We put people of concern on the watch list or the no-fly list, so we have a number of layers of security beyond the airport checkpoint. We gather as much information about a passenger as the law allows without profiling.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The bottom line is, if somebody doesn't go through proper security screening, they're not going to go on the flight.
Sometimes airport security people recognize me. I'll go through the whole screening process and at the end they'll go, 'Hey, man, I really like your work.' That's so cool.
Airport security exists to guard us against terrorist attacks.
Of course, we should all be aware of what we're packing in our carry-on luggage - anything that might be considered dangerous could be confiscated at a security checkpoint.
There has to be so many other ways of approaching airline security than demeaning ourselves by giving up a lot of our dignities and our liberty to do this.
I believe the public's confidence would be increased if the federal government took over the functions of airport security screening for all passengers.
We are ramping up security in the United States but also looking at visa applicants, visa waiver applicants - and looking at travel manifests on the airplanes trying to come into the United States.
On the other hand, all kinds of adventurous schemes to add security checkpoints to subway and bus systems have been circulating since the London attacks. This is nonsense. No one can guaranty 100 percent security.
We want to be sensitive to people's concerns about privacy about their personal being and things, while ensuring that everybody on every flight has been properly screened.
With existing technology, we can enforce airport security without sacrificing our personal privacy.