Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

ocregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 969 posts

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#861

Post by Metacelsus »

moogly wrote: post #762
GhostVII wrote: post #537

We should have some kind of dashboard tracking how many people die from terrorism, car crashes, heart disease, COVID, etc., and how much time and money we spend trying to prevent these deaths. We are just so terrible at evaluating risk, for some reason it is OK to waste everyone's time with over the top security to stop a tiny portion of terrorism deaths, while still being OK with high speed limits that kill thousand…

Whilst I think airport security is indeed just security theater, roll my eyes every time I have to take my shoes off at an airport, and I disagree with some of the claims in this article that these things work and have kept us safe, I'm not sure that's a great idea. I can only speak for myself, but I'm not a fan of cost-benefit analyses when it comes to human lives. Going down that route gives us such wonderful thing…

>I'm not a fan of cost-benefit analyses when it comes to human lives

What about when you measure the costs as lives vs. lives? E.g. spending X dollars on airport security saves Y lives, but spent on highway safety saves Z lives.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#862

Post by kristjansson »

hunterb123 wrote: post #530
recursive wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand "natural immunity" as a reason. I think I don't know what it actually means. As far as I know, natural immunity is conferred if and only if you've recovered from the virus. And one of the goals of the vaccine is to avoid getting it in the first place. But to get natural immunity, you have to be infected first. It seems a bit like burning down your house to prevent arson from a stranger. Have I misu…

Likewise, yelling at people to get the vaccine makes no sense. If you don't want to catch the virus, get the vaccine. Don't worry about others. They will get the virus and then get natural immunity. People will have adverse reactions to both covid and the vaccine. Let them weigh the risk to which one.

> They will get the virus and then get natural immunity

Only if they, y'know, survive, and only after being a nuisance to the healthcare system that the rest of rely on

You've got a point that verifiable natural immunity as of _now_ should probably be acceptable in lieu of vaccination (though efficacy against variants is worth considering) for mandates.

Offering 'natural immunity' as an option to the currently un-vaccinated un-infected population is just crazy. People will assume the risk, get sick, got to hospital, and die. Just ignoring those 'others' isn't an option for public-health since the downside costs of the risk they assume are borne by everyone in the form of healthcare burden. 'They' still expect to be a priority when they get sick...

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#863

Post by TaylorAlexander »

heavyset_go wrote: post #834
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #817

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like free therapy would help with all of this? Therapy is part of free health care in other countries if I recall. Also free health care would help prevent people from ending up in dire straits.

This reminds me of the "This is fine" cartoon by KC Green[1]. Therapy treats the symptoms and not the cause of societal problems. I do agree that therapy and free healthcare would help and are needed, but alone they are not a solution. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2016/5/5/11592622/this-is-fine-meme...

So we both agree therapy and healthcare would help. I did not say they are the only thing we need to do.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#864

Post by AniseAbyss »

Scoundreller wrote: post #258
stoolpigeon wrote: post #18

The US is the only place I think I've had to remove shoes for flight security in years. But in Europe taking off a belt is often required while in the US it is not. In Budapest they stopped having us remove laptops from bags a bit ago. My biggest challenge over the years was remembering what to do in each place as the security people at the airports had a tendency to get upset if you didn't do it their preferred way.

Then there’s remembering airports (and flight patterns) that do “one-stop-security” and which don’t. London Heathrow doesn’t. They re-screen all incoming international passengers, so that 500mL bottle of contact lens solution that the ultra-paranoid Americans allow me to carry-on gets seized by Heathrow when transiting there. I’d think if the UK disagrees with another country’s rules, they should just ban flights fro…

The airport staff must be making millions from all the leftover deodorant alone.

I just take it all in stride and try to remain Zen when I'm flying thinking about a hot shower and a beer at the hotel.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#865

Post by danans »

pacman2 wrote: post #663
GhostVII wrote: post #537

We should have some kind of dashboard tracking how many people die from terrorism, car crashes, heart disease, COVID, etc., and how much time and money we spend trying to prevent these deaths. We are just so terrible at evaluating risk, for some reason it is OK to waste everyone's time with over the top security to stop a tiny portion of terrorism deaths, while still being OK with high speed limits that kill thousand…

20 years after 9/11, BinLaden still takes money out of your pocket (Airport security, air marshals etc.).

