This new policy regarding carry on is a bit absurd, harsh, and sudden, but the biggest issue is in going to be with all these travelers with no idea! Maybe it is time everyone starts signing off on these regulations when booking their ticket so to ease the hassle at the airport?
I'm a professional locksmith by trade, so happen to know a thing or two about security; and here is a little trade secret ... security is an illusion. You can never secure yourself against all threats.
The goal is to add sufficient layers / levels of security in order to deter your less determined 'bad guys'. There is an old saying, that doors have locks to keep the good people honest. Your determined bad guy will find a way around or through whatever level of security you put in place.
Example: a friend or neighbour has their house broken into and robbed, so you go out and hire a locksmith or security company to come put an overkill security system on your home. You've done this simply because of fear; but ultimately a determined crook could still get at you. Even if you turned your home into a bank vault ... because guess what, banks have been robbed too. And while you're sitting in your bank-vault-like home, feeling safe from burglars, what happens when you have a fire, or suffer a heart attack and the firefighters / paramedics can't get to you?
Security is largely an illusion. The idea behind physical security is to make it a pain in the ass for the determined bad guys to hit your target ... you want them to go find easier pickings somewhere else.
As some have pointed out, unless passengers fly naked, with every single one having gone through body cavity searches and full body x-rays, handcuffed to their seats with no baggage allowed on board at all; you'll not prevent a determined terrorist from getting explosives on board. And even then, they'd probably find some way.
Yes, the title of this thread is bang on the money ... they have won. Because they have caused governments to make knee jerk over-reactions, leading to the general public living in fear (or 'terror', if you will).
The whole damn thing has just become absolutely ridiculous.
Also consider that passenger screening is not just targeting terrorists, but also those cirminals that might seize an airplane for ransom.
So why the emphasis on airplanes over other modes of travel? Blowing up an international flight guarantees an international incident involving multiple national governments and something that will remain in the media for weeks or months. Blow up a bus in some city, it may or may not make international news, almost certainly involves only citizens of that country, will not cause friction between nations, etc. Airplanes are still seen by the travelling public as being a little different and riskier than other forms of transportation. Passengers in an airplane are completely at the mercy of circumstance, and the consequences of any mishap will likely be spectacular. By comparison, most passengers on a bus would see themselves as capable of driving the bus if they had to, able to jump off, having help immediately at hand, and any crash as entirely survivable. Blowing up airplanes evokes much more emmotion in the masses than does blowing up buses or trains. There are also no practicable alternatives to long distance air travel, but I can always take my car rather than a bus or train.
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:47 pm
- Location: Straight outta Dundarave...
Does the general public live in fear? I'm not so sure about that. Personally, where I live, I'm more worried about a large earthquake while I am in one of the brick buildings downtown than I am about some crazy Jihadi bombing the WJ flight that I take to and from work every six months...as for the security theatre, like most, I just grin, bear it, and stick pins in CATSA dolls when I get home.Yes, the title of this thread is bang on the money ... they have won. Because they have caused governments to make knee jerk over-reactions, leading to the general public living in fear (or 'terror', if you will).
If Osama really wanted to attack our way of life, he'd be blowing up oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia, but then that would be attacking his own, and probably wouldn't go over so well...
Happiness is V1 at Thompson!
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7374
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:50 pm
- Location: Cowering in my little room because the Water Cooler is locked.
OR we could get bigger wallets.
I reported this to the CATSA manager in Calgary, who made a big deal of it. I told her exactly how easily I could cause a lot of troubles on an aircraft with this. I know first hand that a bic lighter is enough to set off the primer in a .22, so all I need is a pipe with a .22 caliber hole in it, and I have a gun. There are no laws agains taking a pipe on a plane, are there? And you are forced to carry a lighter on your person. I did everything I possibly could to ruin that security persons day, (the incompetent one in Toronto), and hopefully they were fired. How, with all the technology they have available to them, do they let a person thru with bullets?!?!
