The K M Links Game - December 2024 Week...
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Radical Idea for airport security
I think I've stumbled on a radical idea to improve airport security and at the same time speed it up.
Here goes.
Ignore the likes of the white-haired middle aged ladies popping off to Tenerife for some winter sun and families going to Greece for their summer break, and instead target single men of certain ethnic groups.
Would this work?
The first one to adeniodally and incorrectly bleat racism wins a prize.
Here goes.
Ignore the likes of the white-haired middle aged ladies popping off to Tenerife for some winter sun and families going to Greece for their summer break, and instead target single men of certain ethnic groups.
Would this work?
The first one to adeniodally and incorrectly bleat racism wins a prize.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flip_flop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
And when Al Qaeda realises you are doing this and smuggles aboard a bomb with someone who doesn't fit your stereotype will you be personally writing to every familly affected explaining why you thought this was a good idea?
Or do you think it would be totally impossible for them to ever be able to achieve this?
Or do you think it would be totally impossible for them to ever be able to achieve this?
Some years ago there was a very successful drug 'mule' who was not detected because he always travelled in the full uniform of a boy scout leader ! He didn't fit the profile of a drug mule so he passed through. He got caught eventually perhaps because some sharp -eyed official noticed the frequent, unexplained, appearance of a travelling scout or he was stopped on a purely random check.
Had he been a bomber, his first go would have been all that he needed and taking advantage of flip-flop's approach to profiling he'd have got on the plane.
Had he been a bomber, his first go would have been all that he needed and taking advantage of flip-flop's approach to profiling he'd have got on the plane.
I know this is probably tongue-in-cheek Jake, but surely common sense should prevail in the airport security targetting. On a couple of occasions I've been sitting in Cardiff airport, having gone through security, watching the security staff selecting and examining travellers. On more than one occasion I've seen toddlers picked out and "patted down" by some big butch security officer. What the F**K is the point?? I think if it were my kids being treated like this I'd have a go, but then I'd only be hauled off and miss my flight. When you think that a school teacher is not allowed to touch a child without the risk of going on the register it makes my blood boil.
I know security checks are as much for the travelling public's confidence as anything else, but I think the security personnel need more sensible guidance.
Rant over!
I know security checks are as much for the travelling public's confidence as anything else, but I think the security personnel need more sensible guidance.
Rant over!
jason.p
The reason that sometimes airpotr personnel pick out kids is if their parents fit the profile of druggies. You know - back from Amsterdam wearing multi-coloured tie-dyed t-shirts and linen trousers. It's not unknown for drugs to be hidden on kids (even in nappies!)
Oh and flip_flop - racial profiling is already in place at airports. Also on the tubes in London. Hasn't really been in the news, because there's been very little fuss about it.
The reason that sometimes airpotr personnel pick out kids is if their parents fit the profile of druggies. You know - back from Amsterdam wearing multi-coloured tie-dyed t-shirts and linen trousers. It's not unknown for drugs to be hidden on kids (even in nappies!)
Oh and flip_flop - racial profiling is already in place at airports. Also on the tubes in London. Hasn't really been in the news, because there's been very little fuss about it.
It was pretty tongue in cheek but with a serious point made.
My summer holiday last year was for me, Mrs Flop, our five year old daugher and 10 month old son. We were flying to Greece. We were all rigorously searched - I even had to tear open a sealed carton of baby milk and take a swig from it!
Even the most officious security person would know, surely, we posed no threat.
I can't see a reason why a family like us should only receive a cursory 'glance' with more vigorous attention being paid to those more likely - single men of certain ethnic groups.
The "if pots and pans" argument doesn't work Jake.
My summer holiday last year was for me, Mrs Flop, our five year old daugher and 10 month old son. We were flying to Greece. We were all rigorously searched - I even had to tear open a sealed carton of baby milk and take a swig from it!
Even the most officious security person would know, surely, we posed no threat.
I can't see a reason why a family like us should only receive a cursory 'glance' with more vigorous attention being paid to those more likely - single men of certain ethnic groups.
The "if pots and pans" argument doesn't work Jake.
I know what you're saying sp, but believe me I'm a reasonable judge of character (I think!), and these are the most normal looking families you could imagine. This is not just the one occasion, I've seen it many times . I'm sure they're trying to make a point, but surely "sensible" targetting would be more cost effective and reassuring for the travelling public.
