When government is involved, it may be worthwhile to rework a law of physics: For every action there is, in response, an over-reaction. Such was the case in the actions the federal government took after 9-11.
Rep. John Mica (R. -Fla.) lays the wood on the TSA, saying it has “failed to actually detect any threat in 10 years.” He added that it has been a “complete fiasco” of mushrooming budgets and poor management.
In tests, airport screeners at major airports have failed even by their own standards, letting (more often than not) forbidden items pass through security checkpoints. And of course there are also the gropes, semi-pornographic imaging devices, and rude treatment of the flying public.
To add insult to injury, the TSA has been a poor steward of taxpayer dollars, racking up bills at posh resorts and not being able to keep track of its assets.
Also on the occasion of remembrance, David Rittgers says that the TSA’s parent agency, the Department of Human Security (DHS), is too big too work well, and should be abolished. But the problem lies not not just with DHS, says Rittgers, it’s the politicians who fail to talk straight with us about security threats. He says, “Instead of pandering to fear and overreacting to every potential threat, policymakers should keep the risk of terrorist attacks in perspective and focus public resources on cost-effective measures.”
Will we miss the DHS and TSA? Not really. Steve Chapman says that, contrary to predictions made in the early days after 9-11, the U.S. has not been plagued by scores of terrorist attacks. Why? Muslims in America have not, contrary to expectations, been radicalized. Sure, a few have hatched plots for domestic terrorism, but their impact has been an asterisk compared with, say, the number of “regular” homicides. Why so few? “They like living in a democracy that respects their rights. People with good lives are not inclined to throw them away in grisly acts of violence.”