I want high security when checking my fellow flying passengers to/from England

[soloman]

Airline security has rightly become an increasing issue to counter terrorism since the terrible days of 9/11.

Initially the Americans were way behind on security at check-in which is why 9/11 was at all possible. Now they have ramped it up so making considerable checks on all passengers flying at least into the USA. England fell behind and then arbitrarily introduced the pathetic 'no liquids more than 100mls'! It remains pathetic because the rest of Europe essentially does not follow that 'rule' at all.

Now some criticism is being voiced by the Mail on Sunday concerning 'outrage at checks being made on 47,000 innocent people'. I am not one of those outraged as they do not quote the number of passengers denied travel, without which no-one can make a rational decision.

Read their biased article for your self:-

Outrage at secret probe into 47,000 innocent flyers | Mail Online

[manrow]

Regretably if we want real action against the relatively 'new' concept of terrorism then we have to accept excess security checking. It is bad enough to have to go through the security screening at airports, but frankly there is no other way. It would be better if the operatives had better or more thorough training, and can someone please explain why I have to remove trouser belt and shoes at some airports, while not at others? Nevertheless I welcome security checking in principle including targetting certain groups or people who show trends which may indicate their intentions as hopefully that could mean dispensing with x-ray checks for the majority of us.

Sorry Daily Mail you have got this one wrong!

[Midas]

As a regular flier myself I have to agree that many of the so-called 'security' procedures are pretty useless, doing little more than wasting time and causing a great deal of aggravation among passengers - not just my view but that of an increasing number of security experts. As Manrow points out, "It would be better if the operatives had better or more thorough training...", a view which has been echoed time and time again by those within the security industry. The careful study of passenger behaviour, looking for clues among behaviour and expression, has been shown to provide a far higher detection rate than simply herding passengers through physical check after check.

Having said that though, I guess that because the media generally have raised the level of concern over aircraft security to a higher point than reality would dictate, aided and abetted by governments who want to "be seen to be doing something", even if it's about hobgoblins, as a way to increase the invasion of privacy of their citizens for largely political ends (power and control), the powers that be will keep this inefficient and ineffective method in place for quite a while yet.

If anyone is interested in some professional observations on this subject, Bruce Schneier has many relevant articles in his blog and in his Crypto-Gram newsletter, but you might have to do a bit of digging to find them all.