This question comes from the boss: What is my take on the controversial airport security rules?
Plain and simply, while I understand the need to screen for potential terror attacks at peak flight times such as Thanksgiving and Christmas, I think that this is overkill. I also have to question just how much of a deterrence this peep and grope show will have on deterring terrorist acts. Granted, no security measure will be 100% effective, but I'm not asking for perfection here.
My question is: Just how much of a deterrence are these new security measures? Do they cut down on the possibility of a terrorist attack by 50%? 25%? 10%? 1%? If the drop in the possibility of a terrorist attack is 50%, then there MIGHT be a justification in these invasive security procedures, but how do you quantify something like the effectiveness of airport searching procedures in regards to reducing the possibility of a terrorist attack?
But not only are these procedures invasive and intrusive (not to mention what those scanning rays might be doing to your body. Despite assurances from the government - or perhaps because of them! LOL - I have nagging doubts of the low health risk of repeated exposure to those scanning rays), to me it's also a sign that we are allowing ourselves to live in fear, and when we allow ourselves to give into our fears, then in this instance, to quote an often-used phrase, "the terrorists win".
No, there has to be a better way than this. I don't know what that is, but this peek-and-grope system is not it.