Raph's Website » Airport security

Airport security

August 15th, 2006 (Visited 3485 times) Tags:

I had occasion to fly yesterday, and got to experience the ban on liquids first-hand.

At the San Diego airport, the increased security meant a few more National Guard walking about. I got there way early fearing long security lines (the San Diego airport has on occasion obliged me with massive lines, particularly around any sort of holiday season). Instead, I found myself sitting around for an extra hour.

At the start of the roped-off area there was a guy with a table. On the table were a couple of bottles of water, some small unidentifiable vials, that sort of thing. He was holding up samples and calling out like a carny barker, “Folks! Remember, this isn’t allowed on the plane anymore!” People glanced at him, and then walked on by. One of them approached him and said, “How about this, can this go on?” “No, ma’am, sorry,” he said, taking her clear nail polish. It was added to the table…

At the line to board the plane, however, there were two National Guardsmen randomly inspecting people for bottles of water. Apparently explosives concealed in tuna sandwiches are permissible, however, because bags of food were getting through left and right.

In San Jose on the way back, the security line didn’t have anyone checking for liquids at all. However, at the gate to board my flight, the ticket attendant helpfully announced, “Remember, folks, no bottles of water, gels, liquids. Please throw them out in the trash can as you walk by!”

It’s so reassuring to know that we’re relying on terrorists volunteering to throw away their explosives!

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Juju wrote on August 16th, 2006 at 12:34 am:

del.icio.us/gr0k Aug 15 Raph’s Website » Airport security In the not too distant future, we will not be allowed to bring any luggage. Soon after that, we will be forced to fly naked, once some terrorist soaks liquid explosives in their clothing. Mark my words.

Faith wrote on August 15th, 2006 at 10:57 am:

[...] Comments [...]

Prokofy Neva said on August 15th, 2006 at 10:22 am:

Tony Walsh was just writing about this:

http://www.secretlair.com/index.php?/clickableculture/entry/airport_screening_is_a_badly_designed_game/

Over00 said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:01 am:

Soon, every person will be banned from planes. It’s too dangerous…

Like they say for computer security “The only way to be totally safe is to pull the plug”…

Amaranthar said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:05 am:

Raph, you’re forgetting about the honest nature of these terrorists. Also, there’s those dried toads on a stick that the stewardesses have that point to liquids…or was that lunch, not sure now.

Morgan Ramsay said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:10 am:

Technically, passengers are banned. The human body consists of approximately 65% water, remember?

According to the TSA website, there are exceptions to the liquid ban:

— Passengers travelling with infants may bring baby formula.

— Prescription medicine that matches the passenger’s name.

— Essential non-prescription medicines such as insulin are permitted.

Comments:

— If a terrorist does go to the trouble to carry a liquid weapon, this is essentially a list of acceptable methods of delivery.

— Prescription medicine container labels are not difficult to counterfeit. A competent security agency would confirm the prescription with the doctor listed on the label, like backgrounds checks for medicine; unfortunately, doctors aren’t always available, and if they were, they’d be pissed off that their medical time is spent confirming medicine they’ve already prescribed.

— How is essential defined? Are nonprescription medicines essential when the intended user is actively suffering from whatever ailment? Seems like a judgment call based on little to no information with little to no experience in the field of medicine.

Morgan Ramsay said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:16 am:

"As a matter of national security, please unpeel your banana."

At Dulles International Airport near Washington on Thursday morning, one traveler reported that screeners were also making passengers remove all food items from their carry-on luggage for inspection, and one passenger was told to peel her banana.
Source

If you were a TSA security agent, could you keep a straight face while demanding that a traveller unpeel a banana?

If you were the traveller, could you keep a straight face while declining to comply?

Over00 said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:48 am:

Hehe, you’re right. Oh, makes me remember…

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104743/

Live Wire (1992) with Pierce Brosnan

Danny O’Neill is a bomb disposal expert assigned to a case where terrorists have developed an “invisible” liquid explosive which is activated within the human body.