20 years later, the commodity that both financed and motivated 9/11 style terrorism and religious radicalization in the middle east and beyond - petroleum - still does that. It's also the same industry that provides a lot of revenue for the international arms industry.

But we didn't really want to stomach the lifestyle changes that shifting off of petroleum as a fuel would require, so instead we went decided to bomb societies out of supporting terrorism and into democracy.

Even if one doesn't believe climate change is real, that's a pretty good reason to avoid burning petroleum to move around by driving EVs and taking public transit.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#866

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

lolwut9654 wrote: post #853
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> improve mental health I think that this is a poor target. How do you set out directly targeting mental health? What are the biggest causes of mental health issues? https://www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/learn/index.htm CDC lists causes such as childhood trauma, trauma from medical issues, biological factors, alcohol or drugs, and loneliness or isolation. How do you set out to tackle loneliness or isolation? How do you he…

Have you tried doing more than nothing? On many occasions in the past, I’ve found that doing anything often works better than doing nothing, like the US usually advocates. Turns out that there are no perfect solutions, but there are a lot of partial solutions that in aggregate add up to the mental health the rest of the developed world has.

Thank you for making an account to attack a point that I did not make.

I did not say to do nothing. I said it will probably take a holistic approach. Holistic means look at the issue as a whole rather than trying to attack one symptom. A holistic approach would likely implement plenty of small partial solutions.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#867

Post by ubermonkey »

t-writescode wrote: post #835
ubermonkey wrote: post #796

Certainly not. People who were paying attention back then knew this. This kind of intrusion is a ratcheting function. I feel like HN is a sort of older crowd, so a good chunk of those who can read this probably remember pre-9/11 travel, but for those that don't: I have, nearly every day of my adult life, carried a Swiss Army Knife. It's insanely handy, and not at all something that would be parsed as a weapon. (Even…

And one big thing that used to happen that doesn't anymore: * Family would stay together basically right up to the gate. Eating dinner together, possibly, before a flight was had, or picking people up right from the plane, in situations where half the family flies away and the other half stays.

Yeah, for sure. "Picking someone up at the airport" also meant YOU would park somewhere, and then possibly even meet them AT THE GATE.

The other thing the airlines pushed in under the guise of "security" was insisting that everyone have photo ID matching their ticket name. Prior to that, they couldn't insist on this.

As a result, a secondary market for tickets existed. You'd see "for sale, male DFW to JFK" for such-and-such a flight in these forums -- which, of course, only existed because the airlines (then as now) charged EXTORTIONATE fees to change a ticket.

The airlines hated this, and so because "9/11" they pushed through the ID requirement and killed this market. Even though, it bears noting, that 100% of the 9/11 hijackers had valid ID.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#868

Post by rosseloh »

timr wrote: post #439
rootusrootus wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that even happen? I have pre-check, and it's always been an entirely separate line. They'd have to do a fair amount of work to redirect you over to the 'regular' line.

It used to happen only at smaller airports that didn't have the capacity to handle extra lines. But lately, I've had it happen at bit airports (like ATL), so I'm not really sure. The answer to your (implicit?) question is that it doesn't work. The staff take the card from you at the start of the process, and once your bag is in the machine, they have no idea if it's yours. So far, every time this has happened, I"ve b…

My local airport is so small that they don't process security until half an hour before boarding. We have one "gate", and the planes we get can hold 50 people when full.

I have Precheck (always marked on the boarding pass and I assume it shows up on their screen when I scan it), and what happens is the person at the podium notes it and lets his colleagues down the line know. I get a card, and show it to the person handling the body scanner, at which point they send me through the metal detector instead. There isn't much difference when it comes to the bag scanning (if any).