I realise that drug smuggling and terrorist activity are different security aspects, but I imagine Flip_flop's post referred to the latter, and I know where I would like the emphasis to be!
I realise that drug smuggling and terrorist activity are different security aspects, but I imagine Flip_flop's post referred to the latter, and I know where I would like the emphasis to be!
What Jake says is, of course, perfectly possible.
However, as far as I know, Muslim extremists have not yet managed to persuade any 80 year old English grannies, or any 30 year old Christian parents travelling with their children, or indeed any white people with a proclivity for dressing as a Boy Scout, to secrete explosives about their person before boarding an aircraft.
Up to now all recent terrorist activity connected with aircraft has been confined to young dark-skinned Muslim men. Until this is shown to be otherwise there really is no point rummaging through the knitting bags of 80 year old grannies, or ripping the limbs off children’s teddy bears. I know you cannot identify Muslims by sight, but you can identify young dark skinned men by sight. The government (which sets the policies) should allow the airport authorities to exercise its discretion and target their limited resources by using some intelligence.
Unfortunately its approach (as with many things) is to identify all travellers as potential terrorists and considerable resources are wasted screening people who pose no threat.
If profiling at airports is in place as sp suggests it clearly is not very sophisticated. It is obvious that to single out only young dark skinned men would offend the usual liberal lobbies and so cannot be permitted.
Finally, to confuse this issue with the prevention of drug smuggling is disingenuous. The two problems are completely different and they cannot both be solved by a single solution.
However, as far as I know, Muslim extremists have not yet managed to persuade any 80 year old English grannies, or any 30 year old Christian parents travelling with their children, or indeed any white people with a proclivity for dressing as a Boy Scout, to secrete explosives about their person before boarding an aircraft.
Up to now all recent terrorist activity connected with aircraft has been confined to young dark-skinned Muslim men. Until this is shown to be otherwise there really is no point rummaging through the knitting bags of 80 year old grannies, or ripping the limbs off children’s teddy bears. I know you cannot identify Muslims by sight, but you can identify young dark skinned men by sight. The government (which sets the policies) should allow the airport authorities to exercise its discretion and target their limited resources by using some intelligence.
Unfortunately its approach (as with many things) is to identify all travellers as potential terrorists and considerable resources are wasted screening people who pose no threat.
If profiling at airports is in place as sp suggests it clearly is not very sophisticated. It is obvious that to single out only young dark skinned men would offend the usual liberal lobbies and so cannot be permitted.
Finally, to confuse this issue with the prevention of drug smuggling is disingenuous. The two problems are completely different and they cannot both be solved by a single solution.
Call me cynical, but I suspect that the policy is to reassure travellers. If the officials go so far as to search toddlers for bombs then there must be no chance of a bomb getting through ! That brazen excess of enthusiasm is hardly likely to be efficient or deter the ingenious and determined bomber.
It's like the two officers with guns openly on display who wander aimlessly through our international airports. Their presence reassures foreigners (they probably make the British wonder whether the police know something we don't and so have the opposite effect). They can't be much use against a suicidal terrrorist.
It's like the two officers with guns openly on display who wander aimlessly through our international airports. Their presence reassures foreigners (they probably make the British wonder whether the police know something we don't and so have the opposite effect). They can't be much use against a suicidal terrrorist.
I think people are very lacking in common sense - especially those who advocate this sort of profiling
My points are that those suggesting it are invariably not those who will bear the responsibility if it goes wron - that's why I was asking if you'd be writing to the victims - easy to suggest such things when you're not resposible.
Secondly such screening would become obvious very quickly - these people are quite sophisticated and they are well aware or airport security procedures.
Not searching people of a certain type would be a really obvious weakness that they could and would exploit.
*That* is common sense
My points are that those suggesting it are invariably not those who will bear the responsibility if it goes wron - that's why I was asking if you'd be writing to the victims - easy to suggest such things when you're not resposible.
Secondly such screening would become obvious very quickly - these people are quite sophisticated and they are well aware or airport security procedures.
Not searching people of a certain type would be a really obvious weakness that they could and would exploit.
*That* is common sense
Jake.....airflight terrorism is here to stay and we must learn to live with it.
Profiling is an obvious start.
Looking for Al Qaeda terrorists, one must focus on Muslims and dare I say this "non whites" Not all Muslims are terrorists and not all "non whites" are terrorists and this opinion of mine does not make me a racist....in my opinion.