Next, they’ll ban every action movies. Some terrorist might get an idea from one of them…

Allen Sligar said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:57 am:

Im not sure what the rules are for probable cause, and searching peoples fruit, perhaps the banana was smoking? perhaps it “looked” suspicious? Was the banana to ripe? or not ripe enough? Perhaps it was a terrorst plantain desguised as a banana attempting to infiltrate the country….

Moreover the provisions against illegal search and siezure (exclusionary rule) prevent the government employee from taking the banana….

Increasingly I wonder if I live in a Banana Republic….

Perhaps we should ban human travel, we can hire certified replacement travelers to travel and conduct business for us?

Or better yet lets start a private airline that only allows travel after a through background check…

Tess said on August 15th, 2006 at 3:00 pm:

I’ve mostly been unrattled by the vast majority of changes that have gone down the pipe since 9/11. Even the armed soldiers in the airports were not at all shocking, after traveling abroad. Hell, I had AA batteries confiscated from me by armed guards in India, back in 2000. It’s a bit hard to be surprised by anything after that.

I learned to leave my Swiss Army knife and my tweezers at home when I went on flights. Then, I learned to leave my lighter home. But, I’ve always wanted to beat the crap out of the shoe bomber for making me have to take my shoes off all the damn time. I will be a total basket case if they take my lip balm from me. I can’t fly for 8 hours with no lip balm. My lips will dry up and fall off. I might have to start doing all my long-haul flights with airlines that provide care packages to everyone, and avoiding airlines like United, who seem to think that long-haul flights should have the exact same quality of service as domestic flights for those unfortunate enough to be in the economy section.

Michael Chui said on August 15th, 2006 at 5:33 pm:

I learned to leave my Swiss Army knife and my tweezers at home when I went on flights.

I just stick’em in my luggage and retrieve them at the other end. I always began untying my shoes the moment I got in line, and now I even have a pair of moccasins to use instead.

As my friend says,

Liquid is not our enemy. If the terrorists who are watching this nonsense unfold have any brains, they’ll hatch a throwaway scheme to conceal bombs in our solids and gases. Then where will we be?
http://the-sinistral.livejournal.com/469527.html

Allen Sligar said on August 15th, 2006 at 6:38 pm:

Im with Tess on the shoe bomber, if you do get your hands on him I’ll happily hold him down for you to pummel.

I was once stopped and almost missed my flight because I had inadvertantly stepped on a tack, which apparently is dangerous enough for them to question question my motives, I think they just wanted to keep my Stacy Adams though….

Morgan Ramsay said on August 15th, 2006 at 6:55 pm:

Increasingly, I wonder if I live in a Banana Republic.

Ah, monkey business.

Dave Rickey said on August 15th, 2006 at 7:00 pm:

I’m already having to buy my razors on the other end, so this means that I will be buying shampoo, deodorant, etc., at the same time. I refuse to check luggage, I’ve had my luggage misrouted 5 times and stolen twice, and it ranged from just inconvenient (when I was flying home) to absolute hell (when my wallet was also stolen by a pickpocket and I found myself stuck in New York without any money or ID, thank god they didn’t ask for anything but your paper ticket to get on a plane back then).

They go much further (forbidding electronics like the UK seems to), I’ll probably start Fed-Ex’ing the essentials to my hotel and buying the rest. But this reactive approach to security isn’t going to pack it in the long run. It simply can’t succeed (if the goal is to prevent any plane from being blown up/crashed/gassed). When dealing with people who are willing to die in order to kill, you have to accept that some of them are going to succeed. We’re going to lose planes, we need to get used to the idea.

No, it doesn’t seem like a wonderful thought, especially if I or someone I know is on a plane we lose. But more Americans died of automobile crashes in September of 2001 than in terrorist incidents. People don’t have rational responses to novel and unfamiliar risks.

