Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

Have you ever been in line in a long TSA queue at a major airport? See anybody get scanned before getting in that line? With a coordinated attack across multiple airports, you could kill far more people just while they're standing in line to get their TSA gaterape procedure performed than you could by attacking while onboard an aircraft.

The aircraft attack vector has already been played out. Lets keep sane regulations in place (metal detectors, armored/locked cockpit doors), and move on to better problems to solve.

View on HN

Terrorists have indeed already done this at Domodedevo airport in Moscow, Russia. By creating giant lines of people at security checkpoint (along with a scattering of federal employees), the TSA has created the perfect target.

Does it matter if you consider employing several vans running into the airport during holiday rush hours?

If dangerous is present at any moment in time, what do we do? How can we reduce searchable threats? Can we do a scan on entrance to and exit from airport lobby?

We live our lives. Danger will always be present. I could be hit by a car crossing the street from my office to the parking lot. I could be shot in the grocery store near my house.

Sometimes, there is nothing more that you can do. Accept the risk and move on.

Sure anyone could be hit by a car tomorrow. But why do we even bother to have education and laws? Why police officers and firefighters? Why EMT and doctors? Why don't we just let everyone die if there is nothing more that we could do?

If there is only a 40% of a chance that a driver given a ticket will drive safer, then there is a 40% more likely for any individual to survive while crossing the street so we continue to issue traffic ticket.

If kids are 40% more likely to avoid smoking by educating them, we will do it.

If there is a 40% chance you will be saved from a gun shot tomorrow because of more effective, stricter gun control, you probably would support it.

If there is a 10% chance a solider will live after a brain injury, the EMT and doctors will attempt to save his life.

If we all say "well let's fuck it because we will all die", why do we even bother to save life? Why EMT? Just fuck the injuries and let them die. That's your logic. That's the logic we get: survival of fitness.

So, let's accept out ultimate risk that we will all die and let's move on and forget about safety. Just because we can't have a 100% success rate.

While the TSA cargo and individual inspection is not very effective, it makes an attack with bomb a few percents harder. It might open up other avenues (e.g. massive shooting at the waiting line) but we can't lose a few percents because tomorrow when shit happens, and when your loved one is dead, you'd be joining the army and shoot those mother fucker out. And then you will come out and say "I wish I had those stupid TSA did their job".

If we moved every man, woman, and child on Earth to the Moon, there's at least a 40% chance they would survive a catastrophic meteor strike to the Earth.

That doesn't make it a good idea.

There's always a cost and in this case (TSA or moving to the Moon) it's a ridiculously high one to pay for marginal protection against an unlikely event.

So, in the case of TSA, convenience outweigh than 1% of safety because of 40% of increase in both convenience and pleasant experience.

The conclusion that an attack is unlikely to happen is based on what? Can we do a fair experiment to show what would the probability be like if we never implemented this TSA inspection vs after implementing this TSA inspection?

Should we conduct such experiment and watch an alert (or wait until another plan gets hijacked)?

Okay. I need a new solution. What is the solution? I don't need a "we will die let's move on solution" because this is not a solution. If this is were a solution, we don't need law enforcement.

Bingo. The fact that there isn't a viable threat is demonstrated (ok, not proven) by the fact that a large number of completely undefended obvious attack vectors pursuant to terrorist goals have not been abused over a very long time.

At some point the damage by TSA surpassed the expected damage from the alleged threat.

It's a less effective tactic, though. More people are terrified by the thought of being blown out of the sky than they are of being blown out of a long, boring line.

Airline terrorism plays against people's innate fears, and is therefore more effective.

you could kill the most just by mass shooting in a shopping mall, who needs an airport line.

yet we caught at least two people trying to blow up airplanes in the last ten years (shoe bomber and underwear bomber), why is that? why don't they just shoot up a grade school or a supermarket? (I'm asking honestly here. why airplanes?)

Because airplanes are so highly leverageable from a single act into overreactionary freedom-stifling societal damage. One shoe bomber and now billions of traveler-hours are wasted shoeless at the checkpoints. Airplanes have so many eyes on them and every involved entity must overreact to prove We Are Doing Something.

Grade schools wouldn't have the same impact because the control is more localized. There's no federal Education Security Administration imposing gropefests everywhere in response to Newtown. Some schools and places will overreact, but a small proportion.

Or drive several vans with just gas and rush into the airport during holiday. You don't even need a bomb. Just leak the gas and light a match and boom.

I think you have made a good point that others are ignoring. Surely TSA scan is not very effective, but what the heck else do we do?

* intel is too powerful, stupid PRISM is hurting everyone's privacy

* TSA is destroying privacy

* I don't know what else to do

What else do we do? I am constantly afraid of someone hijacking my flight.

This is something I've wondered at: shopping malls/big box retailers on Black Friday are perfect targets for terrorists. The economic damage you could do to the US for comparatively little investment is pretty high if properly timed. And you'd inculcate significant fear of public spaces for years to come.

It's not as cinematic as 9/11, but if you're looking to hurt the US, it's a pretty good choice.

One thing I find terrorists pretty stupid is that they can literally do anything any average individual could do to harm hundreds of people but they choose to organize in the hardest fashion. I just don't understand their stupid mind!

Glad I don't - otherwise I would be a terrorist :( HOLY SHIT

"Have you ever been in line in a long TSA queue at a major airport? See anybody get scanned before getting in that line?"

Let's not give them any ideas...

I think we're well passed giving them ideas; there's a FPS mission designed around the concept of the attack:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Call_...

Too late. The Boston Marathon bombings should have made large crowds at airport security checks a critical priority to get rid of. But noooo.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com