Time To Close the Security Theater 457
An anonymous reader writes "An editorial at Forbes calls for the dismantling of the TSA, pointing to recent headlines as the latest examples of 'security theater' at its worst. From the article:
'The problem isn't that the TSA is harassing the wrong people. The problem is that the TSA is harassing anyone. The TSA is encroaching on fundamental liberties and providing no discernable benefit. ... Naturally, the TSA responds to incidents like these by saying that the agents are highly trained and that they have followed proper procedure. This indicates a signal failing for the agency: if "doing it by the book" involves touching people in ways that would be considered sexual assault in virtually any other context or telling a 90-year old breast cancer survivor to remove her bra lest it contain explosives (as happened to a friend's grandmother), then the book needs to be shredded and rewritten. Better yet, it needs to be replaced with a competitive market for air travel in which the airports, the airways, and the airliners are in private hands. Some might object that private firms will have incentives to cut corners on safety. It is a legitimate concern, but competitive mechanisms tend to weed this out.'"
It is a jobs program. Doesn't actually do anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Security theater. Education theater. Infrastructure theater.
And near impossible to get rid of once established.
I would bet you will see TSA checkpoints on street corners before we get rid of this cancer at airports and train stations.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:2, Insightful)
Couldn't you just replace TSA with Federal Government in that story?
Couldn't you all vote to replace the Federal Government if you all really disliked it so much?
No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:1, Insightful)
The fact is you either get security at the cost of freedom, or freedom at the cost of security. No amount of precautions and countermeasures will prevent the worst from happening; just like with computers and viruses. Doing damage is the easiest thing to accomplish, but prevention is a very inefficient, resource burning measure. Not saying any amount of prevention is necessarily wrong in itself, but it goes to prove my point.
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
That 'security' includes exactly 2 things:
Reinforced and 'locked' cockpit doors.
Flight #93 passenger response.
Those 2 things will prevent another 9/11 from happening. The TSA is preventing bombs 'on' planes which is *not* what 9/11 was. It was using planes as flying missles. Very. Different. Threats.
The problem with "competitive" pressures (Score:5, Insightful)
is that they aim to fly as close to the line as possible.
In a system where safety rating is part of the commercial offering, you'll end up with cheap, dangerous, low margin airlines because (and it's a shame it has to be said so often) enlightened self interest is a myth.
of course the rest of this stuff is spot on. The TSA should be disbanded.
Just like Animal Farm.. (Score:5, Insightful)
All animals are created equal, yet some animals are more equal than others.
The problem is that those people that created the TSA should have to go through this type of security screening. Make these invasive procedures personal to those in power. They'll have a change of mind when Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama and Nancy Pelosi are getting groped instead of hearing stories about some random grandmother. Too bad those three women always fly privately. I guess we're all equal under the law unless you get elected to office.
False dichotomy (Score:4, Insightful)
This isn't an either-or situation. The TSA's perpetrated a number of civil liberties violations, yes. On the other hand, some kind of free market libertarian fantasy should not come at the expense of public safety either.
The TSA needs to be re-imagined, but we shouldn't revert to the system we had before. But c'mon. A free market system has no incentive to improve in this kind of situation (oh, you died in a terrorist attack? Fine, go to some other airport next time!)
Typical Forbes (Score:5, Insightful)
They're a one-tune-band.
Private enterprise. Rah Rah Rah. Solution to everything .... blah blah blah... Capitalism, the savior of us all... blah blah blah. privatise airports, roads, the police, fire brigade, army, air, water, everything.... right to property, profit, business efficiency.... Private enterprise. Rah Rah Rah.
Re:It is a jobs program. Doesn't actually do anyth (Score:5, Insightful)
"but competitive mechanisms tend to weed this out."
This is just a free market troll. Competitive mechanisms favor the group that cuts costs, reduces quality and undercuts the higher quality competitors. The end result is the dodgy group raising prices sky high once a monopoly has been achieved.
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
Incorrect. True security *has* stopped another 9/11.
That 'security' includes exactly 2 things:
Reinforced and 'locked' cockpit doors.
Flight #93 passenger response.
Those 2 things will prevent another 9/11 from happening. The TSA is preventing bombs 'on' planes which is *not* what 9/11 was. It was using planes as flying missles. Very. Different. Threats.
Reinforced and 'locked' cockpit doors are things that should have naturally been implemented into design by common sense. That would be passive security that works on its own without further human intervention after fabrication and production.
