US To Ban Laptops in All Cabins of Flights From Europe (thedailybeast.com)

An anonymous reader shares an article: The Department of Homeland Security will ban laptops in the cabins of all flights from Europe to the United States, European security officials told The Daily Beast. An official announcement is expected Thursday. Initially a ban on laptops and tablets was applied only to U.S.-bound flights from 10 airports in North Africa and the Middle East. The ban was based on U.S. fears that terrorists have found a way to convert laptops into bombs capable of bringing down an airplane. It is unclear if the European ban will also apply to tablets. DHS said in a statement to The Daily Beast: "No final decisions have been made on expanding the restriction on large electronic devices in aircraft cabins; however, it is under consideration. DHS continues to evaluate the threat environment and will make changes when necessary to keep air travelers safe."

Comments

More reasons never to fly

[Austerity Empowers]

There are plenty of reasons not to fly, this is the second best one yet (being beaten by the airline for a ticket you paid good money for is #1, not sure how that will be topped).

Re:More reasons never to fly

[blackest_k]

An obvious stimulus for the american coal industry, what better than steam ships burning coal.

 

How much longer until...

[mishehu]

We're all made to board nude and chained to our seats and made to row across the ocean? As it is, I'm just waiting for them to announce "credible" evidence that ISIS has converted baby formula into a bomb capable of bringing down an airliner...

God Emperor of Dune

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

"Have you not considered how much easier it is to control a walking population?"

Really?

[Areyoukiddingme]

Is DHS really this easy to manipulate? And are they really this stupid? If a laptop shell packed with explosives is enough to "bring down an airplane" (and with the right explosive, it certainly is)(but it would have to be packed with explosive, in which case what's all that swabbing and x-raying of passengers for if it couldn't detect that modification?), how does having it in the cargo hold help? It still makes a giant hole in the fuselage and down goes the plane.

I guess my real question is, are people stupid enough to be convinced by this security theater? And then I realize P.T. Barnum was right: you can't go broke overestimating people's stupidity.

Re: Really?

[Matt.Battey]

I think you're right about being scared children and seeing the maximum threat.

But, I think you give them too much credit. The only threat they are scared of is being voted out of office. No one ever got voted out of office for protecting someone's safety, but the first time you pass legislation that protects liberty, and some one gets a skinned knee, well the you're outa there buddy.

Even the personal liberty screamers in Congress never get any bills passed to ensure privacy and liberty. To much chagrin, it takes an action by a judge appointed for life (personal survival always trumps the greater good).

Re:Really?

[Gr8Apes]

The theory is that if you press the laptop up against the fuselage in the passenger cabin, you can bust a big enough hole to bring the airplane down; if it's in the hold, there's no opportunity to do that.

So you're stating that all that scanning, "nude" photographing and feeling up crap that makes you arrive at the airport 2 hours early is completely ineffective?

Re:Really?

[Vadim Makarov]

Could you please include a reference to a public source of this information?

Re:Really?

[wvmarle]

A sadder part of this security theatre: a few weeks ago when boarding a flight from Taiwan my father had to hand in the scissors of his first aid kit, which happened to be in his hand luggage. Short (about 5 cm blades) with round tips. Apparently a dangerous weapon.

It was sad to see how many much more dangerous weapons were sold after security.

First I noticed make-up kits, with glass mirrors. Makes for nice sharp shards.

Second chopsticks. Combined with a piece of sandpaper like those paper nail buffing boards it can make for a nice piercing weapon.

Then I realised they also sell big glass bottles, usually with some alcoholic substances in it. Break the bottom off of them, and they become pretty nasty weapons - popular in bar fights as well.

And finally we got nice metal cutlery on the flights. Even those knives (and the pointy forks!) looked more dangerous to me than those scissors. Or a bottle of water, for that matter.

I'm sure there are a lot more of these "innocent" items for sale, that can be turned into weapons in the blink of an eye. I just haven't thought about it really, I just looked around a bit while wondering why he had to hand in those scissors. A dedicated criminal would for sure be able to find many other options.

So why again aren't we allowed to bring small scissors? Security theatre optima forma!

Security theater

[qbast]

Why do I put my whole carry-on baggage including a laptop through x-ray anyway?

Re:Could be more sinister

[qbast]

It is not uncommon for TSA agents to help themselves to valuables from checked luggage.

Re:Sigh. As a US academic this is terrible

[Hizonner]

Move the conferences. The US is no longer a viable venue.

Actually, many business travelers will like this

[Solandri]

Back in the day, flying was one of the few times the traveling businessman got to him(her)self. No computer to work on, no phone calls to make or receive. Then came laptops making it possible to do work on the plane, then in-flight phone calls, and now wireless Internet on flights.

Banning laptops would mean that the business traveler once again legitimately can't get any work done while flying, and has a good reason not to be reachable for the 8-10 hours of the flight (no computer = no real reason to pay for in-flight wifi). Nothing to do but take some time off work, kick back, relax, and catch a movie or two.

Re:Comes with Safety Risks

[Anne Thwacks]

The last time someone put explosives in his shoe and try to light it on fire was in 2001. I don't recall a similar incident since then

The guy did not put explosives in his shoe. He tried to light a cigarette in the toilet by striking a non-safety match on the sole of his shoe. That requires leather soles, and he had plastic soles, so when the sulphur in the match caught, bits of burning sulphur were embedded in the plastic, and it caught fire.

The idiot then lied his head off because it is illegal to smoke in the toilets, and the plane crew had probably been over-hyped about terrorist risks and were not old enough to know about non-safety matches.

In simple terms, the entire business of taking off your shoes for the search is entirely based on gross stupidity - like almost all the airport security policies.

You are about 100 times more likely to die in a traffic accident on the way to the airport than in a terrorist incident in flight. These people have no grip on reality, let alone risk management.

Re:Comes with Safety Risks

[Megol]

How about reading the wikipedia article linked in the OP before writing something that is not consistent with the evidence presented at the trial, nor consistent with the information about the case released before and after the trial?

"Authorities later found over 280 grams (10 oz) of plastic explosives TATP and PETN hidden in the hollowed soles of Reid's black shoes"

But I guess that's how a normal shoe is constructed according to you?

BTW checking shoes have been a standard security measure since forever - my uncle commented on the search of his shoes after visiting USSR in the 80's. Guess that's because the Soviets had learned to foresee the future and didn't want anyone to be able to light a match?