Someday, maybe we’ll even get metal silverware again.

And on the other side of the homeland security front:

I wrote back in August about how the Transportation Security Agency was considering lifting the ban on things like scissors and razor blades on airplanes. It looks like that plan, or at least a version of it, is poised to actually put it through, as part of a larger emphasis on preventing explosive materials rather than sharp objects. Some interesting info in that article, especially the revelation that screeners right now spend half of their time looking for cigarette lighters. I’ll repeat that for you. Half of their time looking for cigarette lighters. THANK HEAVENS THEY’RE PROTECTING US FROM THOSE DANGEROUS CIGARETTE LIGHTERS! WHAT A GOOD USE OF THEIR TIME!

Obviously, I support this. Security right now is utterly absurd, focusing on visibility rather than effectivity. Any step toward treating travellers like citizens rather than suspects is a step in the right direction. An Australian minister pointed out earlier this month the pointlessness of current security measures (article and Bruce Schnier’s blog post about it):

In a wide-ranging speech to Adelaide Rotarians, Senator Vanstone dismissed many commonwealth security measures as essentially ineffective. “To be tactful about these things, a lot of what we do is to make people feel better as opposed to actually achieve an outcome,” Senator Vanstone said.

She actually goes on to make some very graphic and accurate observations, ones that very few people have been willing to publicly voice in recent years, so you should definitely check those links out.

Anyway, the opposition to this as quoted in the article comes off as pretty ridiculous:

Charles Slepian, an aviation security consultant based in New York, said the TSA’s proposed changes fail to take into account the safety of passengers and cabin crew. “Whenever you are serving alcohol, you have a double duty to those who are present to protect them from someone who goes off the deep end,” Slepian said.

And that, folks, is why we ban scissors in bars and restaurants.

“TSA needs to take a moment to reflect on why they were created in the first place — after the world had seen how ordinary household items could create such devastation,” said Corey Caldwell, spokeswoman for the Association of Flight Attendants, which has more than 46,000 members. “When weapons are allowed back on board an aircraft, the pilots will be able to land the plane safety but the aisles will be running with blood.”

Clearly the reasonable reaction to this is to ban “ordinary household items” from travel. After all, “ordinary” is just a step away from… “lethal.” And if you missed it, she used the phrase “aisles will be running with blood.” You know, like they did every day prior to the hyperbolic overreaction that followed 9/11.

Man, that kind of fear-mongering is my least favorite rhetorical tactic. We’ve seen more than our share of it in this century, and it’s just dispicable. It’s the last desperate talking point for every advocate of draconian security measures that do more to terrify regular people than they do to protect them. Emotion has its place in public policy debate, but it shouldn’t be the only consideration. Things like effectivity, practicality, and logic ought to have their day, too. This proposal’s enactment would be a good start.

Sidenote: I don’t know about you, but I’m about ready to be allowed to leave my cellphone on and use my mp3 player on takeoff and landing. These and other in-flight prohibitions are baseless and irritating and making flight attendants enforce them is a complete waste of time.