Originally posted by ZoomZoom Diva:
The ability to go about our daily lives and activities in a resonable manner is a very important liberty to me. These rules prevent that with no proven benefits, ...
A little extra security is reasonable to me. You're one of the FEW that seems to have a problem with it. Lip gloss be damned! I want to LIVE!!
Originally posted by ZoomZoom Diva:
Maybe part of the difference is I think there are no real benefits for all these rules, and that allowing people to carry their basic toiletries on a plane has a statistically zero chance of endangering anybody.
How can you track how many 'incidents' these & other security measures may have prevented?? Can't be done - it's impossible. Tracking security failures is easy enough though, isn't it.
Maybe in the past the chances were zero that those items would be a potential weapon, but with heightened terror efforts, who knows what the risks are of allowing such materials on board are? As has been stated before, the game changes as time goes on. Past statistical unlikelihoods are things the terrorists are counting on as a weakness they can exploit - as evidenced by this new method, so your insistance that those items be overlooked could bring them to the rhelm of LIKELY tactics.
Why are you so adamant that travel be totally convenient for YOU at the risk of EVERYBODYS safety? These measures may have been knee jerk, and if later determined to be in-effective or of no further benefit, they'll be cast by the wayside, so no harm done. Frankly, I think they're temporary measures until some better system or idea is developed, and considering the recent threat, I think they're reasonable temporary measures to insure the safety of passengers. Therein lies the difference in our points of view, I guess.
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
| 
