New Terror Plot

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778575.stm

 

Now, doubtless most of you will be aware of the HUGE kerfuffle raised by this foiled plot.

Hand luggage was reduced - in the most extreme cases to a few items carried in a plastic bag. Essentially all drinks/liquids were out, and hand luggage has been reduced down to only the size of a laptop bag, etc etc.

This has caused much hassle to passengers and airlines, and one airline (Ryanair?) even demanded that the governmet act to lift these restrictions.


My question is this:

Why do we need such drastic measures? After all, the plot ws discovered and stopped with the old security measures. Are the new ones really necessary?

Discuss.


Story links

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/4790187.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4790065.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/4789907.stm

 

the terrorists must have a good laugh at our hysteria, ricky...already we have to arrive 3 ours before depature the take our shoes off..i was required to discard a broomstick i had taped to fishing rods,i needed it to make a fish gaff in mexico...i guess they thought i might charge the cvockpit with a 3/4 inch dowel .....my wife had to surrender her nail clippers....its enough to make me want to join al quaieda...

 

These measures are nonsensical, and morever they are exactly what the terrorists want. People change their ways, change their laws and their lives for fear of terrorist attacks; that means the terrorists have won.

I understand that all these measures are taken ultimately to save lives, but you must ask yourself how many more restrictions on your freedom you're willing to tolerate to avoid a tiny risk of getting blown to bits on your way home. Personally, I want to be able to take a pair of scissors with me on an airplane without having to wait three hours for the customs to double-check my profile with the ministry of Justice. I don't care if someone else might use a similar pair of scissors to hijack my plane, because he would have found another way to do so if he couldn't bring scissors.

Weapons cannot be allowed on airplanes, true enough. But these things aren't weapons, and they don't blow up airplanes.

 

A question I have always wondered - why does anybody take scissors on an aeroplane?

 

The war on terror is like saying; I've had it with those hippies, I'm gonna sit down and try to talk things out with them.
You're doing exactly what they want from you :x
Why take scissors on a plane? How else could you possible open those bags of peanuts?
New safety measures are indeed clearly no top priority since the current apparently still suffice.
I'm basicly with Roel here, I'll dare take the risk.
Besides, the obvious guns, big knives etc are easily flushed out at customs.
But if you REALLY want to do harm you'd take your time, get to know the rules and eventually pull it off with a paperclip and bubblegum.

 

Opening bags, clipping nails, cutting loose threads off your clothing, cutting shapes in paper, cutting any piece of paper for whatever reason... The point is not that I have a need for scissors while in flight, the point is that I'm not going to be using it for anything other than what scissors do, and therefore I won't need to have it taken from me as I board the plane.

 

Yes, but then you happen to know that you pose no risk to your fellow passengers. The security people have no way of knowing which individuals pose a risk so they attempt to minimize the risk by eliminating those items that can be easily used as weapons.
As far as the present security arragements being sufficient because they foiled this latest threat well that isn't the case. It was an informer that gave away the plot. The liquid explosives to be used in this plot would likely have gone undetected by the previous security screening.
I prefer more freedom to less in almost all cases however I don't consider it to be a major loss of liberty to check my scissors in my baggage rather than carrying them into the cabin.

 

By that reasoning one could make a pretty good argument for allowing weapons aboard planes. After all, the vast majority of people who would carry a weapon do not intend to hijack the plane or harm anyone.

 

No. Weapons are weapons. Scissors are tools. I am not talking about the intent of the user but the intent of the object, which is the logical criterium since someone who intends to hijack a plane will, like Stix said, find a way regardless of restrictions. It is only the objects that can be used only as and are specifically intended as weapons that should be banned from public spaces.

 

which will not prevent people from having bad intents, even if "Scissors are tools"... ?

 

they're maybe not known as weapons, but they can be used as weapons, seeing that you can wound sb with it. So, should be banned or not ?

 

But then you could use most things as a weapon. If you take that approach then you will end up with passengers flying naked and without any hand luggage at all.

 

Yes, you're right. But scissors are easier to use( as a weapon) than the most other things... ?

 

Anything can be used as a weapon, its a matter of how you use it.

 

Also, it's important in which way anything can be turned into a weapon. If it will draw attention etc. So it's practically impossible to turn EVERYTHING into a weapon.

 

Why not give the co-pilot or a flight attendent some sort of gun with training on how to use it. Guns and big knives, as someone said, are easliy found so theres not much else they can bring on a plane thats going to stop a gun.
Scissors vs. 12 gauge pump/ 9mm/ something else

 

I believe El Ab? (I believe that's what the Isreali airline is) already have air marshalls on the flights who carry firearms. The only safe option on a plane would be to use 9mm Skymarshall round (essentially lethal plastic bullets) which are less likely to over penatrate. They also do selective screening meaning they screen and search those who they believe to most likely be a threat.

 

Or a tasergun those seem to work very well on tv at least. Since the taser is non lethal it could be used to stop somebody with a weapon.

 

It should actually be considered less lethal, because some one with a weak heart could be killed, but tasers do sometimes not work on the first shot (use of drugs or adrenaline rush possibly) thats why two bullets to the body would be much more effective in taking out the target. also do you really one to keep a threat alive on a plane? when killing him/her would eliminate the threat.