Can't Agree With The Article More (Score:5, Insightful)
This article one of the better I've read, and the author is right: the TSA is flawed to the core. The TSA also makes the case that law enforcement should never be above the law... sexually assaulting people, stealing people's stuff (taking away contraband) and creating a system of checkpoints with a do not pass list all are contrary to existing law and at least as bad as anything Eastern Europe had to offer in the 1960s and 1970s. If we are exempting law enforcement from sexual assault and theft laws, then we need to change that as there is not one good example where law enforcement should be able to rape, molest or steal from a citizen, EVER. The TSA also has little regard for citizen health as seen in it's apparent lack of safety testing for backscatter detectors and their treatment of people in wheelchairs.
TSA isn't impossible to get rid of. All it takes is one Senator or member of the House to stand up and hold public hearings where citizen after citizen get to tell stories of their wives, children, and grandparents being sexually assaulted, relieved of property or denied access to travel without any kind of right of redress, and the people will be more than happy to get rid of the beast the TSA has become. Personally, I have avoided commercial flights since the TSA became more Stalinist in its tactics because I fear that I would lose my temper and be arrested for questioning the TSA's right to sexually assault, irradiate people, steal stuff and impede other citizens right to freely move. I'll continue to fly privately or not at all (if the boarding+flight+bag claim time is under 5 hours, you usually can drive there in the same time) until this changes. In 2001, I flew over 340,000 miles. Last year, I flew 0 on a commercial airliner.
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:1, Insightful)
No kidding.
"Some might object that private firms will have incentives to cut corners on safety. It is a legitimate concern, but competitive mechanisms tend to weed this out."
Competitive mechanisms promote corner cutting. See: Continental 3407, pilot pay and rest requirements, FAA's policy of promoting airline business over safety, and outsourcing of heavy maintenance. ST Aerospace, a maintenance provider, has committed some especially egregious offenses (see "Flying Cheaper" by Frontline).
Re:Just like Animal Farm.. (Score:4, Insightful)
You politicians are what you make of them. Your government departments are what you let them get away with.
The difference between a slave and a free person is the right to say no. Next time you feel that authority oversteps it's demands upon you, don't be a bloody slave, simply but firmly state, "Freedom, I wont".
Either you are a free citizen of a country with constitution that provides you with inalienable rights or you are a slave destined to spend the rest of life afraid to say 'NO' and, condemning your family to the same.
Show some genitalia by refusing to have it radiated and exposed or groped, just say "NO".
Re:False dichotomy (Score:5, Insightful)
The TSA has done no better and no worse than pre-9/11 airport security in terms of hijacking/terrorist attempts.
But it has had a noticeable, negative impact on traveler experience, dignity and basic rights both legal and social. I'm hardly anything approaching a"free-market" advocate but what we have now does nothing but cost taxpayers money. I have no problem paying taxes in general but I'd at least like to see some tangible benefit from it, y'know? We can go back to "normal" airport security and put that money towards investigative efforts where it will actually do some good.
Let's be honest, if a terrorist plot gets to the point where the airport security catches him, we have already failed. Next step is to just blow themselves up while waiting in line to be groped... all the airport security goons in the world couldn't stop that. We don't need the TSA.
=Smidge=
Competitive mechanisms? (Score:2, Insightful)
is just crazy. Competitive markets have been shown, time and time again, that they will not implement safety measures unless they can profit from it (car companies through the 70s, power companies, coal mining companies, etc.). I, personally, do not want to live in a country that has planes falling out of the skys because all that happens when something like this happens is the company goes bankrupt and the government is left to pay for the disaster, I strongly suspect that I am in the majority on this. Having a set of base regulations which prohibit known unsafe behavior on the part of any industry should be considered the responsibility of any government. Living in a completely unregulated world is another phrase for anarchy.
Re:False dichotomy (Score:5, Insightful)
Now people know that that outcome is not likely to be the case and they will attempt to overwhelm the hijackers.
However, my recommendation would be to revert to the basic system we had on 9/11, except that the TSA gets reorganized as security inspectors. The job of the TSA would be to inspect the security procedures of various airlines (including passenger screening) and fine those airlines that failed certain objective standards (such as allowing a gun onto the plane--something the TSA has on several occassions failed to prevent).
Emotional appeals are annoying (Score:4, Insightful)
if "doing it by the book" involves [...] telling a 90-year old breast cancer survivor to remove her bra lest it contain explosives [...], then the book needs to be shredded and rewritten.