–Dave

Rik said on August 15th, 2006 at 11:31 pm:

Whole thing seems pointless. If you add high tech anti-copy protection to your software, you know you haven’t cut down on the number of people that steal software, just on the risk to your product. If people want to kill unarmed civilians, they can, you’re just making it a smidge harder to be on an airplane. So now it’s schools, or shopping malls, or what have you. Can’t expect anyone who thinks he will be dead tomorrow to be deterred by making things a little tricky. What we need to do is let him conclude that his life is worth living.

Craig T Dalrymple said on August 16th, 2006 at 7:47 am:

I’ll probably start Fed-Ex’ing the essentials to my hotel and buying the rest

That’s the wave of the future to be honest. I’m already doing it and it’s actually making for better travel. I can walk into the airport carrying almost nothing at all, get through security very fast, and have everything waiting for me on the other end.

My wife and I had to start doing this after 9/11 because we live in Michigan and her family is on the West Coast. Taking the kids to see Grammie during the Christmas season quickly became the “How in the heck am I going to get these damn toys back home?” game. Shipping became the answer.

One of these days I’m going to figure out how to get through a convention/conference/show by changing clothes into the SWAG you can find.

Janey said on August 17th, 2006 at 9:58 pm:

Can you FedEx a suitcase? That’s a great idea.

Psychochild said on August 18th, 2006 at 3:33 am:

Speaking of movies, here’s another one I hope people making security rules don’t see. It could only make them feel sad.

Anyway, at the risk of being put on a government list somewhere (and, who am I fooling, I am already I’m sure), these security measures will do jack-all. I certainly appreciate the feel-good security measures meant to make people think something is being done when in reality nothing can be done to make us 100% safe.

Heck, I just turned down a speaking engagement offer because I don’t want experience the newly updated joys of flying. If things get any more joyful (No electronics? Wow, I’ll happy stare at the blank seat in front of me for hours on end without noise reduction earphones, thanks!), I might have to plan road trips to vital things like the Austin conference just to avoid the joy overload.

Finally, I wouldn’t count on shipping being an option for long. Guess how FedEx, etc, get your package to your destination quickly? Yep, airplanes. The quality same people who look through your luggage (and steal it, in Dave’s case) are going to be sifting through your packages to make sure none of them will blow up.

Feel safer? I know I do!

Kristen said on August 18th, 2006 at 8:33 am:

(No electronics? Wow, I’ll happy stare at the blank seat in front of me for hours on end without noise reduction earphones, thanks!)

What? Don’t you see that as just another opportunity for the airlines to offer more microtransactions? Cute little liquor bottles or renting a pair of Bose headphones or a DVD player and DVDs?

Dave Rickey said on August 18th, 2006 at 9:24 am:

Fed-Ex uses their own airplanes, which carry no passengers, and their own handlers. (the same is true of DHL and UPS, but not of the USPS overnight service). Their standard shipping boxes don’t seem to include a size that can hold a carry-on suitcase, but you can ship *anything* if you take it to a Kinko’s. Presumably if shipping your luggage ahead of you becomes common, they’ll come out with boxes and service addons (like being able to turn around or change the destination of your package online if your travel plans change after you ship it).

2% of trips with checked baggage involve some kind of baggage mishandling, from simple misrouting to loss, theft, or damage. If the overnight shippers had anywhere near that kind of failure rate, they wouldn’t have a business.

I don’t see the US banning electronics on airplanes anytime soon. But I wouldn’t have expected them to ban soda and toothpaste. I guess the electoral value of fear and security theater shouldn’t be underestimated.

Joe said on August 23rd, 2006 at 9:19 pm:

We should be learning from the Israelis and El-Al… they really know what its all about and you dont have to smell everyone’s feet at their airport. Read about it in
http://www.TechnonLLC.com/blog

Airport security

22 Responses to “Airport security”

Meta

Recent Comments

Categories

Tags

Recent Trackbacks

Archives

Twitter @raphkoster

Academics

Comics

Game devs

MMO devs

News/Forums

Other

Players