Oklahoma man held before boarding plane with bomb

[Unassisted]

Machines are great; but they can't subdue the suspect.

This one can.

[Johnny Footstool]

Gee! A Oklahoma man caught in his home state of Oklahoma, trying to board a plane with a bomb, and this proves that OVERALL profiling doesn't work?

No, it simply offers further proof that profiling *in and of itself* is ineffective. It offers further proof that *everyone* needs to be screened, not just people who look like they're from the Middle East.

Is it feasible to use such screeners at subway stations, such as NYC for example, where large amounts of people are going to and fro? If so - GREAT! Do it!

There's no question -- it has to be done. We need to make the money available and make it happen.

[registerthis]

There's no question -- it has to be done. We need to make the money available and make it happen.

Are you referring to baggae screening security lines, or simply random screeners who will check people?

Because one thing you will NOT see is baggage screening at public transportation stations. It is simply not feasible or practical in any way to expect to be able to screen, for example, the 200,000 people who pass through the Metro Center station in DC each day. You might see sensors, you might see police, you might see random bag screeners roaming around, but the implementation of anything remotely close to what exists at airports would cripple the public transportation system.

[Johnny Footstool]

You might see sensors, you might see police, you might see random bag screeners roaming around, but the implementation of anything remotely close to what exists at airports would cripple the public transportation system.

So would a bomb.

If this Oklahoma nutcase had decided to take a subway (luckily, they don't have subway stations in Oklahoma), he never would have been caught.

If we want the subways to be safe, we have to install security checkpoints. The other options are simply lip service.

[GAC]

This one can.

Alaways love your sense of humor Johnny!

[registerthis]

If we want the subways to be safe, we have to install security checkpoints. The other options are simply lip service.

Trust me, that is not going to happen.

And I don't think a bomb would cripple the system like security checkpoints would. You can have security systems in place that don't require everyone to go through a checkpoint, and they could be quite effective. I ride the subway every day here in DC, I don't even give it a thought. But I can't imagine what would happen if everyone had to go through a metal detector/baggage screening, or what that system might cost. Londond seems to be dealign very well with the aftermath of the bombings there, because they understand that it's simply not feasible or possible to prevent against every type of attack. Security measures must use a balance of common sense.

Otherwise, they would just make the entire plane out of whatever material is used to construct the "black box".

[GAC]

No, it simply offers further proof that profiling *in and of itself* is ineffective. It offers further proof that *everyone* needs to be screened, not just people who look like they're from the Middle East.

And I agree with you on this 100% Johnny. But does the technology exist that enables us to monitor our airports and other mass transit systems without causing massive delays and stoppages?

I wold love to see everyone screened, somehow via technology at the gate/entrance, before they even enter that main terminal/subway station.

My whole viewpoint was simply based on the practicality of the situation at hand, and what we already know concerning WHO is committing these terrorist assaults on mass transit/public areas around the world. And if the technology does not yet exist to catch someone using hidden explosives on their person, or in their carry-on, then the best means available to do so is by a personal search. And since you can't search everyone (implausible), you narrow the search by eliminating the less obvious and focusing on the obvious - basded on recent years/history.

There's no question -- it has to be done. We need to make the money available and make it happen.

Again I agree with you 100%.

[creek14]

I read a lot of *stuff* at work. To the point where I am almost immune to it all.

I read some stuff yesterday that made my palms sweat.

Just sayin.

[RBA]

Having everyone screen at a checkpoint before they enter the subway is not going to happen. In fact having people wait in line to get checked is a "target of opportunity" Why would a bomber even bother going by security and into the subway when they can cause even more deaths by attacking the checkpoint? This is what's happening in Iraq. Iraqis are waiting in line for jobs, food, gas, etc and they are being blown up.

[RedsBaron]

I read a lot of *stuff* at work. To the point where I am almost immune to it all.

I read some stuff yesterday that made my palms sweat.

Just sayin.

I think I wish you could share this "stuff" with us Creek, but maybe I don't. I probably sleep better not knowing.

[Johnny Footstool]

Having everyone screen at a checkpoint before they enter the subway is not going to happen.

OK, if security checkpoints aren't feasible for mass transit, that's fine. But beyond that, having a few more guards and hassling people with "random" searches will be a waste of money and time. We're basically considering our mass transit systems to be acceptable risks.

But if (God forbid) terrorists do hit one of our subways, you can bet there will be a huge public outcry blaming the government for not setting up security checkpoints.

[M2]

The dirty secret with subways is you can't secure them. If you put in security screens you've just made it so that no one will use the subway.

Since subway cars really can't be used as much of a weapon I think the sane response to possible underground terrorist attacks is to have the same minimal security we've always had in our mass public transit. There comes a point where you've got to jsut get on with life and not worry about every possible bad scenario that could befall you.

And I say this as a frequent subway/trolley rider.

Aside from that, what the hell's in the water in Oklahoma?

[registerthis]

OK, if security checkpoints aren't feasible for mass transit, that's fine. But beyond that, having a few more guards and hassling people with "random" searches will be a waste of money and time. We're basically considering our mass transit systems to be acceptable risks.

Pretty much, yes we are. As much as we are considering malls, theaters and other mass-gathering places to be acceptable risks as well.

But if (God forbid) terrorists do hit one of our subways, you can bet there will be a huge public outcry blaming the government for not setting up security checkpoints.

Honestly, I don't know what the public outcry will be.

My best guess is that the loudest outcry will come from people who live in municipalities that don't have a subway, and thus would be less likely to recognize the crippling effect that adding security checkpoints for all riders would have. And, as RBA posted, why wait until you're on the train to blow up your bomb, when you can take out a couple thousand people hung up at a security checkpoint?

Would a bomb going off on a subway be a terrible event? of course it would...if it happened in D.C. I'd probably be driving the next day. But all security actions must be tempered with a dose of reality and common sense. You can't prepare for every conceivable scenario, so put in place safeguards to prevent as much as you can, and be a dilligent as possible. It's an unfortunate reality we live in, to be sure.

[Johnny Footstool]

And, as RBA posted, why wait until you're on the train to blow up your bomb, when you can take out a couple thousand people hung up at a security checkpoint?

If they just wanted to kill people, they could do it any number of places. But their M/O hasn't been simply to kill people. They also want their attacks to do millions of dollars worth of damage and disrupt our daily lives.

I still don't see why they have security checkpoints at baseball and football games (thousands of people entering a site all at once) and not at train stations. Must be the luggage thing.

I don't live in a mass-transit town, so I have no idea about the volume of people using it. Would it really grind things to a halt, or would it just force people to get up 30-45 minutes earlier every morning?

[Roy Tucker]

We could be like the Israelis and put armed troops with Ouzis and live ammo on all public transporation. The Israelis don't screw around.