Analyst: TSA Methods 'Will Kill More Americans on Highway'

[Hissyspit]

Source: The Hill

Analyst: TSA methods 'will kill more Americans on highway'

By Jordy Yager
11/21/10 09:09 AM ET

The recent public ire toward the TSA’s new pat-down and body imaging screening methods is likely to cause more people to drive automobiles and forego airline travel, say two transportation economists who have studied the issue.

As the nation readies for one of the busiest traveling holidays, Steven Horwitz, a professor of economics at St. Lawrence University, told The Hill that the probable spike in road travel, caused by adverse feelings towards the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) new screening procedures, could also lead to more car-related deaths.

“Driving is much more dangerous than flying, as you are far more likely to be killed in an automobile accident mile-for-mile than you are in an airplane,” said Horwitz. “The result will be that the new TSA procedures will kill more Americans on the highway.”

Clifford Winston, a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institute, stopped short of saying that more people could die as a result of the TSA policies, but said that the airline industry will definitely see a decline in passengers if the public’s contempt for the pat-downs and advanced-imaging technology systems continues.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/130243-analyst-new-tsa-procedures-will-kill-more-americans-on-the-highway

[madrchsod]

1. driving is far more dangerous than driving

people going 80-90 mph on an interstate is down right frightning at times. of course people driving under the speed limit are just as bad.

[stray cat]

2. So progressives who say we should boycott flying are guilty of killing people?

[Hissyspit]

3. No.

The people who put them in that position are the guilty parties.

Boycotting can mean staying home.

[hayu_lol]

5. More dull-witted professors of economics making...

more wild-ass assumptions about things they know nothing about...ummm...unless they have a puter model for their assumptions. Shades of Milton Friedman.

Interstate travel is far safer than urban driving...at least on major highways, all the traffic is going in the same direction.

[DissedByBush]

16. Flying is still far safer than Interstate driving

Interstate driving: 1.5 fatalities per 100 million passenger miles driven

Commercial flight: 3 fatalities per 10 billion passenger miles flown

[PavePusher]

18. Yes, and at some point, you have to leave the interstate. n/t

[roseBudd]

21. Actually urban driving is safer, slower speeds & parked cars offer crumple zones...

It is rural driving on narrow winding roads, that culminate in collisions with trees that are dangerous

[barbtries]

4. i wouldn't say that

but i can't boycott flying with my family 3,000 miles away.

[tblue37]

6. An article I read yesterday said that there has been an 11% increase in travel for this

year's Thanksgiving holiday, but that an unprecedented 94% of travelers are driving this year.

Hmmmm. I wonder why that could be?

[KittyWampus]

12. I would really love to read that article if you can find it.

[tblue37]

23. Here is the link and a couple of excerpts:

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/nov/19/kansas-law-enforcement-increasing-patrols-record-n/

“Kansas law enforcement increasing patrols with record number of road travelers expected during holidays”

<snip>

More than 42 million people will be traveling over the Thanksgiving holiday, an 11.4 percent increase from 2009.

<snip>

Of those leaving home for the holidays, 94 percent will be driving, the highest number ever recorded in AAA’s holiday travel history.

The article didn't say that the 94% driving was because of the new security measures; that was my interpretation.

[KittyWampus]

28. Very interesting and thanks so much for taking your time to find that.

[tblue37]

29. It was no trouble at all. Glad to help. nt

[rexcat]

24. If it is 11% over last year that still means air travel is still down...

from 2007. The economy took a nose dive late 2007, early 2008 and air travel dropped like a rock. My choice is to drive if at all possible. I have been abused by the TSA way to much this year. What the TSA is doing has nothing to do with security and everything to do with window dressing.

[Alameda]

7. so in addition to the radiation and humiliation...there's this!

Yes....they really are keeping us safe.

[ladywnch]

8. If Amtrack were smart, they would be investing heavily in

streamlining routes, more express routes, upgrading trains, advertising, promotions, etc.

I personally plan to start using Amtrack more. One of my fondest childhood memories was traveling cross country from Pittsburgh to Seattle. I know that a lot has changed but it still has to be better the flying anymore.

Just this week I flew back from Pitt to Denver. I was recently prescribed a TENS (an electrical device that sends micro current through muscles to keep them from spasming) unit for my back pain. I was too afraid too try and get through security. I spoke to 2 TSA agents after I had checked my bag. They told me it was "NO PROBLEM"...."we see this kind of thing all the time"....."we see all kinds of medical devices...all you have to do is give the TSA agent a heads up -and make sure you go through the full scanner- and then all the agent will have to do is pat down that specific area". Well between the flight attendant who had to remove her prosthetic breast, they guy with the colostomy bag who ended up peeing himself as a result of TSA futzing with it I guess they were wrong.....thank god I didn't try to get through with it.

VIVA LE LOCOMOTIVE!

