top | item 44500500

(no title)

yincrash | 7 months ago

With no explanation on the change, I will have to assume that taking off our shoes never made us any safer.

discuss

order

gryfft|7 months ago

The policy began as a direct response to the Richard Reid shoe bombing attempt in December 2001 [1]. This was as America was still reeling from 9/11, and full body scanners weren't standard at airports yet. Now they are, and they've improved explosive detectors too [2].

It indeed seems like it was always something of an overreaction, but an understandable one that's now fully overlapped by superior modern scanning.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_63_(2...

2. https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/news/2022/10/06/f...

Edit: whoa, groupthink.

os2warpman|7 months ago

>Edit: whoa, groupthink.

Every time an article about airport security is posted the comments are the same.

To prove that I'm sane and my memory has not been corrupted by time or cosmic rays I google "airline hijackings by year", I look at the graphs in google images, and I briefly wonder what happened in early 1970s and 2000s before remembering what happened in early 1970s and 2000s.

Then I murmur "that's some fantastically effective theater".

privatelypublic|7 months ago

Also, this is from memory, but 'cotton wipe' tests for the compounds used didn't exist for several more years and a few more incidents.

xnyan|7 months ago

Until 2017, The DHS Inspector General’s office found that 90% – 95% of dangerous items get through screening checkpoints in testing.

What changed in 2017? They stopped publishing the results of the testing.

jfengel|7 months ago

I don't doubt that the screenings are security theater, but it is impossible to know whether anybody was scared off from even trying. A 10% or even 5% chance of getting caught is deeply concerning. It risks not just you, but everybody else in the plot.

It could well be zero: the turrurists aren't dumb and they also know it's security theater. But I have to admit that I genuinely do not (and cannot) know.

Liquix|7 months ago

IIRC the modern "raise your arms" scanners had not been rolled out in 2006 when the shoe policy was instituted. perhaps the TSA has realized there's no point in making people take off their shoes when explosives/contraband within are easily picked up by the new scanners.

greyface-|7 months ago

The article implies that passengers who opt out of the "raise your arms" millimeter wave scanner and go through the magnetometer instead will not have to take their shoes off unless the magnetometer alarms:

> Passengers who trigger the alarm at the scanners or magnetometers, however, will be required to take their shoes off for additional screening, according to the memo.

tw04|7 months ago

Let me start by saying I'm no fan of the TSA having been traveling for business for 20 years. But we do know exactly why it was originally enacted. Which is that someone tried to hide a bomb in the base of their shoe to blow up a flight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid

While we don't know why they've stopped, it could be any number of things: from they have other ways of detecting explosives that don't require your shoes going through a scanner, to they just don't think it's an issue anymore.

While a lot of what TSA does appears to be security theater, saying "it never made any of us safer" is a claim you have no way of backing up.

Analemma_|7 months ago

The problem with this theory is that plenty of times (not just for PreCheck flyers), they arbitrarily decide you don't need to take your shoes off. It's not a technology thing, because they change it back and forth at the same gate at the same airport-- I fly enough to know. And whatever they've changed it to, they bark at you for not knowing, as though you could've known about whatever RNG generates TSA policy this week.

It's a power play, nothing more.

chrismcb|7 months ago

The claim is the old machines had issues with detecting and on the ground. First time I went through Heathrow after the incident. You had to take your shoes off and went to a separate machine. The shoes were scanned then you walked back... Plenty of time to put something back on the shoe.

Jubijub|7 months ago

Case in point : fly from EU to US, no shoes off. Same planes, flying over the same cities.

mc32|7 months ago

It’s always risk/reward. The risk isn’t only physical; it can also be intangible. For now at least, it looks like they’ve reassessed and decided it’s not worth the inconvenience.

haiku2077|7 months ago

It's due to new technology: https://youtu.be/nyG8XAmtYeQ

laborcontract|7 months ago

There is not a single thing in this video that addresses shoes. I want my time back.

video tldr: 3d x-rays have made bag scanners more effective at screening

red-iron-pine|7 months ago

and that it took 20+ years to prove that.

dataflow|7 months ago

That seems like a childish and unreasonable assumption. In addition to the technology changes everyone mentioned, it could also have to do with other factors, like the actual threats the country faces, or the relative weight the powers-that-be place on the different sides of each tradeoff. It's not like this is a controlled experiment where every other factor is held constant.