Whippersnapper, IMHO you are right to suggest that journos don't do what this guy did and that it should be left to "controlled and licenced" organisations.
But maybe that's where Danny's cost arguments come in - maybe the "controlled and licenced" organisations don't have the resources to do their job to the extent that it should be done. So maybe, the hysteria created by the likes of this journo do two things:
a) create a bit of heat under the relevant administration to put a few more resources into security (in whatever form, eg. pre-boarding or profiling as suggested in this thread);
b) create a climate where the punters are happy to pay a bit extra (ie. be less "penny-pinching").
So whilst not defending the journo, maybe his (illegal) actions can have a positive outcome. Of course the negative is that it might encourage other more nefarious persons to give it a try themselves, before any resources can be applied - so for that reason alone, the guy deserves some condemnation.
However it does beg the question, what is happening to the extra charge made for security these days?
Drags