Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

CAMPOS: Jumping through hoops

By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published October 29, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

More stories »

A man I know has been doing a lot of flying lately while, among other things, conducting a more than normally problematic love affair. His agitated mental state has made him particularly prone to noticing and being annoyed by the absurdities of what has been labeled "security theater."

Security theater involves engaging in ritualistic measures that create a sense of improved security, while doing almost nothing to actually improve security. In the context of flying, security theater includes such idiocies as requiring passengers to remove their shoes and to not carry liquids aboard planes.

Both of these measures were put into place in the wake of ridiculously inept terrorist plots - the idea being, apparently, that no terrorist "threat," no matter how preposterous, is too silly to not be worth getting hysterical about.

But the most absurd aspect of airport security is the government's no-fly list. The no-fly list, which is supposed to stop terrorists from boarding planes, is at the center of the whole multibillion-dollar airport security rigmarole. Yet the procedures it employs are so transparently inadequate that it's hard to believe any process serious about improving security could have set up such a thing.

Here's how it works: Purchasers of airline tickets have the names they give checked against the government's no-fly list at the time they purchase the tickets. When they go to the airport, passengers are required to produce picture identification (usually a driver's license or a passport), and a boarding pass that matches the identification.

Yet the checkpoint procedure at the airport doesn't record the names of the people who are flying! In other words, there's absolutely nothing to stop someone on the no-fly list from purchasing a ticket using a fake name, then appearing at the airport with his real ID and a forged boarding pass that matches his real ID (anyone with a home computer and printer can forge an authentic-looking boarding pass easily enough). In other words, the on-site airport identity check does nothing except confirm that the name on a passenger's boarding pass is the same as that on his ID.

So, even assuming the names on the no-fly list represent a reasonably accurate record of people who are potential terrorist threats (and, given the list's track record to date, this is a very optimistic assumption), the whole security procedure can be circumvented so easily that the airport ID check is obviously a complete waste of time.

Yet every day, hundreds of thousands of travelers are forced to tolerate tedious delays, and uncounted millions of taxpayer dollars are lit on fire, while we all engage in a ritual that is less rational than a Balinese tree exorcism, and considerably more expensive.

Watching the docile lines of travelers patiently tolerating all this pointless and costly nonsense makes one feel less than optimistic about our culture's ability to resist authoritarian promises of "safety" and "order" should we face a real crisis, rather than the largely fake crisis posed by the existence of international terrorism.

Indeed, if I were a American-hating terrorist or terrorist sympathizer, I would get an enormous sense of satisfaction from the mere sight of the irrational hoops a single successful terrorist incident can get the American government to build, and even more so from how readily the American people seem ready to jump through them.

It's true security theater has its social uses, in that it can provide psychological benefits that may even, in theory, justify its costs. For instance, when dealing with a threat that's extraordinarily small but difficult to eliminate entirely, such as terrorist hijackings, something like the no-fly list can be analogized to nailing garlic to one's door to keep away vampires (another safety protocol that almost invariably "works").

But on the whole it would be better if people weren't afraid of vampires.

Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado. He can be reached at paul.campos@colorado.edu.

Comments

  • October 29, 2008

    5:15 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    corneille1640 writes:

    I agree with most of Mr. Campos's articles, but I demur on this point: "Watching the docile lines of travelers patiently tolerating all this pointless and costly nonsense makes one feel less than optimistic about our culture's ability to resist authoritarian promises of "safety" and "order""

    Is an airline passenger supposed to harangue an airport/TSA employee who is just doing their job? When I fly, I "patiently" and docilely tolerate some of the absurd security measures not because I am apt to submit to authoritarianism, but because I want to pick my battles and because those employees don't make the policy that is so ludicrous and annoying.

  • October 29, 2008

    6:25 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    blacksho89 writes:

    Where did Campos say that you should harangue the TSA actors? He was referring to our legislative branch of government that has implemented this absurd ritual.

