Air travel restrictions

[meeera]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What would you suggest as an alternative? That when intelligence services learn that terrorists have devised methods of planting explosives in laptops that can't be detected by current airport scanners that this information should simply be ignored, rather than steps taken to protect the safety of passengers? I'm sorry, but as a frequent flier that seems like an irresponsible course of action to me.

I'd like governments to act similarly urgently on some of the other things we've learned about terrorism. For example, the way in which terrorism is fueled by a climate of fear and hatred, nationalism and division, poverty and inequality. I'd like certain government to take a much longer, harder look at their own radicalised-Christianist-dude domestic terrorism problem, instead of pretending the threats are all external because it's good for votes (ratings). I'd like governments to recognise the connection between violence in one's personal life (particularly intimate partner violence) as a flag for the potential for wider community violence.

And if we're talking about value for money in saving lives for longer than the next election cycle, I'd like a hell of a lot more attention paid to inequality and healthcare, global reproductive health services and education of girls, and climate change mitigation.

I'd like a lot of things.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by meeera

I'd like governments to act similarly urgently on some of the other things we've learned about terrorism. For example, the way in which terrorism is fueled by a climate of fear and hatred, nationalism and division, poverty and inequality. I'd like certain government to take a much longer, harder look at their own radicalised-Christian-dude domestic terrorist problem, instead of pretending the threats are all external because it's good for votes (ratings). I'd like governments to recognise the connection between violence in one's personal life (particularly intimate partner violence) as a flag for the potential for wider community violence.

And if we're talking about value for money in saving lives, I'd like a hell of a lot more attention paid to inequality and healthcare.

I'd like a lot of things.

Desirable goals, to be sure, but it doesn't answer my question: what should be the response to intelligence received about credible threats? Jon appears to be suggesting that they should be ignored. Do you agree?

[meeera]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Desirable goals, to be sure, but it doesn't answer my question: what should be the response to intelligence received about credible threats? Jon appears to be suggesting that they should be ignored. Do you agree?

I don't much care. I think it's largely, possibly entirely, hand-waving and security theatre. I think it's a distraction, and it's meant to be a distraction.

[meeera]

Sorry. Saw the participants/subject matter, and thought this was P&R. Should maybe fork this thread.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by meeera

I don't much care. I think it's largely, possibly entirely, hand-waving and security theatre. I think it's a distraction, and it's meant to be a distraction.

You are aware that a bomb planted in a laptop exploded on a Somali airliner last year? Fortunately it detonated prematurely and only the bomber was killed. That appears to be what has prompted these restrictions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-35521646

[meeera]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You are aware that a bomb planted in a laptop exploded on a Somali airliner last year? Fortunately it detonated prematurely and only the bomber was killed. That appears to be what has prompted these restrictions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-35521646

Well aware.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by meeera

Well aware.

Then how can you claim that it is "security theatre", given that it's actually happen?

[meeera]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Then how can you claim that it is "security theatre", given that it's actually happen?

If laptop/Kindle bombs are so terrifying, what are we doing about the fact that now anyone can smuggle a bomb anywhere laptops or Kindles are allowed: i.e. almost the entire rest of the world? Cafes, crowded theatres, schools, stadiums, Boxing Day sales, Parliament House? Nothing. There are many, many ways to kill and terrorise. A lot of them are very low-tech. When the focus is on preventing explosions, people drive trucks into crowds. Etc.

A single incident where a single person killed himself isn't worth a huge wave of further restrictions on freedoms, because these changes will achieve little or nothing and will in no way be worth what they cost. And it distracts us nicely from areas where actual change could be achieved. That is security theatre. Security theatre isn't about preventing impossible fairy dust attacks, it's about ridiculous overreach and keeping us afraid and compliant.

If your threshold for introducing new restrictions on freedoms is a single death, that's a slippery slope to utter absurdity.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by meeera

If your threshold for introducing new restrictions on freedoms is a single death, that's a slippery slope to utter absurdity.

It's not my threshold that matters, but the decisions reached by the people whose job it is to determine the credibility of threats and advise the government on the appropriate level of response. Do you claim to have the knowledge to judge the seriousness of these threats? I don't.

[piperclassique]

We are of course assuming that the intelligence services have correct information. How do we know this?
And it rather appears to me that the day we all stop doing normal everyday stuff because someone we don't know has information they won't give us, is the day the terrorists have won. They won't need to kill us, we will have given in to them.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What would you suggest as an alternative? That when intelligence services learn that terrorists have devised methods of planting explosives in laptops that can't be detected by current airport scanners that this information should simply be ignored, rather than steps taken to protect the safety of passengers? I'm sorry, but as a frequent flier that seems like an irresponsible course of action to me.

So what would you do if you were to fly without being allowed to take anything electronic?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I'm not "fine" with it, but I'm asking you what you'd suggest as an alternative. What should be the response to reliable intelligence received about threats?

We would not be needing this intelligence if the airport scanner was not stolen.

[JSWolf]

A Reader cannot go in a suitcase that goes in the hold. The risk of it being broken is very high. My laptop could maybe be damaged. I know how bags get handled sometimes and I don't want my electronics broken if they have to ride in the hold. I don't use my laptop on a plane. I do use my Reader and sometimes my music player. A flight where we have to use possibly very dirty headphones that sound awful is not my idea of an enjoyable flight. Having to bring paper books because my Reader has to stay home is not my idea of an enjoyable flight.

It could get to the point where most people stop flying.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

So what would you do if you were to fly without being allowed to take anything electronic?

Read a book?

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It could get to the point where most people stop flying.

If people were flying for the sake of flying perhaps. Usually it's a means to an end and a lot of people don't find it enjoyable as it is now.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Read a book?

And what will you do when you get to your destination, if all you have is your phone, because the electronics that you were forced to check got lost/broken/stolen?

If people were flying for the sake of flying perhaps. Usually it's a means to an end and a lot of people don't find it enjoyable as it is now.

This whole thing is pretty ridiculous, on the face of it. Seriously...if a bomb can be hidden in a laptop or tablet, what is the difference between having it in the cabin or the hold? Either way, the plane will go down when the bomb goes off.

Shari