Perhaps not on a day to day basis. And perhaps not your regular air travelers (i.e. commuters, and those who fly often) ... But many people I know who travel infrequently by air, have expressed more apprehension about flying now than they did in the past. And that fear may not necessarily be about being blown up, but of coming under undue scrutiny by some security nazi.North Shore wrote:...Does the general public live in fear?...
And I'm not talking about people who should have anything to fear (i.e. no criminals or anything like that). Just your average, law abiding citizen, going on that first vacation in 10 years, fresh passport in hand, worrying about getting strip searched or some such thing because they looked nervous or did something that's 'wrong' according to some rule they don't know about.
Next biggie for us is the VIA rail ride through the Rockies with stops at Lake Louise and Banff – that special hotel is noteworthy. Even hear the Westerners are a good bunch to be around, they don’t mind us Easterners at all.
The airlines are supposed to make you check it but none of the check-in agents do because they don't want to put up with the hassle of an argumentitive passenger.
As has been said -
I always carry a spare set of clothes in my bag in case my luggage is lost, and for a short trip - just a carry on so I don't wait an hour to claim my bag.
How many of us would have bothered flying to Moscow while the Communists ruled Russia?
The Union of Soviet Americas is the same today.
We don't have to go there do we.
If the USA wants to be isolationist that is their right.
If the USA wants to create NAZI style organisations, that is their right too.
If we want to go there we'll have to go with their rules and it's not worth crying about it since none of us are voters in the USA and most Americans are in agreement that their security must be 180% assured.
So you can walk around and attempt to blow up a plane during the flight but not when preparing for landing? Where is the logic in that one?godsrcrazy wrote:They are also saying you will have to remain in your seat for 1 hour prior to landing.
If it has come down to every passenger being considered a threat, when are pilots going to start receiving danger pay?
I'm going to Barbados in January, non-stop from YYZ, can we still bring a carry-on.
The problem here is this has become big business for home land security and others. It is all a big joke. Go on most planes during the day when all the blinds are closed. You may not get through the cockpit door but look thru the holes to the cockpit thru the bathroom walls.
So i am going to make a prediction here. I don't know when i don't know how but trust me some terrorist will bring an airplane down in the next 10 years. With all this knowledge i should get a job with home land security as a consultant getting paid $100,000.00 plus a year.
There are some that believe in more security i think its a big joke. With enough imagination anyone can bring a plane down. It may not hit the target but it will come down. Like my brief case wit a laptop isn't as dangerous as a pocket knife.
As i said at the start the terrorists have won we are chasing are tail spending tons of money. We are taking away the freedom to travel and speak.
Carry-on baggage has gone berserk. While convenient for some people who don't want to go to battle with the rest of the madding crowd at the baggage carousels, is is a nightmare for people waiting to go through security screening, cabin attendants, and other passengers who have to put up with the irritating inconvenience of someone searching the overhead bins for a non-existent place to put some huge bag that never should have been allowed thru the door in the first place, and won't fit under the seat.
There has to be an end to that b/s. If you're not going to need or use it in flight, then it should be checked.
I'm actually referring mainly to domestic flights here; on International flights I can see that a passenger's needs may be a bit more "diverse". And as for the poor Peruvian-bound s.o.b., I always wonder why the baggage missed the flight. If it was improperly tagged, the pax himself has a certain amount of responsibility to check that himself also; and it would not surprise me to find out that late runners have the most problems in this regard.
If yer gonna be dumb.....you gotta be tough.
Personnal interpretation, but I think it's because they judge their security screening more adequate than those of other countries.Crobe wrote:Whats really bizarre is that these new security measures seem to only apply a/c bound TO the US, and not within it. I flew from YVR to LAX on the 27th and it was a gong show, extra screenings, warnings, full pat-downs for everyone, carry on limits, staying in seats for last hour and all that crap. BUT from LAX to KOA......nothing! No extra security, no carry on limits, no sitting restrictions, NOTHING. Nobody even seemed to acknowledge the previous days events. It was business as usual. It blows me away that they can react so strongly to such a narrow threat, then completely ignore everything else. Funny and sad at the same time. I think in the future i'll just drive to SeaTac and fly from there.
