Hacker News Reader

Comment by function_seven | Hacker News Reader

The regulation is about bombs, not batteries. There has been a report that would-be bombers are using stolen (?) airport screening equipment to develop undetectable bombs.

I’m not sure how effective this ban can be, but I assume there’s recent intelligence that prompted it.

View on HN

But laptops are still allowed to be checked and stored in the hull. If the bombs are undetectable then doesn't the problem remain?

Like all air regulations, this one is full of holes. (Pilot can’t bring a pocketknife onboard, but has an axe in the cockpit for example).

In this case, I suppose it’d be easier for the terrorist to have a manually-triggered bomb on their lap, vs having to also rig a GPS or time-delay bomb for the cargo hold. Obviously still do-able, but one step harder.

To be clear, I’m not all that impressed by the ban or it’s effectiveness.

Also, to consider the pocket knife restriction, versus the axe, the axe is an inventoried community possession, while the pocket knife is an irregularity, and inconsistent across cabin populations. Some are big, some are small, some are ineffective as actual weapons, others being designed to function solely as weapons without any other utility.

With the axe, it's a known quantity, unconcealable, large and conspicuous, but personal possessions are variable, and the only way to normalize them is to remove them from the equation.

Furthermore, bringing a pocket knife into the terminal gives the opportunity to transfer it to another person. An attacker might not be able to convince a pilot to use the cockpit axe for an attack, but could convince them to smuggle a knife through the security screening checkpoint.

I'm assuming the scanning machines for checked luggage are superior to carry-on luggage. I know in TLV they put checked luggage through a pressurisation check, in addition to all the scanning they do.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com