
> an interesting revolving door that purportedly is only for the "out"
> direction. I suppose the concept of revolving doors is a bit too much for
> airport security people. Ok, so the "incoming" side has a weight detector
> in the floor and will stop the door if someone steps there. The kids
> playing with these doors soon learned that if you hold on to the railing
> and hang on the door, it keeps going and you can come back inside the
> terminal. These kids were all in the 6-10 year old range. Obviously they
> are mastermind criminals, and no simple terrorist would ever think of doing
> this.
>
> I started thinking about the privacy violations we are forced to endure in
> order to use air travel. Luggage searches, forced strip searches,
> displaying ID, etc. (Note that the ID requirement is NOT law according to
> the FAA; the airlines are doing it "voluntarily".) And then I see that it
> is all fruitless, for if a bunch of kids can "sneak" into a terminal, who
> can't?
>
> So what is the point of the ID? If I'm going to blow up a plane while I'm
> on it, am I too worried about my identity being known? Also, I just
> noticed the typical "next step" in the ID requirement. It now says in
> American Airline's rules that it must be "state/government issued
> identification." It used to be just anything with a photo and your
> name. This is the typical encroachment scheme used for things that the
> general public would object to. I predict that within a few short years
> they will actually run your ID for a background
> check. Paranoid? Maybe. But it fits the "profile" for government
> tactics.
>
> I suggest that we scrap the so-called security altogether. Give passengers
> a discount if they bring their own weapons and agree to shoot any hijackers
> (much like you have to agree to assist the crew if you are seated in an
> exit row). Issue special frangible ammo for the flight which will no
> penetrate the skin of an airliner. Put a sign on the side of the plane
> stating, "At least five people on this plane are armed. You guess which
> five."
>
> Oh, and skip the anal probe, thanks.
>
> --
> Carlos Alvarez, Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy
> http://www.neta.com/~carlos
>
> JESUS IS THE ANSWER!
> The question is, "What do you say when you hit your thumb with a hammer?"
Visit the Crazy Atheist Libertarian
Visit my atheist friends at Arizona Secular Humanists
Some strange but true news about the government
Some strange but real news about religion
Interesting, funny but otherwise useless news!