

Knives in airport cabins? No thanks - anigbrowl
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324240804578417042988685564.html?mod=hp_opinion

======
crazygringo
So, I see certain groups (union of airline attendants) opposing knives in
cabins.

It sounds reasonable enough for their safety... until I consider the fact that
_anyone can have a knife, virtually anywhere, already_. On the bus. On the
train. On the subway. In a bar.

Yet in none of those places is anyone contemplating removing them. So now that
the cabin door is reinforced, what's so special about planes that you
shouldn't be allowed to carry a swiss army knife? I just don't see the logic.

~~~
anigbrowl
Reinforced doesn't mean impregnable, for one thing. For another, on the ground
people can flee. On a plane you could still have a bad hostage situation even
if the cockpit is not taken over, because there's nowhere people can go while
it's in the air.

~~~
martey
" _Reinforced doesn't mean impregnable, for one thing._ "

The reinforced cockpit doors are meant to be safe from being penetrated by
small arms fire and fragmentation grenades. [1] I doubt knives of the size
that the TSA plans to allow would be more dangerous.

" _on the ground people can flee. On a plane you could still have a bad
hostage situation even if the cockpit is not taken over_ "

You could have a similarly bad hostage situation on a bus, on a train, or in
the subway.

[1]
[http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId...](http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=5470)

~~~
anigbrowl
_The reinforced cockpit doors are meant to be safe from being penetrated by
small arms fire and fragmentation grenades. [1] I doubt knives of the size
that the TSA plans to allow would be more dangerous._

It's harder to get through a reinforced door in a hurry, but I can think of
plenty ways of either getting through it more slowly, or of making the cockpit
unpleasant to be in without breaching it - lighting a fire outside it, for
example. At the least this would necessitate a dangerous emergency landing.

 _You could have a similarly bad hostage situation on a bus, on a train, or in
the subway._

No, you couldn't. Those are all bad hostage situations, but the difference is
that if you manage to escape the confined space then you'll probably be able
to run away, whereas on an airborne plane there's no where you can run away to
because you're thousands of feet from the ground.

Ignoring this rather obvious difference seems obtuse.

~~~
martey
" _It's harder to get through a reinforced door in a hurry, but I can think of
plenty ways of either getting through it more slowly, or of making the cockpit
unpleasant to be in without breaching it - lighting a fire outside it, for
example._ "

I can think of a number of ways as well, but most of them do not involve the
type of knives that will be allowed.

" _the difference is that if you manage to escape the confined space then
you'll probably be able to run away_ "

You specifically used the words "hostage situation", which implies an
inability to escape.

" _Ignoring this rather obvious difference seems obtuse._ "

HN guidelines aside (I do not think it is civil to call someone obtuse), the
original article you submitted states that the TSA does not think that small
knives are sufficient to let people with bad intentions crash airplanes. I do
not think that the situations you have mentioned (slowly breaching a cockpit
door or a hostage situation in the cabin) call this into question.

------
anigbrowl
I'm personally in favor of the TSA relaxing the rules, just as a lot of people
here are opposed to any sort of rules. However a) I thought it would be
intersting for people to engage with the reasons why some _son't_ want to see
those rules changed - for flight attendants, after all, the low risk -per-
flight is multiplied by the very high number of flights they are on; and also
to reflect that people opposing the rule change are organized whereas people
supporting rule changes are not, and have so far greeted the proposed rules
changes with total indifference.

So if the TSA decides to leave the current rules in place and continues to
prevent passengers from carrying on anything larger than a paperclip, it might
be because people who want change have failed to advocate for it. I'm
surprised, for example, that Bruce Schneier has had nothing whatsoever to say
on the the subject.

BTW I am not one to recommend the WSJ comment pages, but you can see further
examples there of why many people prefer to trade freedom/dignity/convenience
for security.

------
lotu
He, as a 9/11 family member, makes a persuasive emotional argument. However,
he is unaware of, or ignores, a special type of blindness people develop when
doing repetitive tasks like searching baggage. People will only see the
common, ignoring the uncommon all together. An example of this is the gorilla
and basketball experiment. TSA emploies have a similar problem they will only
see the common things they need to confiscate, small knives and water bottles,
but miss the rare and dangerous stuff, guns or bombs. They have done studies
where they send a bag though airport screening with a bomb and a water bottle
in it, and what happens frequently is the TSA will find and confiscate the
water bottle but miss the bomb. This is not a fault of the TSA being
incompetent it is because the TSA emploies humans. By allowing small knives
through not only does it make passengers happier it makes it so that the TSA
is not distracted from real dangers.

------
nickzoic
Read the actual rules in the graphic in the article. The "knives" they are
talking about are the tiniest little scrapers, first class cutlery would be
more dangerous.

For example, the Leatherman Wave is too long (by 7mm) too broad (by 1mm) and
locking in any case. That was in my toolkit in my cabin baggage all the time
back in the 90s.

~~~
jff
When I heard about this rule change, I checked all my knives. Out of the 6
non-kitchen knives I have, not a single one of them is short enough to go on
the plane. Disappointing. Even my little Buck folder, the best little utility
knife, is too long.

~~~
anigbrowl
That's all fine and I agree, but the reason I posted this is to point out that
the opponents of change are better organized than the advocates of it.

