they actually created something that would allow them to check you without having to resort to these things you complain about but it had its own complaints

Namely you could see peoples underwear a little too well and some did not like that idea

Fly first class, they let most us waltz on thru without that tripe.

Brad you are a CEO, I'm sure you could afford a private charter to where ever you want to go.

 I do.

yeah. security measures are very much a hassle really. although i do understand their intention to protect us all.

Ya gotta love the TSA (Toiletries Security Administration).

Leave it to the government to take a good idea and waste billions screwing it up.  I have to concede, however, that ya never know when that extra half-ounce of Ole Regenerist facial rejuvination cream might blow.

That might have been a bad idea.

Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they won't know me next time I fly.

In both airports (MSP and SEA), I actually had to take off the belt as well, which was a first. I never used to, but the security folk were shouting out the PSAs once in a while. It's the main reason I hate airports. Once you get on a plane it's all good, but going through the airport is ugh!

As someone with a degree in chemistry and a history that has me on a couple FBI watch lists anyway, I can confidently say there is all sorts of stuff you could hide in something like that which you really wouldn't want on a plane.

Aluminum won't set off a metal detector. Neither will magnesium, or rust. If you know what you're doing you could bring down a plane with enough of those three things, and "enough" would be about the size of a D battery. I can think of a few other multi component threats that wouldn't be easy to detect, hopefully the TSA people know what to keep an eye out for.

I've been through six international airports this year. I don't mind the security, it's for my safety.

What I do mind is fat people taking up more than their seat space...

I've flown the most paranoid Israeli airlines in the world... and they aren't nearly as much hassle. More invasive, but less hassle.

I brought back a full bottle of Maple syrup and they took it out of my luggage and questioned me about it. Then they took it off for testing because they considered it low threat and gave it back to me. I mean yes, you can fit all kinds of bad things even in a 3oz bottle.. but a lot of those bad things don't even need the 3oz bottle and could just as easily been in an envelope... or a shoe bomb.

So in general I like the middle eastern security policy. If you don't have ANY reason to suspect them let it go, and if you have any reason you want to test like a random screening or just a hunch.. do a test and make arrests if necessary rather than dumping any would be evidence in an open trash container (conveniently placed in the middle of the airport's highest traffic areas so that if it was dangerous you get the maximum nubmer of fatalities).

Maglev, or magnetic levitation, is a system of transportation that suspends, guides and propels vehicles, predominantly trains, using magnetic levitation from a very large number of magnets for lift and propulsion. This method has the potential to be faster, quieter and smoother than wheeled mass transit systems. The technology has the potential to exceed 6,400 kilometres per hour (4,000 mph) if deployed in an evacuated tunnel. If not deployed in an evacuated tube the power needed for levitation is usually not a particularly large percentage and most of the power needed is used to overcome air drag, as with any other high speed train.

Catching a train overseas would be less of a hassle coz its so much faster

I'll stick with my hugely expensive maglev bed thank you.

Wouldn't you need some sort of magnetic rail for that? One hesitates to think about the upkeep.

You do need a magnetic rail for that. The reason why it's not a total economical failure is because only the one place where the train is currently floating over needs to be powered. So, while powering the whole length of the rail would suck a city dry off juice, it is not really necessary, because only the magnets that are one kilometer ahead the train are being powered up and are turned off as the train 'flies' by.

As for airport security, I understand people may not like it. I understand they may choose other means of transportation above the plane due to these annoyances.
I do not, however, understand people who fail to see why it HAS to be this way.
Sure, 99.999% of the flights wouldn't be interrupted in any way if the security wasn't there at all.
But it doesn't really take a strong imagination to think WHAT IF? 
Think: You kiss your beloved wife as she's boarding the plane to visit her mum and then turn on the TV to learn that your wife is dead. Her organs are blasted all over southern Nevada, because some mentally unstable f%&k wanted to live forever and loaded his laptop with nitro and blew up the plane at 30.000 feet.

Would you NOT be ENRAGED if some suited prick showed up on TV and said
"We are sorry, but with the passenger's convenience in mind all security procedures were cut down. People didn't like their laptops being checked, you know. Also, we've been losing some billions of dollars because of the security being inconvenient. Well, shit happens."

What can be done to ensure safety has to be done and that's it. That's the only way.

Along that line I can't understand those jerks that walk around the streets at night screaming "F*ck the police!".
If I put a bullet through his legs so he can't move and aim at his forehead he will CRY for a police patrol to magically pop out of nowhere and stop me.

People hate what they find inconvenient without ever spending one damn second to really think about it.