[LisaL]

9. You are assuming TSA won't implement the same type of

searches on other modes of transportation. What is to stop them?

[ladywnch]

14. there are currently no plans to expand TSA beyond airlines

and given the current issues it is highly doubtful that the rail industry consent since there have been no indications of rail terror and the fact there is no money to fund such and expansion.

Is it *completely* inconceivable that it could happen? No. But it is highly improbable given the current state of a TSA. They would need Congressional approval to expand their scope and Congress didn't approve of this current round of nonsense. TSA pulled existing monies from elsewhere in their budget to fund this current cluster fuck but to launch a whole other branch of staff and equipment would take virtually all their current operating budget....and they'd have to show cause as to why that level of security is needed. And as I pointed out, there have been no rail terror plots.

[dipsydoodle]

15. No plans yet to include bicycles and roller skates then

:rofl:

[Xithras]

26. It would be pointless anyway.

Even if the stations were all upgraded and airport level security were installed, the trains would remain just as vulnerable. You'd just need one suicide bomber with a big truck at a rail crossing.

Rail can't be secured.

[ladywnch]

27. and yet no one has bothered trains and thousands use them daily.

and truth be told, (as someone who rolled out the TSA program nationwide) if someone wants to blow up a plane, NOTHING TSA is doing is going to change that. If they want to do it, they will find a way. the airports will NEVER be secure.....they will just be a miserable experience. No mass transportation can be secured. Old adage: the more you tighten your grip, the more things sift through your fingers

I was not talking about vulnerability, I was talking about TSA hassles AND the quality of travel once you get through the stupid human tricks portion. the airlines/planes themselves are just awful

There are no airport-like security on cruise ships and there are thousands on those ships....soft target. There are no security screenings for trains today (and no immediate plans) so there is nothing saying they will install those measures....plus no funding to put them in place.

in any event, at least after the torture of getting to the gate you can at least have a comfortable travel experience with rail.

[Ghost Dog]

22. What does "TSA" stand for, again?

(For a moment I was thinking "Territorial", but nope, that would be fatherhomeland):

TSA | Transportation Security Administration | U.S. Department of ...
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) protects the nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.
www.tsa.gov/ - Cached - Similar
Prohibited Items
3-1-1 for Carry-Ons
Join Us
Contact Us

Acceptable Identification at the ...
For Travelers
How to Get Through the Line Faster
Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT)
More results from tsa.gov »
►

(via google).

[Xithras]

25. They really can't.

While the stations in the major cities may be large and showy, the reality is that MOST of the rail stations in the country are little more than roofed platforms on the side of the tracks.

Here is one about 30 minutes from my house that I drive past occasionally. It's literally nothing more than a small parking lot and a concrete pad...it doesn't even have a roof: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=37.527332,-120.797466&spn=0,0.005386&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.527332,-120.797466&panoid=o57mTgpXi-tvsgVGYkI_Jg&cbp=12,226.39,,0,7.51

It would be impossible to perform airport style security screenings for the railroads, when rail stations are so primitive.

[PSPS]

10. These studies are always kind of humerous

While "true" in abstract terms, they're really of little value. For one thing, this one assumes that all travel is compulsory.

"Driving is much more dangerous than flying, as you are far more likely to be killed in an automobile accident mile-for-mile than you are in an airplane," said Horwitz.

By that reasoning, one could say that traveling by space shuttle is even better because "you are far more likely to be killed in an airplane accident mile-for-mile than you are in a space shuttle."

[skepticscott]

11. Well, in the first place

fatalities per passenger-mile is the relevant statistic. And even if that figure is very low, traveling by space shuttle is not "better" if ordinary people can't use it to get places that are useful and necessary to go.

[mwooldri]

13. Depends all on the mile-for-mile in this case...

If you're talking about gross distance above sea level, mile for mile...

Driving is safer than flying in regular aircraft, which is far safer than the shuttle.

Lies, damned lies and statistics, they say.

[Psephos]

20. The most valid comparison is per-trip, not per-mile, if substituting one form of travel for another.

We don't conduct travel by miles, but rather by destinations.

In the case of the space shuttle, the risk exposure is virtually independent of the miles traveled. On a jet trip, traveling to grandma's may or may not involve hub and commuter connections. If there's a commuter connection, it's considerably riskier, even if compared to an all-jet connection through a distant hub.

As you said, lies, damned lies, and statistics. :)

[Psephos]

19. The space shuttle is massively more dangerous than commercial jet flight.

The current best estimates for the chance of any one flight blowing up are from 0.5% to 1%. In other words, you have somewhere between a 1 in 200 and 1 in 100 chance of dying on a shuttle flight.

[AsahinaKimi]

17. It always seems to come down to fear doesn't it?

Ooooh scary!! You will be killed in a car if you don't fly!!! OMG!! bleh..
I am boycotting flying, and in SF, I don't need a car.