  • October 29, 2008

    6:38 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    VVVV writes:

    Here's how it works. Release information pertaining to vague terror threats. Randomly raise and lower the defcon color. Put in place various requirements to get a good laugh at the public's expense. In all, foster an atmosphere of fear and suspicion.

    Why?

    How else would you secure a blank check to wage war anywhere you pleased?

  • October 29, 2008

    9:17 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    AngelontheSidelines writes:

    If 'they' hate us for our freedoms, and our freedom is destroyed for security, then mission accomplished.

    How stupid must we become to trade liberty for safety? Apparently, we deserve neither.

  • October 29, 2008

    9:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    RegLib writes:

    Great article. I fly for my business pretty much every week, and the illogic of the security procedures leaves me with gritted teeth as I head for the gates. You put your finger on two of my biggest peeves: The obsession with shoes and liquids. In both cases the "perpetrators" were completely incompetent and stood no chance of success. Yet our equally incompetent administration took two failed terrorist plots and turned them into thumping victories. The disruptions and lost time caused by the shoe and liquid checks (no to mention the incredibly silly clear plastic bag rule) surely has our enemies celebrating.

  • October 29, 2008

    10:58 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Ted_in_Vegas writes:

    Yep, these "fixed defenses" of the TSA reminds me a Patton quote, which I'll attempt to share accurately: "Fixed defenses are a testament to the stupidity of mankind; better to be on the offensive."

    Which makes me wonder; if Campos is against the clearly faulty fixed defenses of the TSA, why is he against carrying the fight to the enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan?

  • October 29, 2008

    11:34 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jay writes:

    because the "enemy" had nothing to do with iraq, ted.

    jebus, man, we've gone over these myths so many times you must have some kind of short term memory issue for still spouting them here.

  • October 29, 2008

    5:20 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    The_Punnisher writes:

    corneille1640, your attitude is what the GERMAN citizen had up until the Allies liberated the camps. The SS were just " protecting " their freedoms too.

    The officers of the SS claimed the same justification too.

    It didn't work to say " I vas chust following orders ", they got HUNG anyway...

    So a comparison of the TSA goons ( Look up goon ) and the SS or Abwehr is valid...

    And Ben Franklin's statment turns out to be true....

    We deserve NEITHER

  • October 29, 2008

    8:05 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike846 writes:

    Of course, what we SHOULD be doing is racial profiling as opposed to patting down and wanding 78-year old caucasian grandmothers who walk like they're mired in mud. A couple of years ago I flew into and out of Paris, France. When you go to check in for your homebound flight, you are searched, yes, and you are questioned, and by someone who is watching your every eye movement and answer. But if you look even remotely Arabic and are under 40, you go to a whole different line where the seaching and questioning is quite different than in the other lines. I'm told by Jewish friends that its even stiffer and more thorough in Israel's airports. I think they may have something there....Mike

  • November 4, 2008

    8:09 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rjnova writes:

    Yes Campos agencies like TSA, EPA, IRS, HLS, etc that are established with an open agenda develop a Gestapo mentality because no decent citizens become like cattle going to slaughter in their presence. Some kind of a citizen revolt must take place but we are so unorganized I do not see much relief. If Campos’ leftist buddy Obama and the leftist Democrats take over we will see how much more difficult life can be under his confiscatory redistribution of wealth, which will totally send this economy down the drain. The current financial crisis is the result of Democrats in Congress taking the idea of everyone owning a home to the extreme which has led us to this economic meltdown.

    So it surprises me that Campos complains about the airport security stupidity. It is insane because liberals were so insistent that racial profiling not be allowed now 100% of us are hassled to screen for 1% of the flyers. None of whom have been collared in an airport. But we are all treated equal. Israel has never had a hijacking because they profile and screen for Middle Eastern looking men and women. There were no Caucasians in the 9/11 crazies so why does TSA hassle 80 year old White grandmas? It is the absurdity of govt bureaucracy working to expand the bureau instead of using common sense. Sort of what you get in Campos’ law classes that all should work for the govt or universities.

  • December 1, 2008

    11:26 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    epaminondas writes:

    Standing ovation. Great article. Loved every word of it.