Yes the terrorist is always one step ahead, but this, in my opinion , will always be so.
Profiling is an obvious start.
Looking for Al Qaeda terrorists, one must focus on Muslims and dare I say this "non whites" Not all Muslims are terrorists and not all "non whites" are terrorists and this opinion of mine does not make me a racist....in my opinion.
Yes the terrorist is always one step ahead, but this, in my opinion , will always be so.
If you are interested and have the time read this link, as it says in the article Tel Aviv's airport hasn't been breached since 2002.
http://www.thestar.co.../world/article/744199
http://www.thestar.co.../world/article/744199
Blimey Sqad - that's the fastest about turn I've ever seen
You wen't from "Profiling is an obvious start"
to targeting everyone in 21 minutes!
This is exactly my point - if you profile people that profiling will be used against you - It's not a racism issue It would be exactly the same if you profiled blonds or people over 6 foot.
You wen't from "Profiling is an obvious start"
to targeting everyone in 21 minutes!
This is exactly my point - if you profile people that profiling will be used against you - It's not a racism issue It would be exactly the same if you profiled blonds or people over 6 foot.
jake,,,,we are talking about 2 differing countries.....Israel and the UK. I must point out that that is an excellent method in Israel, but imagine that outside Heathrow, Gatwick or Manchester...all supported by motorways.....logistically impossible.
I go back to profiling as the only reasonable method in the UK.
I go back to profiling as the only reasonable method in the UK.
Vulcan’s link provided a very good idea of the way things should be done.
I’m not sure that Tel Aviv airport deals with quite the same number of passengers as Heathrow or Gatwick, but that should not be an issue.
I’m afraid, jake, I still have to disagree with your thinking. Of course nobody venturing an opinion here is in the position where their ideas may be adopted and may lead to disaster if unsuccessful. But that should not stifle the debate.
Screening in the manner I and some others have suggested may not be all that is required, and the procedures adopted at Tel Aviv may well be part of a revised process which the British authorities could adopt. However, the notion that if we stop searching 80 year old’s knitting bags then terrorists will somehow exploit this (presumably by persuading 80 year olds to conceal explosives about their person) is ridiculous. Or are you saying that they might arrange for the said 80 year old to unwittingly convey some explosives on board in the secure knowledge that they would not be searched? I’m not really sure what your angle is.
My contention is that the approach currently in force is unsustainable. As methods become more sophisticated (and probably more time-consuming) it will simply not be possible to carry out thorough searches on all passengers unless they report to the airport a couple of days in advance.
Terrorists know that they only have to get lucky once whereas the authorities have to get lucky every time. My view is that their major aim is not wholesale carnage (they know that is possible only on a limited scale) but the widespread disruption that follows from their limited successes. By adopting the knee-jerk reactions that seem to follow every incident the authorities are allowing those aims to be adequately fulfilled and a different approach needs to be formulated.
I’m not sure that Tel Aviv airport deals with quite the same number of passengers as Heathrow or Gatwick, but that should not be an issue.
I’m afraid, jake, I still have to disagree with your thinking. Of course nobody venturing an opinion here is in the position where their ideas may be adopted and may lead to disaster if unsuccessful. But that should not stifle the debate.
Screening in the manner I and some others have suggested may not be all that is required, and the procedures adopted at Tel Aviv may well be part of a revised process which the British authorities could adopt. However, the notion that if we stop searching 80 year old’s knitting bags then terrorists will somehow exploit this (presumably by persuading 80 year olds to conceal explosives about their person) is ridiculous. Or are you saying that they might arrange for the said 80 year old to unwittingly convey some explosives on board in the secure knowledge that they would not be searched? I’m not really sure what your angle is.
My contention is that the approach currently in force is unsustainable. As methods become more sophisticated (and probably more time-consuming) it will simply not be possible to carry out thorough searches on all passengers unless they report to the airport a couple of days in advance.
Terrorists know that they only have to get lucky once whereas the authorities have to get lucky every time. My view is that their major aim is not wholesale carnage (they know that is possible only on a limited scale) but the widespread disruption that follows from their limited successes. By adopting the knee-jerk reactions that seem to follow every incident the authorities are allowing those aims to be adequately fulfilled and a different approach needs to be formulated.
Latest Posts
Crosswords4 mins ago
ChatterBank31 mins ago
ChatterBank38 mins ago
News52 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles54 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.