Never fails to amaze me, how many people fail to understand the logic behind all the 'security' we are discussing here. No one is advocating that there shouldn't be security screening. We have all become used to the facts of life after 9/11. In fact, many of us were used to it before 9/11.
I have no objection to having my bags scanned and passing through the metal detector on the way to the aircraft. What I do object to is the attitudes of some screeners, especially when in the US, and their ability to make your life hell if you so much as give a whiff of dissension. That is akin to the power the Brown Shirts in early Nazi Germany had. They felt they were above the law and they could use their 'powers' to make life hell for anyone they didn't like whether it was anything to do with the job in hand or not.
What I have always advocated and it is already known that it is the best way of preventing hijacking is passenger profiling. Now, before the PC brigades get all hot under the collar, I am not advocating racial profiling. I am advocating 'intelligent profiling'. I use the word 'intelligent' in both senses of the word, IQ and information gathering.
All passengers should be profiled before they even get to the check-in desk. The profilers need to be well trained and intelligent enough to do the job. Invariably we see all this coming down to cost. The profilers have to know what they are looking for on the passengers ticket, the answers that the passengers give, their demeanour etc. Based on the results they are either assessed as no/lo-risk or else they are passed on for secondary profiling by someone further up the food/intelligence chain. Only after being profiled can they check-in and then go on to pass through security screening which could be much less intensive.
The reason I advocate profiling, and I don't mean the minimum wage Securicor employee who has a quick look at your passport and asks a few very simple questions but can usually be outfoxed by anyone with more than single digit IQ, is that it is not the weapons that do the damage but the person willing to use them. All the scanning and TSA style rigid conformity tactics will not prevent someone with the intent to do damage from getting on the aircraft. We all know there are many different things that can be used as weapons. It is the intent to use a weapon that is the factor that we are trying to prevent from getting on board.
Unfortunately, the mandarins that dictate policy have felt it is better to have a big cosmetic show of strength that we are all now familiar with. The X-Ray machines and the induction loop. The farce is that we have all experienced the security person who insists on making you take your shoes and belt off and then emptying your flight case out looking for anything that could be considered by them useable as a weapon. It only takes a couple of well trained terrorists to get through that security and what we have is some people with 'intent' on board. The locked cockpit door may be our last barrier but that doesn't make it any safer for our cabin crew and passengers should the terrorists want to make a point by trying anyway.
You or I could accidentally leave a knife or a gun in our baggage. If we were able to get past the current security, accidentally, and end up on board with the weapon, there is no real danger as you or I have no intent to use that weapon. On the other hand, someone who intended to cause problems on board could still pass through the current security and once on board use any number of items freely available on board to carry out the intended acts of violence. There is nothing better than someone with something on their mind, specifically knowing that they intend to carry out an act of terror, to give off the signals that will alert a well trained profiler. Get them at this stage and you have a much more effective deterrent.
We need proper profiling. I don't mind being asked sensible questions and having my ID checked before I get anywhere near 'security'. Someone properly trained and not on the minimum wage but a career specialist can tell pretty quickly if I'm likely to be a threat. After that, all we'd need the heavy metal security equipment for is to prevent the neanderthals who put non-empty petrol canisters and other assorted dangerous goods into their hand baggage.
Sadly, profiling is probably too expensive and non-PC to be used properly except for a few carriers. That is, until the next spectacular by the terrorists. Door, stable, bolted, lock, horse... rearrange the words in the correct order.