[Scan-DC] Scanner Ban At Airshow

[Frederick J Cox]

To reiterate what Willard Hardman said, but perhaps because I am not
involved with such things directly, I can be more forward. The reason for
NOT being allowed to bring scanners into an event may have NOTHING to do
with monitoring radio trraffic.  Instead, they are trying to prevent
suspects from using an electronic device as a weapon, whether bomb or
otherwise.  Same as a ban on coolers - has nothing to do with preventing
people from refreshment!
	Why the difference between two days?   A couple thoughts.  Perhaps
the first day, the guard was uninformed, or on the second, the guard was
overzealous.  Second, a threat may have been received between the two
days.
	Will Hardmen mentions he has been involved with security for these
types of events, and he is an avid scanner enthusiast.  It seems to me if
he says they had reasons to ban scanners, I would believe him!

Rick

*****************************************************************************

"ad augusta per angusta"

Frederick Cox
University of Delaware
Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry
(302) 831 4265
fjcox@udel.edu


On Tue, 28 May 2002, James Sheridan-Peters wrote:

> > I am not going to get into a contest over this - but please READ my
> messages
> > again.
> >
> > As for your tangential point, should we all therefore just throw up our
> > hands and surrender to what you seem to perceive to be the inevitable?
>
> The simple question, to my mind, is this:  Does preventing people from
> bringing these devices into the show prevent the incident security is
> guarding against?   If the answer is yes, go to it with my blessing.  If no,
> then the measures serve no purpose save to limit the actions of everyone.
>
> If I can sit in my car on the road outside Andrews and use a scanner somehow
> to trigger an incident at an airshow then how does preventing me from
> bringing inside the grounds mean anything?  Hell, a criminal doing such a
> thing would have more reason to stay outside the gates anyway!  Not knowing
> the details of the incidents mentioned, I don't know if the range is a
> factor.  If the criminal has to be real close, fine, ban the devices.
>
> --
> James Sheridan (perhaps repeated myself, but what the hell)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scan-DC mailing list
> Scan-DC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
>