March 4, 2006
Creeping Totalitarianism Department
What Kind of Name is "Abdul" Anyway?
I'm no fan of celebrities receiving special treatment from law enforcement, but this seemed a bit silly:
LAS VEGAS - Paula Abdul was allowed to board a plane at the Las Vegas airport without passing through a security checkpoint, prompting all passengers and luggage to be screened when they landed in California, officials said Friday.
It's like they think she's some sort of Bond villain: Well-known music and television celebrity, but also a secret member of SPECTRE, using her fame to cover a plan for world domination that somehow starts with a hijacked passenger airplane...
I'm not saying that famous people should be given exceptional treatment because they are famous, but the fact is that the media has thoroughly investigated and documented her life. I think we can say with confidence that Paula Abdul is not a terrorist. We could let her board airplanes without delay for the rest of her life, and no one will be worse off for it.
On the other hand, I can understand the reasoning behind not making any exceptions, even for people who are too well known to be terrorists. Once you start allowing some special exceptions, it's hard to hold the line, and eventually more and more people demand to be excused. Today it's Paula Abdul, tomorrow it's Gary Coleman, and by next week it's Emo Philips and the personal assistant to Fabrice Morvan's agent. Pretty soon your security procedures are full of holes.
Actually, now that I think about it, my point of two paragraphs ago is probably wrong: It wouldn't be safe to let Paula Abdul board airplanes without a security screening for the rest of her life. Once it becomes well-known that certain people are not screened before boarding commercial aircraft, then those people become targets. If Paula Abdul can board airplanes without being screened, you can bet that some terrorist will be trying to sneak a bomb into her luggage.
So, I take it all back. Putting people like Paula Abdul through the screening process makes a lot of sense.
The real mystery, however, is this: Can someone explain the point of screening passengers and luggage after the flight is over? Several explanations come readily to mind.
- Security theater: It looks a bit like real security, and that might help re-assure people that the Transportation Safety Administration knows what it's doing. That might improve passenger peace-of-mind, not to mention the TSA's budget.
- Punishment: If Paula Abdul thinks she can get one past the TSA, they'll show her a thing or two. Not only will they search her, they'll also search everyone else on the plane again and tell people it's her fault.
- War On Drugs: They're not trying to keep bombs off the plane, they're trying to keep drugs from being transported by plane, and using the War On Terror as an excuse for an otherwise unwarranted exercise of power.
- Creeping Totalitarianism: Some people just like being able to push other people around, so they use Paula Abdul as an excuse to inconvenience an entire airplane full of people just to show them who's boss.
Is there a sensible explanation that I'm missing?
1 Comments
Leave a comment
.
I don't know about Gary Coleman. They might just red flag him for that whole Postal business.
http://www.gopostal.com/postal2/screenshots/gary.jpg