From what I have read, the recent terrorism bust in the UK is perhaps the biggest known terrorism bust this century. From my understanding, terrorists in the UK who had plans to blow up 10 planes going from the UK to the US were caught while doing a ‘dry run’ of the plan on Thursday, trying to see how exactly they would smuggle a peroxide based solution (one that could ignite when sparked by a flash or another electrical device) onto the plane. Now, I am not going to discuss the radical movement taking place in the world, nor am I going to discuss the growing threat of terrorism and its repercussions on the global community. These are discussions that need to be had over the course of time, in a mature and rational manner, free from anger and fear, that takes into account all sides, the ’gray area’, when it comes to religion, belief and humanity. Instead, I am going to discuss the effects that these acts have on airline passengers and then beg the question: is this all necessary?
According to a statement issued by the Department of Transport in the UK, from now until further notice passengers will only be allowed to carry the following items on board:
- Pocket sized wallets/purses
- Passport/ticket
- Prescription meds, except in liquid form unless authenticated (apparently the way you authenticate it is by taking some when you are clearing security)
- Glasses without cases
- Contact lenses w/o solution
- For those with babies, milk (that, once again, needs to be tasted), and enough sanitary items for the flight
- Keys, but no electrical fobs
And that’s it. Nothing else. You may ask, “But what about books?” Sorry, try again later. iPod? Nope. Laptop? Keep dreaming. You will not be allowed to carry anything except the above onto the plane, and that too, what you have you will have to carry in a clear plastic bag. You cannot carry anything in your pockets. Period.
Needless to say, this is causing some uproar amongst frequent UK travelers. All of a sudden you have to change the way you have flown for however long in order to comply with the new standards…which begs the question, is this really necessary? Are we really that much safer because I can’t carry my copy of The DaVinci Code onto to plane? Because my sister can’t listen to her iPod? While I understand the need to ensure the safety of the passengers is the first priority of any airline, and at present, with a terrorist attack still very much a possibility, the security upgrade in place is justified, should the airline regulators make this the ruling on all future travel instead of simply at present, what would happen?
I would expect to see a lot less travel through the UK. It would just be too much of a hassle, too much of an inconvenience. Lines would be long, security checks extensive, and for what? To allow society to once again feel that we are safe from harm? That terrorists can’t get us? Sure, rules like this might keep terroists out of planes, maybe, but if you really wanted to, you could spend time and devise ways to get around the system. And then what? Another thwarted terrorist attempt followed by more stringent security policies? Keep this up and sooner or later planes will each be equipped with our own little seat bubbles, flying naked, and having zero interaction with other passengers while getting fed through tubes…
Who benefits? And is the benefit really worth the hassle? In this world, one defined by opportunity cost, this option versus the next best, where is the line to be drawn in terms of airline security? Is some additional safety worth convenience?
Let me know what you guys think. I am interested in finding out if it is just me who would be quite pissed off if the current security measures became the norm…
Cheers,
Taps
Is this just the beginning?
