K. Kopp

With what has happened and hearing about people getting by security with knives & guns
I think I will just stay home. The heck with
air travel. I never thought I would say this but I'm Just mad as hell. Until I know for sure that my family can travel on a plane and get there in one piece I will not be traveling. If I feel this way I know other Americans do to.
K. Kopp

Jim Rosenberg

I've flown several times since Sept. 11 and I intend to continue doing so. Is security perfect? No, but there are far more people walking around in your local mall with guns and knives. It is a matter of comparative risk. It was very interesting to travel through some major hubs last week and talk with other travelers, aircrew members, gate agents -- even a high-ranking transport union representative. Those who want to stay home are free to make their choice, but that choice rests on the illusion that you are somehow safer in familiar surroundings. My own belief is that the world (and travel) are not nearly as dangerous today as many people seem to believe. Conversely, it was not nearly as safe a few weeks ago as many people believed at that time.

John

K Kopp, your head is in the sand. My next door neighbors died last year in a very fiery automobile accident on one of America's interstate highways. It was an awful time for all of their friends but we didn't stop getting in our cars even though it was odd doing so the first time or two.

Security will never be 100% but we're moving in the right direction because now at least we realize there is a threat. I, for one, will fly as I always have because it's the right thing to do for me personally as well as for my country.

S

I've heard several people make the same comment lately. My response? You're probably safer in the air right now than ever before! They look at me somewhat dumbfounded, think about it, then agree.

L

Why bother to respond to an obvious doomsayer - and one who cannot spell? There is so much of this type of posting ... where did these negative folks come from? What the heck are they doing on a TRAVEL site? Tell them to scram and take their sad, pathetic views with them. Osama lives in hiding ... why would one wish to emulate his behavior. We live in the US ... lets start acting like it. Ciao

xxx

I want to let K know that I'm with him. This doesnt mean that I think that others who feel ready and safe flying shouldn't do so - but I need to deal with this fear for a while. I'm less fearful of walking out my front door today than I was two weeks ago and that's progress. I resent those who imply that you've got to hop on a plane to show your patriotism - I live outside of Boston and we are learning more and more daily about the continuing security lapses at Logan - someday they'll prove that they've fixed things over there and then I'll happily fly again - until that time, I'll go about my daily life on the ground, supporting the economy as best I can and enjoying the wonderful travel possibilities we have right here in our back yard in New England.

Cindy

I won't go so far as to say I won't ever fly again, but a vacation is supposed to be fun. If it isn't, I can skip the trip and buy something else instead.

As it stands, air travel presents an unreasonable risk, IMHO. In this context, unreasonable does not mean high. It means a risk much higher than it needs to be and a risk that can easily be avoided. Based on what we have experienced in the last two weeks, (WTC, stories of people bringing more guns and box cutters onto planes), if you get on a plane, there is no real basis to sit back and feel confident that there is not a gun, bomb or other weapon on it. The testimony before Congress demonstrates that clearly. I think people are responding to that, and I think their fears are plenty rational.

That we could die in a fiery car crash is really beside the point because most of us have to drive. We do not have to fly.

L

Isn't it possible that your feeling of relative safety in a plane prior to the 11th was in itself quite irrational? Information on terrorist threats using planes has been available for all of us to read. But these facts were evidently not on the screen for most people ... somehow most of managed to remain unaware and uniformed. Were we being rational? But now, the 11th occurs, and we are forced to look at a new reality, new information ... people are actually here in the US trying to kill us. Are we suddenly so much more rational IF we once again become fixed on one perspectiv, this time a heightened sense of fear of leading normal lives in a society founded on freedom of movement. Before the 11th, most of us gave into our ignorance ... we chose not to be aware. Now people are overcompensating and going completely to the other position ... either refusing to fly again, or establishing unrealisitc conditions for flying (e.g., expecting the government to attain instant, immediate flight safety before you will consider resumption). I find this debate a bit disheartening. Are we just working through our emotions (I hope so), or are we staking out a new irrational position for managing our lives? I certainly hope your fears will diminsh. Ciao

Cindy

L, I will freely admit to being blissfully unaware of the possibility of a terrorist attack of this magnitude, of the pitiful compensation of airport workers, of the turnover, of the unchecked backgrounds. Maybe that was irrational of me, maybe not.

