Monday, June 17, 2013

Win-win... I don't think that means what the NFL thinks it means

And.... the terrorists win another one (emphasis mine):
Under the new policy, standard-size purses would be banned, but women can bring a small clutch no larger than a person's hand. Large freezer bags are acceptable, but anything else must be made of a clear material and must not be larger than 12 x 6 x 12. The NFL will be selling its own version of this clear bag.

Camera bags, fanny packs, backpacks, coolers and luggage are also prohibited at stadiums as of this year.

NFL officials, according to ABC, say they have already listened to feedback and call the changes "a minor inconvenience" for most fans, but largely produces a "win-win" situation of increased safety and quicker entry into the stadium at security checkpoints.
"Win-win" indeed. No more little kids to annoy the football fans - who's taking a little kid somewhere for hours without a bag of stuff (like diapers, toys, food)?

Oh, wait. That's a bonus! It's no bombs. Because after all, if they bombed the Boston Marathon, they'd bomb the Patriots. Right? This is just one more thing we have to do in order to live in our new natural state of fear, constant and unending.

Although, perhaps I'm being unfair. Maybe it's not just fear of bombs. (What's next, no seat cushions? You could stuff one of those with explosives. Or shoes? The TSA is scared of those, after all.) Maybe it's that plus something else.

They'll sell the acceptable bag. They'll also sell the cold beverages you'd have brought in in the cooler. And the snacks you'd have brought in in the backpack. With digital cameras, they won't sell much film, but otherwise, it's pretty much going to "if you don't buy it here, you don't get to have it here".

So pretty much. They NFL claims other sports will follow suit. I hope not. This really isn't a win-win at all.

ps: ABC doesn't understand what "but" is for:
Safety expert Brad Garrett, ABC's crime and terrorism consultant, said he thinks the new rule strikes a reasonable balance between safety and privacy. "The idea is to allow people to quickly move through security, but not have a bag big enough that you could potentially put some sort of explosive device in it," Garrett said.
Not having a big bag is not a contradiction of moving through security quickly. In fact, they're explicitly banning big bags because they take too long search.

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post

Links to this post:

Create a Link

     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                    Newer Post -->