i mean whats a couple more quid compared to millions of lives (i know im going on the extremes)
why do you think this is?
also what do you think of the bomb scare?
do you think it will happen, somehow?
2006-08-13 08:31:24 · 18 answers · asked by LoVE LiFE 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Simply too much money. There are over 11,000 airports operating commercially..
--With that, would you like to pay extra taxes?
I wouldn't...besides, the government would spend it on something else.
--Rob
2006-08-13 08:41:39 · answer #1 · answered by stealth_n700ms 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Airports have several methods for bomb detecting, however terrorists are constantly evolving and finding new ways to pass the security checkpoints. It seems bombs can be made out of nearly anything these days and terrorists will use any opportunity they can in order to bring destruction.
2006-08-13 15:23:47 · answer #2 · answered by tdublur 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they are trying to take money from airport security....WASHINGTON - While the British terror suspects were hatching their plot, the Bush administration was quietly seeking permission to divert $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new homeland explosives detection technology. Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of steps by the Homeland Security Department that has left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies
2006-08-13 08:33:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
It would be cheaper to pay off the survivors than to upgrade security. THE TERRORIST HAVE WON. lets admit defeat and go about business as usual, i would rather see 100 people die than cause all the headaches increased security means. You will die it is just when, but the stress and anger kills more people than any bomb ever could. At least with every suicide bomb that explodes we have 100% justice for the bomber as he or she is dead and we dont dont need a trial or investigation as we are 100% certain the guilty was punished.
2006-08-13 08:42:32 · answer #4 · answered by johnman142 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because the reality of the situation is that in spite of what you have heard, and what we are told, the US is not really taking security seriously. I am in the business, and it is still as much a joke as it was in the 80s and 90s. Even if we get hit again, they will tell you allot of things, and they will do very little.
2006-08-13 09:23:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
President Bush asked Congress to cut funds for airport security, well Congress refused. Homeland security is new and I haven't gotton the full report on who and how financing is handled, much less the spending. Since Pres. Bush was talking to Congress would leave one to suspect he has something to do with airport security.
2006-08-13 08:44:25 · answer #6 · answered by longroad 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Government wont pay for things for a privately owned enterprise! BAA owns ( or has already done the deal with a German firm and sold them ) all major UK airports.
2006-08-13 08:38:33 · answer #7 · answered by camshy0078 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Airports are not government owned, but PLC's or privately owned.
It is up to the company concerned to install the appropriate equipment, albeit, the government could insist on certain equipment, and if they do not comply, their operating licence could be revoked.
2006-08-13 08:39:48 · answer #8 · answered by steve b 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I see most of my fellow Americans couldn't tell from your use of 'quid' that you are from the UK not the US. My guess is that the airline are private companies.
2006-08-13 10:36:00 · answer #9 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All air companies make Millions each and every year. the question should be why are they not paying for it themselves when they want you business and have a duty of care for every traveller.
2006-08-13 09:04:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