Chase, John wrote:
I'd aver that the mere fact of the hyper-hysterical over-reaction in the name of "security" is the terrorists' "victory".
It's unlikely the UK would ban carry-on electronic devices if there wasn't a credible threat of an active plan to use just such a device to trigger a bomb, probably stowed in the luggage compartment, on board an aircraft.
Such decisions are not made lightly. Many smart people are involved in the decision-making process and their job is unenviable. They must choose between bad and worse. [It's exceedingly difficult to protect the public against those that believe they'll be judged heroes by their God, and rewarded handsomely in the after-life, if they kill themselves while killing you.]
These air-travel inconveniences may be deemed unreasonable by some people suffering through them. But, if the terrorists succeed in perpetrating mass murder, they'll be among the first to complain that not enough was done.
Personally, I would like to see dampening fields used on airplanes (and in restaurants, movie theaters, etc.) that would render cell-phones and other similar transmitter/receivers completely inoperative. (That way, you could carry your personal electronics anywhere and still be able to enjoy dinner in a restaurant without having to listen to the person at the table next to you fighting with their boy/girlfriend over the phone.) The technology to do this exists. The challenge on an airplane is to implement it in a way that won't interfere with the aircraft's navigation and communications systems.
-- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
