On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:27:35 -0500, "Stephen M"
wrote:

No, but I certainly don't think that they are 90 year old grandmothers
in
wheelchairs; or for that matter, 70 or 80 year old able-bodied gray-haired
women, or even 40 something, middle-aged, balding white guys. TSA stops
and frisks more of them than 18 to 40 year-old middle-eastern appearing
men. That make sense to you? Does that seem like a good use of
resources?

To a certain degree, Yes. No group should ever draw a bye (sp?). If you
*never* search 8-year old girls (or insert grand mothers, or any other
low-risk group) terrorists will recognize this hole in the system and start
using 8-year-old girls as mules for weapons.

Sure concentrate your resources on high-risk targets, but no group gets a
complete pass. This good policy.

Therefore complaining about the statistically mimimal grandmother who gets
"secondary inspection" is a not a very well-thought out point of view.


Have you actually watched TSA at an airport? As one of the
"statistically insignificant" 40-something, balding, middle-aged white
guys, my statistical insignificance has achieved an 80% secondary screening
rate when I fly. No, my ticket buying pattern is not unusual, there is
nothing in my profile that should trigger such a high amount of screening
for a truly "random" process. My cynical side says that this is because by
screening enough persons such as myself, they can then screen 1 or 2 people
they believe are real threats. It has gotten to the point that if I can
drive to my destination in 10 hours or less, I'd much rather drive than
fuss with the hassle of getting to the airplane.

-Steve




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety

Army General Richard Cody

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+