Airport Security

Needless to say, the world has changed since September 11, 2001. An expiration date on a milk carton that reads 9/11 will make you stop and think. In fact, any mention of the date in a sense that doesn't refer to the attacks makes you think twice. Even Limp Bizkit's idiotic video for Limp Bizkit's idiotic song, "Rollin'" has become a poignant reminder of the attacks simply because it features the World Trade Center in it.

Not that it takes coincidence to remind us of the tragedy. Enough movie directors and musicians throw depressing reminders at us constantly, and apparently, enough Americans are masochistic enough to buy into it. Seriously, just this year both the movies World Trade Center and United 93 hit theaters, and a lot of people went to them with the intention of, well, crying. Unless these people are in-the-closet-lachrymologists ...why bother?

I read a review for WTC that said "I would recommend bringing Kleenex." I can only assume that the reviewer wasn't implying that the film caused a considerable percentage of people to have allergic reactions. So why do people want to torture themselves? Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should pretend the attacks never happened, but I don't really want to dwell on it, either.

And then, of course, there's the odd one of the bunch, Michael Moore's comedy, Fahrenheit 9/11. Honestly, I haven't seen the movie, but the preview had me cracking up, because I could already tell that the thesis was that George W. Bush was responsible for the September 11 attacks because he played golf during his presidency instead of checking airport security himself.

Actually, airport security was one of the most immediate and major changes after September 11. After several terrorists were able to hijack multiple airplanes with relative ease, the metal doorframes you walk through at the airport decided to kick it into high gear. Some people complained about what a hassle it was just to get on a plane, others conceded that it was a necessary evil of travel. I'm somewhere in the middle.

With airport security, the question always seems to be "how far is too far?" Airports are constantly trying to find a balance between travelers' rights and security needs. Higher security entails more checks to go through, fewer things allowed onboard, and the same number of unnecessary flight delays. Lower security results in the death of 3,016 people. Unfortunately, what "trying to find a balance" results in is an inconsistent, ever-fluctuating security system ripe with "random searches" ("of Middle-Eastern-looking people" is left in fine print).

Every time another incident occurs, security is cranked up again immediately and diminishes over time, until it is back up again for some other reason. It wouldn't be such a big deal if "better airport security" didn't imply the existence of "worse airport security." If on anniversaries of 9/11, airport security is tighter, doesn't that mean that on 9/12 it will be looser, and easier for terrorists to get through? I don't think that's a message we want to send to them.

A number of factors contribute to exactly how strict security will be on any given day, leaving it as likely to change as a celebrity's religious beliefs. (L. Ron, anyone?) The only solution to this problem, unfortunately, is to make travel consistently obnoxious to get done. Keep the security moderately high instead of sporadically making it ridiculously high and letting it plummet from there. Besides, as long as every waking minute spent at the airport is pure torture, you are guaranteed to have plenty of anecdotes with which to bore the relatives you hardly ever see. That should stifle the awkwardness...or at least the awkward silence.

Really, the only problem increased airport security causes (not counting annoyance, of course) is when people need to bring certain things onto the plane and can't. For example, after the Aug. 11 attempted terrorist attacks, U.S. airlines prevented people from bringing any liquids onboard. But what if a passenger has a baby on the plane? (Or even worse, what if a passenger has a baby on the plane?) What are they supposed to feed it with? Of course, the people that would have sat by the baby won't be complaining.

Predictably enough, though, the airlines have since eased this restriction, because the terrorists were only capable of improvising explosive devices immediately after Aug. 11 and don't remember how to anymore. So until any obvious, permanent changes are made to the way airport security is going right now, it is probably best to heed the advice of Samuel L. Jackson from the recent airplane safety instructional video Snakes on a Plane, which features an in-depth extended allegory comparing snakes to terrorists: "Enough is enough! I have had it with these mother****in' snakes on this mother****in' plane. Everybody, strap in! We're 'bout to open some ****in' windows." 'Bout to open some ****in' windows, indeed.