Lost Mobility — Lost Freedom
By James Baxter, NMA President
Two Wall Street Journal articles over the past week brought home how much our freedom to travel has been diminished in the pursuit of absolute security.
First was an editorial by Peggy Noonan that clearly described the degrading, inconvenient, and humiliating experience called “commercial air travel.” She provides a crystal clear image of the plodding lines of airline passengers, shuffling along shoeless, and dreading the possibility that they will be chosen for extra attention by TSA personnel.
Second was a book review of “The Closing of the American Border” by Edward Alden. Mr. Alden describes the practical, economic, and psychological effects of treating everyone who enters the U.S. as a potential criminal or terrorist. Lost jobs, lost income, wasted tax dollars, diminished international reputation, and the simple wasting of human time. “Waste” is the operative word because finding any benefit is worse than elusive, it is non-existent.
I can already hear the shrill cry “our national security demands these measures.” Or the more populist “How would you like it if you or your loved ones were on a plane that some terrorist took over or blew up?”
I’d like to take my chances, I’d like my freedom back.
Along with abolishing the TSA and thereby regaining a little national sanity how about allowing airline passengers a choice? They can fly under the current system that involves invasive searching, interrogation, and arbitrary command and control regimentation, or they can choose an airline that sells them a ticket, they get on the plane and they fly to their destination.
If you want the illusion of perfect security you can select the first option, take your shoes off and get in line. If you’re willing to take your chances and fly with the rest of us on the “No Fly List” you can opt for “buy your ticket and get on the plane.” With the money saved from not strip searching old ladies or lathering the floors with fungicide, an armed marshal could be assigned to every flight, and/or the training and arming of flight crew personnel, if deemed necessary.
Back at the border; how about we cut a deal with the Canadians and the Mexicans, we’ll take down our customs stations if they take down theirs’. I mean, who’s kidding who here? Twelve million illegal immigrants suggests the current system isn’t exactly bullet proof! And, most of these people did not hoof it on foot through the desert. They came in planes trains, busses cars and trucks, right through those border crossings.
Why not make it easy for them to go back and forth so they don’t feel obligated to set up camp here, for fear of not being able to get back? Think of the millions of gallons of gasoline that would be saved by the Canadians not having to make multiple crossings to do their shopping in the border states.
OK, I admit there might be a few downsides; more US sold leeches and night crawlers would make it into Canada, but hey that’s where they came from in the first place. Then, there’s the lost Canadian taxes from U.S. Citizens buying gifts for Canadian friends. However, revenue from the oil sands projects should help to offset these losses.
The current immigration and customs laws do a pretty good job of discouraging tourism, preventing skilled professionals from moving to the US, and confounding commerce. But, preventing terrorists from entering the country; not a chance.
Other Related Articles
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
Fine, you can put me in charge, but I am no expert. Why don’t we let the true security experts tell us how to do it right, and for once, actually listen to them?
I nominate Schneier for the position, as he has already told us how to fix the idiocy.
Our government is well known for asking for real scientific or expert evidence, then completely ignoring and hiding it. What makes you think security is any different?
The only thing we need to do then is to put Schwinn in charge and you can correct security so nothing gets through. Good luck in your new job.
By the way how many armed men are you going to have to hire to put 2 or 3 men on each plane to guard everyone?
I don’t believe I ever said NO security is a good thing. The article doesn’t even say that, as they say there should be armed people on the plane to address such situations.
My problem is that the current direction of “improved” security has nothing to do with real security. Spotchecking is pointless, because if you dont spot-check the RIGHT person, you’ll let them through. You must check EVERYONE for the usual threats (just like we used to before 9/11) like guns and such. But the rest of the nonsense is… well, nonsense. A truly determined attacker will simply find a way around your checks (whether it’s matches, shoe-bombs, or whatever) and use an alternative that you aren’t looking for. So, ANY reactive, specific screening is useless.
And watch lists? Eliminate them… as the stats show, almost all terrorists are first-time offenders. What on earth are you going to possibly watch for to prove that the next person is really a terrorist? There is no way to predict this with a list, so just get rid of it. (Besides which, as the article showed, it’s EASILY bypassed anyway, because of stupidity on the TSA’s part, honestly.)
Most importantly, be intelligent about the rules. Like the article I linked says, they won’t allow 3oz of fluid, but then they will if it says “Saline Solution” on the outside. Really? Are you f-ing kidding me? This is why the current system is idiotic and totally ineffective…. so don’t even bother with it.
Sure, you have to start somewhere, and find flaws (and then FIX THEM) but we haven’t even got a good start to begin with. None of the new “improvements” are even remotely effective in reality, or in theory. So just stop it.
I have a question Schwinn, are you saying we need no security or better security from what you said in your post? Your link shows what security checks are for is to determine problems and get them fixed.
Randy and Schwinn,
I can see both of your points and i agree with Randy that the step up in our homeland security has been amazing and is definitely preventing planning and executing of attacks daily. But I do agree with Schwinn that there will be another attack in the next 10 years or so from now. The simple fact is that you cant totally prevent everything. Even me as a police officer cant provent crimes all the time, i just have to respond to them responsibly and do the best i can with what i got.
I’ve had enough or Randy’s nonsense, so I am not going to even bother answering any of it, since it’s totally factless.
For the rest of the readers I submit an interesting story of the failure of post-9/11 security:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2003/10/16/logan_screeners_fail_weapons_tests/
The article says that even 2 years after all the hype over higher security, the very same Logan airport STILL failed to catch basic weapons like “knives, a bomb, and a gun in carry-on baggage”.
And a second article that really made me laugh at the nonsense of the TSA:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/airport-security