Terr'ists

Every time I hear a news broadcast about the new no-liquid restrictions on airlines, the anchor says something like "Wow, people are really taking this in stride and accepting the new rules." They're trying to show how Americans aren't letting those nasty terrists ruin their lifestyle; how we're resilient and plucky pioneers. But what I hear the anchors saying is "We can't believe people are putting up with this crap."

As a person who considers the is-this-worth-it factor, I say that the miniscule increase in safety we get from these restrictions, alerts, and orange flashing lights is totally not worth the inconvenience to millions and millions and millions of people. (I'm sure that even you, my loyal friends, will give me flak for pitting inconvenience against our beloved Homeland Security, but think about the scale here.) Here are my issues with airlines in general and this incident in particular:

First, the plot was foiled. If the group had actually managed to blow up or almost blow up or board a single airplane, sure, increase security. But since they were stopped, that indicates that current security worked. Some brave American official in a New York Times article vouched for the non-imminence of the attack: "“I would caution about how close it was,” he said. “They had materials, but it wasn’t like they were driving out to the airport the next day. They identified a number of flights.”"

Second- and this is why I hate rules- the rules are blanket rules without any ingredient of common sense. My sister heard a New Yorker who had to throw out a tiny bottle of nail polish say, "I'm all for security. Security is great. But I just don't think that anyone out there is trying to blow up a plane with rose nail polish." Unless Michael Crichton planted some antimatter in that bottle, I don't think anything that small could blow up more than a handbag.

Third, airlines are always telling people to carry their toiletries, important items, and a change of clothes on board because having the airline lose your luggage, rip it open through their incredibly crappy handling, or having baggage handlers steal stuff out of it is such a common occurrence. If airlines didn't suck so much, people could happily check everything they didn't need to use during the flight.

Fourth, unless you're going to stop allowing people and luggage onto planes, there will always be some risk. Do they scan passengers for knowledge of martial arts? Because I'm pretty sure that under the right conditions, someone could walk onto the plane naked, take control of it, and crash it into whatever.

Fifth, I never get the impression that airline officials take their scan of me too seriously. I once carried two Dance Dance Revolution pads onto an airplane- an entire bag that was a tangle of wires and electronics, and definitely not something they X-ray every day. They didn't even bother to open the bag. Of course, I'm sure if my skin was a few shades darker and I was wearing a turban they'd pay more attention to me.

Sixth, I hate it when people freak out about flying, because flying is still 65 times safer than driving. ""For this type of flying to become as risky as driving, disastrous airline incidents on the scale of those of Sept. 11 would have to occur about once a month," says Sivak, head of UMTRI's Human Factors Division."


I'm really glad that I live in the era of cheap flights- my life would have been a lot different without them. But really, this is ridiculous. We have lots and lots of airline security. It works very well, and if there is a flaw, I would say that it's bored airport employees that don't do the existing scans carefully enough. I wish they would go spend this money and energy on making the highways safer. Or AIDS. Or anywhere where it would do more good.