I know we need security, even if it is only to stop the loonies, but if you believe the authorities, they are the only reason we are not having airplanes taken over every day, so "if you give up your freedoms and rights we will protect you". That is simply not true, since terrorists and hijackers are rare. Even more so in places like the US and Europe. A good security system would identify the problems and take action to stop criminal activity, rather than assume everyone who wants to travel is a criminal and treat them as such. There were plenty of opportunities to stop the 9/11 hijackers, well short of the airport; none were taken.
I don’t know about you, but I do not like being treated that way, having to take off my shoes, take my computer and video camera out for handling by idiots, not being able to do flying training in the US on a layover, showing ID whenever I check in, or go through security, unable to fly to the US without 24 hours notice, not be able to accompany my family through security to the Gate if I am not also flying with them, have my wife on the flight deck, etc etc, all things I was able to do until the hysteria set in, Hysteria driven by fear, by cowardice, and fear encouraged by the authorities in order to maintain control over us, and therefore gain Power. I am not a criminal, I had rights until the cowards took them away. I should not be subject to searches without reasonable cause, I should not have to show ID just to enter an airport, nor disrobe and be subject to random pat-downs. You might think it a good trade, but then you believe the bs they are feeding you. I remember that the people doing the telling are politicians and therefore are liars. The US pres said he can anything he wants, and he is probably right; what will you do if he says we have to be handcuffed to the seat when we fly? Or wear only an apron issued by the airline so they can see we are unarmed? We have already shown we will bend over on command, when we give up our rights even a little bit we have told them we will give them all up.
It is nothing to do with security since no matter how good it is, it cannot stop a determined hijacker or terrorist, and if you believe it protects you I don’t know what to say; you are either ignorant or afraid and need the assurance, however hollow, of your government that they will make you safe. When the bad guys pull out the ceramic knives, the bottles with alcohol or simply broken bottles, or, through force of their willpower, take control of the airplane you are traveling on, it will do you no good to then realize that the security of the airport has nothing to do with the security of the airplane.
There were not many attacks on airplanes before 9/11, it had been thirty years or more since an attack was made in the US, and even though 9/11 was horrific, it was isolated and in relative terms only a blip in a good record. It took years to plan and it could have been stopped at any time using the intelligence available to the authorities in the US and Europe. Relying on airport security to protect the traveling public is stupid. We have to be successful every time, while “they” only have to be successful once.
Employing a huge security army to harass honest people simply because they want to fly is a waste of assets, and I know we don’t have a secret staff of security personnel in the wings doing the real job. What we see is what we get, and they concentrate on things, not people. It is the intent that needs to be identified, and those who present a threat should be given the full treatment. With the airport security staff totally involved with minutiae and unable to see past the blinders they are forced to wear, with PC correctness forcing them to waste time searching old ladies and aircrew, putting people like Ted Kennedy onto a watch list simply because he shares a name with a suspected terrorist, etc, it prevents a proper watch being maintained, and real protection being developed.
It is not things (guns, knives) that hijack airplanes, it is persons with a determination to do so. They will use whatever is available, and taking small knives, scissors, leatherman tools and so on from aircrew or passengers merely ensures that the only persons armed on board will be the bad guys. Richard Reed, flying from a UK airport, managed to bring explosives on board (I doubt that this was as bad as it was reported, since the shoes failed to even burn, much less explode) and it shows that airport security cannot catch unconventional weapons any better than they can guns and knives (he was stopped the first time, not because of his shoes, but because he triggered extra attention due to profiling, something illegal in the US). It also shows that the attack was thwarted in the air, on the airplane, and by crew and passengers, not by airport security.
Stop guns, explosives and knives, of course, and on 9/11 this was done. The hijack teams on that occasion were successful only because the crew and passengers, acting in accordance with the FAA training of the time, allowed them access to the flight deck. Once they had that, boxcutters were enough. Boxcutters were allowed then, and can easily be taken on board even now despite airport security. It is not important what they have, there is no reason for us to let them get onto the flight deck. We can protect ourselves and will do so now we know the need. It took the FAA two years to agree, but most aircrew know this by now.
In places where the threat of armed hijackers is greater, the authorities must of course ramp up airport security, with armed guards and a willingness to shoot first. But if there is no direct threat, make the airport security appropriate to the risk. Use the resources wisely. Stop making me a criminal.