Ultimately, banning items from flying will fail

[Freedom_Aflaim]

Our leaders are so short sided. Banning items from flying will never stop airline terrorism.

Even if you completely ban all items from a flight, there are still numerous items on any aircraft that can be converted to a weapon.

Did you know that all flights have at least 2 survival knives in the cabin, readily accessable to passengers? Its true. Thats in addition to shoe strings, broke cd knives, hot water, numerous stabbing devices etc etc etc.

Heck it impossible to ban liquids from a plane without a strip search and body cavity search.

Even if we achieve the impossible, and ban all harmful items and make it IMPOSSIBLE to bomb a flight, terrorist will simply move the point of attack to the checkpoint area....where hundreds of people gather up to be shaken down by gleeful TSA agents, and where a bomb would harm the most people.

Its a losing game. Its either lose or lose more by playing it. So far we are choosing the lose more method.

[kurth]

1. Bush to announce anti-liquid defense initiative

Defense conglomerates will be lining up for "research" contracts to prevent the possibility of a terrorist attack where the terrorist detonates his own bladder using the frequency of his quartz watch.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

2. THEY DON'T FUCKING CARE!!

They'll strip away our freedoms. No sweat off their backs. They travel in VIP style anyways.

It's all a fucking game to them, and they're the winners. Any inconvenience or TERROR SCARE the little people may have, is meaningless.

[Uzybone]

10. I saw them throwing out juice

and water on the news today. Why do we over react like this? What will a 5yr old do with his sippy cup of juice on an airplane?

[displacedtexan]

3. Here's why the liquid ban won't work...

Really good liquid foundation makeup costs $30.

That's why this won't work. The upscalers won't
stand for this. Period.

[iamjoy]

6. Check The Stuff

check your $30 foundation, no problem. Supposedly, the machines that scan checked bags can detect explosives.

Now, why don't we scan carry ons with the same machines?


They're too expensive.

How many of those machines could we buy if we weren't spending umpteen billion dollars in Iraq?

:eyes:

[MercutioATC]

4. Bottles of wine...those have always been my favorite.

It's a club until you crush somebody's skull with it and it breaks. Then, it's a knife.

...but nail clippers are verboten...

:eyes:

[MrModerate]

5. They're already talking about . . .

The "bomb in the screening area" scenario -- which has been a real worry for years -- and saying that, just like hand baggage, they'll simply have to eliminate such a collection of unscreened people. I can't imagine how.

But it's going to be really expensive.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. BUT they HAVE TO concentrate on planes. Because.

forget our nation's unprotected nuke power stations, our oil and gas pipelines, our bridges our underpasses in major cities, our food supply, our rail, our coal mines, our oil wells, our high scrapers and our low damns and berms.

a cascade of terror? my ass.

[KatyaR]

8. Why in the world does the TSA think that allowing these

items in the luggage compartment is safer than not allowing passengers to have them in their carryons? It just means that the plane could blow up from below instead of from the seated area.

Stupid, if you ask me.

And yes, I understand that it's harder to detonate something from baggage, but it's still stupid.

[Earth_First]

9. I seem to remember a total ban on lighters and matches...

that turned around PDQ.