But now we know airport security is a sieve. I personally think it is irrational NOT to react to this newfound awareness. But to each his own.

Bottom line: leisure travel is entirely optional, and the feds had better figure out a way to make the skies more secure (or even appear to be more secure), or the recovery in the airline industry will be a long time in coming.

Nervous

Value Jet (Florida), Pan Am (Lockerbie), other airlines with crashes in PA, off the coast of NY, Tenerife, etc. Even after these crashes you've felt that you and your family can "get there in one piece"?! You were better off than I was -- I've been afraid for YEARS. Guns and knives weren't the problems in those cases -- faulty wiring, pilot error, tower error, security... Scared the bejesus out of me!

I think that to be comfortable with flying before 9/11 was to live a dream.
I still fly. I'm not comfortable, but I still fly. If you wait for guarantees, you miss opportunities. There's a big world out there and you have to take risks to see it. You took them before, even if you didn't recognize them. I understand not flying now -- not saying you have to or you should. But to wait to make sure you get there in one piece? It'll be a long wait.

Texas

L is right. The reality is we weren't safe to begin with. Difference is, now we know it.

If a pressing need to fly comes up in the near future, I'll be jittery. I don't think it's my patriotic duty to take my Nov. or maybe even May vacation. But I admit if the airlines & resorts start offering real deals I'll be more tempted to take a chance.

no guarantees

I think you have to realize that our awareness of risk sometimes changes, and when it does, it is quite reasonable to change your behavior as a result. It is one thing to swim in shark infested water if you have no idea sharks are there. Once you know sharks are there and that they will attack, you may decide not to swim, or not to swim at dusk.

Same thing with cars. People used to happily ride in vehicles with the gas tank located inside the passenger compartment. Why? Because they hadn't thought through the obvious risks. Now we know better, and no one considers this an acceptable risk ("Oh, it's OK honey, as we all have to go sometime, and we probably won't be in an accident, so let's risk burning to death.")

Therefore, it is the people who insist that they'll continue flying even without security improvements who are exhibiting a bizarre reaction to an increased awareness of risk. If they wish to behave this way out of bravado, fine. If it is fatalism, fine.

But I now know that terrorists will give their lives to kill Am civilians on Am soil, and that we have no reasonable security to prevent it. My risk awareness has changed, and so has my behavior.

As for the idea that planes crash all the time, yes, that is true. But can you imagine if 4 planes crashed in an hour due to a single mechanical defect? Do you think similar planes would be allowed to fly before the defect were fixed? Of course not. So why are people willing to hop onto planes when there has been no fundamental change in airport security? Doesn't make sense to me at all.

Clare

Texas is right at least this once. I will add it is your time when it is your time. Why let someone have this power over your joy. This country has seen adversity before. Other nations like Japan have seen even greater adversity. I am thinking of Hiroshima. We will move on and life will return to normal. In the mean time don't let someone have a greater hold on you than necessary. Remember who we are dealing with. Yes a worldwide terrorist network but with what has historically been simple attacks. The 93 attack on the WTC is more representative of their sophistication. Yes I know a loss of 6 lives is terrible but it did not encourage Americans to make life changing decisions. We are going to overcome this. If our skies were indeed as unsafe as they want us to believe then there would have been a number of attacks. Everyone should try to be strong here K.Kopp. Not trying to force you on a flight just want you to consider this.

Texas

Why thank you, Clare. Nice to know I'm right, even if it is just this once.