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#869

Post by stormbrew »

jedberg wrote: post #633
stormbrew wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I agree in general but it is also likely that they're performing at least some kind of background check on you when you participate in Pre. They definitely do with Nexus. It does make a certain degree of sense as a program if you believe in the premise of the entire security theatre apparatus to begin with. Especially within the US where domestic air travel has traditionally required very weak identification…

They run a background check on you whenever you buy an airline ticket. The airline submits their manifest to the TSA to cross check with the no-fly list. The only thing that TSA pre does is give you a number that is unique to you (as opposed to a name that you may share with someone else). They could easily solve this by having you submit your SSN or Passport number whenever you buy an airline ticket. I agree on Nexu…

The no-fly list isn't really a background check. It's just a simple name match, and it catches people who aren't on it because of that. An interview (like nexus or customs) also isn't a background check. These are three separate things. Everyone gets a check on the no-fly list, some people get advance background checks (Pre and programs like it I'd expect), and fewer still get an actual interview (international travellers who also have to supply a passport).

Having a unique ID number tied to other information about you (like your license ID number or passport number or SSN) allows for a more in depth check, no doubt in ways you probably don't even explicitly consent to.

If they did have your ssn or passport number from the airline at ticket purchase time then sure, that would allow for the same thing. But they don't. And if they did it'd be pretty expensive to do it for everyone. So, the current solution is basically just to make (some) people pay for their own background check.

Re: 20 years after 9/11: Will we ever stop taking our shoes off at airports?

#870

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

maxwell wrote: post #802
Y_Y wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. That's the whole thing. I think the most literal interpretation is that people have a right to bear arms, and you cant infringe that, by telling them they can't bear any arms. Obviously reasonable people will differ here, but I don't think it's fair to say that it unambigu…

The 18th century "regulated" means "well trained" today. What implies that any restrictions on the type of arms which may be possessed would be Constitutional? Where is the ambiguity outside of misunderstanding the contemporary meaning of "regulated"? "Bearing" doesn't mean using/firing weapons, of course, it's about preventing any authority from monopolizing violence. Certainly the founders—you know, the violent, en…

The United States Constitution was not "the first constitution in history". For earlier, famous, instances of actual "constitutions" rather than codes of law (such as that of Urukagina of Lagash) see for example Solon's constitution of ancient Athens:

The Solonian Constitution was created by Solon in the early 6th century BC.[1] At the time of Solon the Athenian State was almost falling to pieces in consequence of dissensions between the parties into which the population was divided. Solon wanted to revise or abolish the older laws of Draco. Solon promulgated a code of laws embracing the whole of public and private life, the salutary effects[2] of which lasted long after the end of his constitution.

Under Solon's reforms, all debts were abolished and all debt-slaves were freed. The status of the hectemoroi (the "one-sixth workers"), who farmed in an early form of serfdom, was also abolished. These reforms were known as the Seisachtheia.[3] Solon's constitution reduced the power of the old aristocracy by making wealth rather than birth a criterion for holding political positions, a system called timokratia (timocracy). Citizens were also divided based on their land production: Pentacosiomedimnoi, Hippeis, Zeugitae, and Thetes.[4] The lower assembly was given the right to hear appeals, and Solon also created the higher assembly. Both of these were meant to decrease the power of the Areopagus, the aristocratic council. The only parts of Draco's code that Solon kept were the laws regarding homicide. The constitution was written as poetry, and as soon as it was introduced, Solon went into self-imposed exile for 10 years so he would not be tempted to take power as a tyrant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solonian_Constitution

See also Aristotle's "Constitution of Athens", on the constitutions of Athens, Sparta and Thebes, and with a title that makes it clear that "constitution" was an established term at least since Aristotle's times.

Finally see wikipedia's article on pre-modern constitutions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution#Pre-modern_consti...

Modern constitutions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution#Modern_constituti...

And (modern) democratic constitutions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution#Democratic_consti...

For more examples of constitutions before the United States Constitution.

Post reply on HN