On the radio the other day the new announcer indicated that the TSA has released the previously closely guarded information the in the past 78% of the test cases used (knives, guns, explosives etc) were failures. The weapons got on board the plane.
Some airports had a 0% success rate.
My question to the community is this; do these figures change any attitudes that the new scanners and/or searches are vastly intrusive and not to be tolerated? Those figures are pretty scary.
I think everyone walking on to a plane should be given a handgun, which they have to return when disembarking. That should speed things up a little and even out the odds.
If after a while the TSA employees got "bored" with looking at normal x-ray machines, who's to say they won't get "bored" with back scatter and pat downs? The problem is NOT technology. The problem is with personnel.
Casino's had a similar problem. Their solution? Hire more people. They no longer allow workers to spend long hours on a job that requires 100% attention to detail 100% of the time. So, they hire more people, work them for 2hrs and give them a 30 minute break. I'ts probably the better solution.
I think they should get rid of the TSA and hand out that responsibility to private contractors. They'll probably do a better job.
I'm not sure I'm happy with the prospect of a private police force. Particularly "protecting" our air space - bribery and corruption is too common.
I'm fond of this story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4069785.stm
They tested security with a small amount of explosive, which they caught and then subsequently lost and shipped somewhere.
I don't have a problem with the new security measures. I'd be interested to see how these statistics change in places that have the new technology/protocols.
Of course, most of the value of the TSA is psychological and it's more difficult to evaluate it. A slightly unbalanced person who might take a weapon on a plane won't because he's afraid of getting caught going through security. A terrorist cell is less likely to try something because there's a chance that one of their agents will be compromised and their operation will be shot.
If security is so poor, why haven't we had more incidents? I'm reasonably sure it's not because we're running short on people who are interested in doing us harm.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.