threat of a bomb in a fake tablet

[murphey]

As noted in my posts above, I'm not aware of any data showing that the TSA has a deterrent effect. The rate of terrorist attacks did not demonstrably decrease after the TSA was implemented.

It is rather easy to imagine ways to implement terrorist attacks even with TSA policies in place (even when one is not too serious about it), so no reason to think on a causal basis that TSA mass screenings work.

Finally, they catch only 4% of banned items with these mass screenings, so no reason to think that will deter serious terrorists.

It is quite logically possible for there to be a extremely low rate of such attacks AND for the TSA to be doing their screenings AND for there to be no causal relationship between these two facts.

But I'm a scientist, so if these is some other data demonstrating the effectiveness of TSA mass screenings, I'd love to see it.
Please post.

You will NEVER see any factual, valid data regarding deterrent or anything else unless you are actively employed in that arena. Period. End of discussion. I love watching/reading these arguments because that's all they are.

Unless you have the data, and anyone who does have the valid data, is forbidden to release or discuss in public. This is not a nanny state issue, it's the job of anyone in the Federal gov, or contractor, that swore to uphold the US Constitution (which many of our congresscritters forget, but that's another discussion for another time).

I agree that the money is obscene and could be used for other things, but this is the new reality. The mideast/european crisis is intertwined with this. Don't attack immigration, solve the problem causing the immigration and you solve a huge portion of the problems TSA/DHS is chartered to deal with. TSA is dealing with a symptom, not the cause.

There are times I feel like I'm channeling Henning.

 

[murphey]

But I don't think you can compare terrorism in 1964 to 2017.

Very true. Prior to 2001, most hijacks were for money or publicity. Read Jeff Price's book ( can't remember the name, will post it later, Jeff's an expert consultant in these matters).

 

[JOhnH]

Questions remain about why the UK implemented a smaller ban than the US, and why other western countries banned nothing at all, according to the story.

It depends on your perception of threat. I have no alarm system, and I often forget to lock my doors when I leave the house.

My brother lives in a different neighborhood where the perception of threat (borne out by statistics) is much greater. He has multiple deadbolts that he keeps secured even when he is home. He has an alarm system with a wireless connectivity and a UPS system in case a burglar cuts power. And he has three handguns strategically located around his house where he may need them in an emergency.

And with all that, I feel safer than he does. Why is that?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

You will NEVER see any factual, valid data regarding deterrent or anything else unless you are actively employed in that arena.

I believe that even when classified Senate oversight committees have asked to see the proof these things work, there has been nothing.

There is no reason a court could not order a review in camera or some other independent agency could review and report.

I think the notion that we have secret government agencies running around violating people's privacy and spending large amounts of money secretly and we should all just put up with it is really dangerous.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

I agree that the money is obscene and could be used for other things, but this is the new reality. .

Of course some facts are public knowledge, like the number of attacks before and after 2001 as well as the failure rates of the TSA in catching contraband. Those argue fairly strongly that TSA mass screenings don't prevent terrorist attacks.

Given those facts, as well as the costs of the TSA, I think it rather reasonable for citizens to ask that the TSA produce proof of effectiveness, by a classified independent review if needed, or be replaced by a privatized system.