Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608131415030.30087 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:17:08 -0400 (EDT)
To: improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu
From: Daniel Reeves <dreeves &AElig umich.edu>
Subject: stupid feel-good "no liquids" rule
Status: O

My mom and I argued about this today.  I'm on a plane right now and here 
are my thoughts:

If you wanted to get a liquid on a plane you would just put it in a 
ziplock bag in a square container and that would pass through the x-ray 
without raising an eyebrow, or just leave bottles of stuff right in your 
pockets -- no alarms will go off as you stroll through the metal detector. 
Or print a fake prescription label (they have an exception for 
prescriptions).  These measures will foil the terrorists who are 
sophisticated enough to acquire liquid explosives but not sophisticated 
enough to get some liquid through security (something, incidentally, I 
just did without trying).  If you still think (this is directed at you, 
Mom) we've got to "at least try", how about this:  do brain scans of 
passengers and reject those who are thinking about blowing up a plane. 
Sure, we can't detect that in a brain scan and if we could terrorists 
could circumvent it by thinking about kittens, but my god, we've to to at 
least try!

Thus is my rant.  The TSA is stupid.

Danny

PS, seriously, any idiot can get liquids through security.  I'm a case in 
point.  Oh, and same goes for pocket-knives, to a lesser extent.


-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"

         "I'm on a seafood diet -- I see food and I eat it."