Apparently they think that McDonalds rejects can do a better job than Tim Horton rejects. Smoke and mirrors again.Crobe wrote:Whats really bizarre is that these new security measures seem to only apply a/c bound TO the US, and not within it.
Somebody will make millions selling TSA the next screening machine.
In the mean time, check your bags paying the extra fee and allow enough time after your flight to file a lost or damaged baggage report.
This is typical of the sort of comment from an unfortunately large and ignorant section of the population that thinks that the only people who travel are tourists and vacationers and that all travel is a discretionary pleasure!
This is supposed to be an aviation forum. Think of all the aircrew who commute to work. Think of all the aircrew and support staff who work on rotation for contract operators with aircraft based in other countries. On each journey these crew need to carry the tools of their trade and supporting documents. There is no way any intelligent pilot is going to have his headsets, GPS, handheld aviation radio, cell phone, calculator, logbook, licences, etc, going as checked baggage and subject to being lost or stolen. This lot should stay with you in your carry on baggage or else refuse to travel. The employer will have to make other arrangements to get you to and from your base.
Pilots, when they travel to get to and from work, are not the only non-discretionary travellers. The requirement to travel internationally is faced by many others such as miners, geologists, flight attendants, aircraft maintenance engineers, diplomats, government workers, politicians, aid workers, engineers, architects, the military, the merchant navy, medical doctors and specialists, nurses, TV and press reporters, professional sports players, missionaries, multi-national company managers, travel agents, couriers, marketing reps, contractors, artists, actors, emigrants, retirees, etc, apart from tourists. We live in an ever more inter-dependant world, with ever increasing movement between countries, and with ever more persons in expatriate situations. Many Canadians live permanently outside of Canada or travel internationally for employment and are far more likely to need emergency travel, particularly those in the Third World who might have to be medevaced to a country with decent medical facilities. All of these should be up in arms over the abuse being inflicted upon them.
Are there any effective passengers' rights organisations?
You know what else is unbelieveable?Whats really bizarre is that these new security measures seem to only apply a/c bound TO the US, and not within it. I flew from YVR to LAX on the 27th and it was a gong show, extra screenings, warnings, full pat-downs for everyone, carry on limits, staying in seats for last hour and all that crap. BUT from LAX to KOA......nothing! No extra security, no carry on limits, no sitting restrictions, NOTHING. Nobody even seemed to acknowledge the previous days events. It was business as usual. It blows me away that they can react so strongly to such a narrow threat, then completely ignore everything else. Funny and sad at the same time. I think in the future i'll just drive to SeaTac and fly from there.
On US domestic flights - the passenger/bag rule does not apply. I couldn't believe it at first, but if a passenger has checked in and then didn't get on the flight - their bag is not pulled! It just goes on it's merry way and that person picks it up later whenever they get in.
We are pulling bags everyday because someone either didn't or couldn't travel. The Lufthansa YVR - FRA flight earlier this week was delayed an hour and a half trying to find the 4 bags of this woman who lost her passport after check in. However - this is one rule I firmly believe in.
Guess there is no threat inside the good ol' USA.
Question for ya!!
What is the purpose of the carriers such as CanJet, Sunwing, AT et al who's objective is to attract such customers(and do a good job of it, mind you). And..... how come the big two boys AC and WJ offer a "vacations" section in their business plans.
I did Actually, it was a lot of fun, watching their "system" as a westerner. Very orderly and safe, no hassles except for customs bureaucracy, and you could live like a king after selling a pair of blue jeans or two. Besides, you should have seen the amount of carry-on the Russkies brought on board. 30 kilos each, easilyMichaelP wrote:Do you remember the USSR?
How many of us would have bothered flying to Moscow while the Communists ruled Russia?
The Union of Soviet Americas is the same today.
.. so the situation really is not comparable.