(no subject)

[lithera]

I have a question for all fo you.

We used to have people called "sky marshals" on planes before we installed metal detectors and such in airports. They were armed US Marshals who rode on airplanes to make things safer and to make people feel secure.

I've heard rumors of them thinking to re-institute them.

What do you think - good idea, bad idea and why?

Comments

Good idea

[turbolemur.livejournal.com]

In the short term, at least. Until a more complex electronic security system can be developed and implemented.

The only other immediate alternative to an armed sercurity force in airports, and onboard the aircraft themselves, would be to keep the planes grounded for the long haul until they think of something else. Which would be catastrophic; not just economically, but to the country's morale, as well.

Just my opinion, of course...

Great idea

[fireballof3.livejournal.com]

I think too much faith has been put into electronics. The people who hijacked the planes didn't use guns, or bombs, or much beyond the stuff that was ALLOWED to be taken on an aircraft - small knives and (possibly) mace. In the end, I think we need a little more of a human element in our saftey and anti-terrorist response.

Hell, look at europe. When there's a terrorist threat, they'll do thorough searches of trains, planes, subways, etc to make sure there aren't bombs being brought through. Also, there are ARMED (with automatic weapons, no less, and in body armor usually) security at any major travel point (train station & airports) to ensure safety.

I can only imagine how many threats have been averted by Europe's agressive anti-terrorist stance.

Like I said, I think reinstituting the air marshals would be a great idea.

[rfjason.livejournal.com]

Sky Marshals are a good idea, always.

But, we should reinforce the notion of the PEOPLE behind the electronics need to work hard, and be paid better.

Many X-Ray technicians at airports earn less than their McDonald's counterparts. LESS. What's the motivation to do a good job when there hasn't been a hijacking in 10 years here? None.

Granted, these were simple knives. But, standard procedure is to search carry-on luggage, take ANYTHING that looks like a weapon and move it to standard holding for luggage. The devices are then returned to the owners after the flight. Very simple. But, we don't do that because it's too cumbersome of a task when you're trying to move as many people as you can through the system.

Oh well. Lot of good it does now.

[arctures.livejournal.com]

I'm all for it.

I was told that Israel has a similar program - armed guards on all flights - that was instituted some ten years ago, and there hasn't been a single hijacking since.

Hell yeah.

[julzerator.livejournal.com]

I think it is a great idea to institute them.

When you realize that they just used things like knives and mace to hi-jack the plane, well, that sucks.

I fly.. a lot... and it sure would make me feel safer. Although if you even sprayed mace across a big school, I would get terribly sick. I am allergic to it. If I was on one of those planes, I wouldn't have been able to do anything other than die.

[crispengray.livejournal.com]

It would probably also help the smaller, but more wide-spread, problem of air rage.

It's not a bad idea at all, really. I used to fly a lot, and I hope to do more flying later in life, and I have NO problem with a trained armed guard on a plane.