Quote:
Originally Posted by gstelmack
Seriously? Exactly how do YOU want to handle a problem with a plane in the air? The only thing we've got is scrambling fighter planes, and given that the pilots can use the flight time anyway, what is the issue with this?
It never ceases to amaze me how many people on here don't realise how much the world changed with 9/11. Or how much it already changed, but that managed to drive home the point. Next time it's going to take a nuke in a city to wake people up again at this rate...
|
I will answer three different ways...
1.
Doomsday answer: Let's suppose he was in the bathroom trying to light his shoes on fire to blow up the plane. So his objective is to try to blow up the plane? How does scrambling fighter jets to blow up the plane help with this problem? Besides making you somehow feel safer this doesn't really make any sense. The school I teach at suspends kids for skipping school, again how does this address the problem or prevent it from happening again in the future? I would welcome another answer but the fighter jet answer doesn't really address the issue at hand at all. And you did respond to JPhillips talking about nail clippers and mini shampoos. Would love to hear how this zero tolerance strategy is going... No 9-11 like attacks? How many were there before 9-11?
2.
Realistically: This shit costs money. Not even getting into wars and politics just the security, just the cost of the TSA and homeland security. Someone has to pay for it. (In both ticket fees, lost airline jobs, lost productivity) I think it is an incredibly expensive facade.
3. Honestly I think this is one of those things like abortion, health care, lesbian proms, etc. I don't see either of us changing each other's opinion. I freely welcome a discussion but am skeptical that we both haven't already made up our minds. If you want to know what my solution would be... quit meddling in the Middle East and the fuckers won't want to come blow themselves and us up. I am sure energy prices would go up but that would be the cost of security that seems more sensible than what we have now.