;-)

dan woodlief

Well no guarantees, I somewhat share your risk explanation, and have argued such. That is, I believe you can eliminate any risk by not engaging in a certain activity such as flying or swimming. However, I see the analogy a little differently. I don't see the skies as terrorist infested. I consider that the sky is a very big ocean, with hundreds of thousands swimming in it each day, and just as with shark attacks, the chance any individual will be involved is slim. I would hesitate to go swimming in certain parts of Florida right now, but I wouldn't hesitate to go swimming in other waters. In the same way, I would have serious thoughts about flying from Boston to Tel Aviv, but I wouldn't think twice about flying from Jacksonville to Cancun.

Frank

Dan: Curious why "you wouldn't think twice" about flying from Jacksonville to Cancun. Considering the intended routes of the 4 flights that were hijacked, how could you not think twice. September 11 proved that all flights are equally dangerous (or not dangerous based on your viewpoint), regardless of the route.

L

FYI: decent coverage in today's Wash. Post about airline safety measures Bush will consider. He's cool on guns in the cockpit (there's a surprise ... too bad, too). Also, on the Op-Ed, some letters about what to do with National. One of the more adventurous suggests a base for F-16's, anti-air missiles, etc., plus spillover parking for the Pentagon. Another suggests prime land for condos. Another, a baseball staduim within our beautiful new terminal, a la Camden Yards, named of course after The Gipper. You'll also see a letter from the DC Mayor, VA and MD Goveronors, with a more rational suggestion ... improve safety and reopen National. What a tragedy to let those monsters close our airport. Screw bin Laden!! Ciao

no guarantees

Dan, I think our take on my analogies is quite different. I appreciate your view that the skies are a great big ocean or a great big highway, and a way to reduce the risk to 0 is to not use them. There's no arguing with that.

But the sad thing here is that no one is saying they want the risk reduced to 0. I think we can agree, however, that the security risks associated with air travel are way beyond 0. Not just because 4 planes were hijacked and crashed in an hour, although that sure woke me up. No, the real crime is that nothing beyond window-dressing has been done to prevent it from happening tomorrow.

Since I love analogies, it is like someone who fails to secure their front door, and thugs came in and have their way with them. Sure, they could continue to live there with no lock on their front door, perhaps sticking a wad of gum in the door jam by way of extra security. We all have to go sometime, and lightning doesn't strike twice, right? But I'll bet every one of us would install a decent door lock in a heartbeat. So why the cavalier attitude toward airport security?

I must say that I am astonished that people aren't up in arms demanding decent airport security. As a society have the resources to view risks that can be greatly reduced with a little effort as unacceptable risks.

dan woodlief

Well, let's see. No guarantees, I do agree that airport and airplane security both need improving drastically. I have stated to others I know that we all should write letters to the airlines demanding it. It would be especially helpful if major corporations would do the same (lots of dollars in business travel). Frank, I don't think anything has proven that all airports and routes are equally susceptible. Let's look at the facts: Newark, Boston, and Dulles - major International airports and hubs. Going to LA and San Francisco - cross country and major destinations = big planes. My example was just that, an example. Cancun might not be the best example, since everyone knows lots of Americans would be going there, but I was just saying that some locations/routes are riskier than others. They can strike anywhere at anytime, but I firmly believe some places are more likely - for example, Washington, New York, Chicago, LA, Frankfurt, Paris, Rome, London. Others are possible but probably less likely, such as Des Moines, Sydney, Rio de Janeiro, Venice (Italy), Freiburg (Germany), or Tokyo. Essentially all I am saying is that one would think the risks vary.

no guarantees

Let's assume the risks vary by city, Dan. That fact doesn't get you very far because no one knows which routes/flights/carriers are at risk at any given time. Except the terrorists.

Consider also that one of the planes headed toward WTC had to maneuver to avoid mid-air collisions (and other planes took evasive action as well). That shows that even if your flight didn't start at a "major" airport, that doesn't mean you won't get caught up in a similar tragedy.

Security has to be beefed up at every airport carrying commercial flights. Any airport that can't be beefed up has to close, because as we saw with WTC, the system is only as strong as its weakest link.