Sept. 11 marks the 10-year anniversary of one of the modern world’s most defining moments. A generation remains forever impacted by the terrorist attacks on New York’s twin towers and the Pentagon in Virginia.
With events of great magnitude and tragedy, change and reform ensue. In this case, heightened and increasingly trying airport security.
Often, irate airline passengers whiningly contest such measures, yet I fail to grasp the need for reprimand.
The wake of more rigid security procedures merely signals the increase in dangerous threats.
To complain just seems trite, when, ultimately, regardless of how wearisome or numerous they may be, these measures are in place to ensure our protection.
The Aug. 23 East Coast earthquake and the reactions of the general populace in the face of this event allowed me to realize the need for increasingly rigorous security measures.
The quake itself was quite a shock and I was in Washington, D.C. as it occurred, witnessing the panic that erupted in the instants following the baffling rumble.
Buildings were evacuated promptly and the streets filled with people spewing theories, many admitting aloud they first thought the earthquake was, instead, a terrorist attack.
These declarations startled me and I was fraught with the notion that 10 years ago, most would have casually dismissed the rumble as an earthquake, yet today, a small tremor is enough to prompt fear of attack and terrorism.
I saw these reactions as further justification for the increased presence of security we experience today in airports throughout the world.
These measures began with the implementation of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in the United States and the Canadian Air Transport Security Association (CATSA) in Canada in 2002.
Both groups, similar in scope, were created to tighten security in order to ensure the complete safety of airline passengers.
Endless precautions and directives followed, notably the restriction of traveling with liquids greater than three ounces and the necessity to remove all footwear prior to passing through the metal detectors.
As recently as November 2010, the regulations have been morphing further in stringency as signaled by the use of pat- downs and full-body scanners in order to detect potential weapons.
As many fall prey to rebuking airport security lineups and sighing in the face of pat-downs, it is key to recall what has put them there in the first place. Sept. 11, 2001 is forever ingrained in our minds as a horrific event that should never occur again.
So why do people insist on complaining? Mostly, many simply forget, their memories of the past eclipsed by their annoyance toward these precautions, essentially failing to realize the vitality of airport security.
Yet, time and time again during the decade following 9/11, heightened security precautions have proven to be of great aid in thwarting the plans of many potential terrorists, radical Islamists and followers of the now late Osama Bin Laden.
In fact, around 40 potential terrorist attacks of vast enormity have been foiled since 9/11, according to The Heritage Foundation, an American research and educational institution
.
Inevitably, the complaints have been vocal and abundant, yet I still fail to understand the reasoning one might employ in admonishing such measures.
Frankly, if the ideal way to ensure the security of my fellow passengers is to be submitted to the slight humiliation of a full-body scanner, then so be it.
As awkward as a pat-down may be, take it with pride, knowing you are doing your part to ensure a seamless flight for yourself and your fellow passengers.
Complaining about airport security is passé and ultimately useless.
If you want to fly, there’s no way around it.
The quickest way to get through the process is to grin nonchalantly and remove your shoes before a burly man gingerly pats down your thighs.