That the person is 90, a woman, or a breast cancer survivor shouldn't matter. Perhaps the "book" should be rewritten so that a 20-year-old bra-wearing drag queen otherwise in the same situation shouldn't have to remove his bra, just like the old woman shouldn't have to. Randomly deciding some people aren't dangerous is dangerous.
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:4, Insightful)
I would add one more thing: The FBI. They've stopped some actual terrorist plots from getting past the planning stages. But if a terrorist manages to elude the FBI, the TSA isn't going to be more than a minor inconvenience.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:4, Insightful)
replaced with what?
democracy has turned into picking the less of two evils
TSA abridges First, not just Fourth, Amendment. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:4, Insightful)
If the American people want airport security, the only way to do it right is through a government agency that takes a little bit from everybody to provide some expensive security to a small subgroup of people.
Except that it obviously is not working. There have been several breaches of security. The shoe bomber and the Christmas day bomb plots were NOT defeated by security. They failed because the explosives did not work. Proving if anything the higher hurdle crafting an effective portable explosive device; not defeating airport security.
I am not suggesting we should have no airport security but going back to someone asking if you have your bags in sight the whole time, checking ID, and going through a metal detector would be reasonable. We are not getting much in terms of safety for the steps we take beyond that; and that little if any added safety comes with a very high price tag socially and economically.
The only way everyone is going to truly safe from terrorists on planes/trains/buses is if all passengers spend the entire ride naked and handcuffed to their seats.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:5, Insightful)
Interviews conducted by experts, not groping and searching by minimum wage automatons, provide effective security. Bags do need to be searched, and passengers screened, but this searching does not need to be intrusive. Anything else is just theatre.
Whether the airport, the government, or the airline directly foots the bill, you still pay for it. You pay for directly in your airline ticket or via taxes which spreads out the cost more.
Some things are not done better by the private sector. Government is not universally incompetent, they actually do many things well. Changing to private security from government security will not magically improve security. If the airlines provide security it will just be done as cheap as possible without breaking any laws. Government regulations ARE required when it comes to health and safety issues. The free market simply does not give the average consumer the required information in a timely manner to prevent health and safety abuses.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:4, Insightful)
Safety that requires groping grandmas is not worth having, even if it really is safety.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:5, Insightful)
Thing is: NOBODY voted for the TSA.
Re:Just like Animal Farm.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You must watch a lot of Fox News.
Congress does participate in Social Security. What made you think they do not? They pay income and FICA taxes on their salaries just like anyone else.
As for "ObamaCare," you are probably right that it wouldn't have been passed if Congress were forced to participate, since that would mean giving up their free government health care and being forced to buy private insurance instead.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because there is a serious dumbing-down of the entire US population. Many of them can't even find or identify the capitol of their own state now, and at least half are religiously-brainwashed morons who will believe any anti-gay, anti-women, and anti-minority hate speech that is thrown their way by the 'Good Ol' Boys' (who strangely enough are usually the ones arrested for doing a transsexual black hooker at the rest stop).
Republicans, Democrats, and all of their kind are DESTROYING this country, and they have their fingers, propaganda, and moral bullshit embedded so deeply it will require a full-blown guns-blazing revolution to oust it.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:5, Insightful)
If the American people want airport security
Who says we do? We did pretty well for a few decades without the TSA or a private firm equivalent. Why the hell do we need them now? Because some loonies pulled one over on us 10 yeas ago? Whoopty-doo. Even the toughest kids on the playground get a black eye from time to time.
I say bring in some bomb sniffing dogs at every airport. Dismantle the scanners and sell the materials on e-bay to pay off some of the debt. Lay-off every single TSA employee. Get on with our lives. I'm tired of living in a country where wanting to travel long distances quickly and conveniently is a reason to suspect someone is a terrorist.
Let's not forget (Score:5, Insightful)
Terrorists don't have to get past airport security. They can wheel in a huge bomb on an airport-provided trolley and blow up the queue for the scanner.
If there's no terrorist attacks in the USA it's not because of the TSA, it's because there aren't any terrorists who can be bothered to do it.
If you don't believe me I've got a magic tiger-repelling stone I'd like to sell you.
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:1, Insightful)
I would add one more thing: The FBI. They've stopped some actual terrorist plots from getting past the planning stages. But if a terrorist manages to elude the FBI, the TSA isn't going to be more than a minor inconvenience.
Oh, you mean terrorist plots where the FBI goes after mentality retarded folks who have no means to do something and give them fake bombs and claim it as a victory? Wow. Great job. My tax dollars at work.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:5, Insightful)
Bags do need to be searched, and passengers screened
Says who? Did you read TFA, in particular the part about the number of deaths due to terrorist+airplanes vs. accidental deer strikes?
There is no statistical justification for searching any bags or for any kind of passenger screening.
Imagine this: suppose after the first WTC bombing (truck in the parking lot), some authority decided the only way to make cities safe is to stop every car, bus, and truck on the way into the city, search all occupants and their luggage, and do to the vehicle. Absolutely ridiculous? Now tell me how the airport+TSA crap is any different.
Re:It is a jobs program. Doesn't actually do anyth (Score:4, Insightful)
You forgot one thing: If you cut too many corners then you might find your passengers vote for your competitor (with their wallets).
The real problem with the TSA is that even a child can see they're not actually increasing security. Mostly they're just making scanner manufacturers/shareholders rich and keeping unemployment figures down. All at taxpayer expense and passenger inconvenience.
Re:No amount of security will prevent terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
Should have. But common sense and hindsight are 20/20. Most terrorists just wanted a ride to Cuba before 9/11, so there was no need to escalate the situation. When 9/11 turned the planes themselves into weapons, the attitudes of the passengers and the pilots changed. That is all that it took. We don't need anything else.
Re:It is a jobs program. Doesn't actually do anyth (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be an idiot. If the TSA were having measurable successes like those, the leaders would be on TV regularly extolling their successes.
With political incentives like they are, absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Re:It is a jobs program. Doesn't actually do anyth (Score:4, Insightful)
Someone mixing up some TATP in the lavatory [theregister.co.uk] is about as likely as the TSA stopping twenty terror attacks just this year [slashdot.org] but has been keeping quiet about it.
Re:TSA = Federal Government (Score:5, Insightful)
We've only got two choices and they're both completely crap.
You're doing it wrong.
Candidates in the 2010 Ohio Senate election:
Rob Portman (R)
Lee Fisher (D)
Dan La Botz (Socialist Party)
Eric Deaton (Constitution Party)
Michael Pryce (Independent)
2008 Presidential Candidates On Enough State Ballots to Reach 270 Points:
Barrack Obama (D)
John McCain (R)
Ralph Nader (Independent)
Bob Barr (Libertarian)
Chuck Baldwin (Constitution)
Cynthia McKinney (Green)
Incidentally, in the 2008 presidential election 1,623,078 people voted for a 3rd party out of 131,014,789 votes (not counting "others"). 1,623,078 people voted for what they believe. Do you think that many people will revolt when they have food in their bellies and a roof over their heads? Two party system? That's the defeatist attitude that ensures a two party system. If it doesn't matter who wins, democrat or republican, focus on raising that number. 1,623,078 people voted 3rd party in 2008, in 2012 don't focus on which R or D wins (in presidential elections or congressional elections), focus on raising the number of 3rd party votes. That's the real victory. Every election with less votes for R and D is a triumph for freedom. Democracy sometimes takes a long time to change direction, don't give up now on the idea that men can govern men with ideas instead of violence.
Re:Typical Forbes (Score:4, Insightful)
The drug cartels of South America are not corporations and they are just as large as any large company - or larger.
There are many very large companies today that are not corporations, but are partnerships.
If I am not mistaken (it has been many decades since I read a biography of Andrew Carnegie), the Carnegie Steel Company was not a corporation, but I could be wrong. But in any case, Andrew Carnegie had full control, so regardless of its legal status it acted as a sole proprietorship. Yet it became one of the largest (the largest?) companies in the world, and the infamous Homestead Steel Strike illustrated how ill-behaved the company was, with the many killings at the hands of privately hired Pinkerton guards.
The kingdoms of the feudal days were nothing other than completely unregulated companies. Like the drug cartels of South America, the feudal regimes were created by bullies who made their own families (clans) into the lords of those around them, in effect hiring armies with their favors. Hierarchy breeds greater hierarchy, and these small fiefdoms grew into kingdoms, and employed "sheriffs" to go around and collect taxes so that the kingdoms could continue to live lavishly from the fruits of the labors of the average person, who had by then had all of his land confiscated by the kingdom and who now lived at the "grace of the king".
Yes, that is what true capitalism it. What we have in the US is highly regulated capitalism.
But I agree that corporations are an evil. They allow people to escape personal accountability for their actions.