If we really wanted to be safer, we'd stop creating droves of new enemies every day in our pursuit of global military empire. Most of my fellow Americans remain blissfully unaware that we are bombing people, arming jihadists, and backing dictators every day, but the people getting bombed and oppressed are quite aware of what is what.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/a-cluster-b...
Its inevitable that we are going to continue facing blowback for our actions, but unfortunately its heresy for the masters of conventional wisdom to admit that their policies make life more dangerous for everyone.
http://www.salon.com/2016/07/11/u_s_backed_syrian_rebels_com...
Then the big security threat shifts from what a hijacker can do with a jet packed full of humans and fuel to what a hacker can do by seizing control of the whole network, but the travel experience itself wouldn't need such invasive screening.
All my family lives in Europe. I live on the US west coast. "hopping city to city" would turn a 1 day nuissance into an arduous journey.
No thanks. I already see my family only once to twice a year.
Considering there are multiple flights per day between SFO and Paris and other EU hubs, I think my case is far from being a corner case.
302,382 people flew from SFO to Europe in May 2016. That's a lot of people. Almost 5% of the Bay Area population and there are 2 more international airports in the region. [0]
[0] http://media.flysfo.com.s3.amazonaws.com/media/sfo/media/air...
Same principle applies to express trains, and dwell times at stations. The benefit of high speed is lost just decelerating and accelerating from every stop it has to make.
Before all those hijackings, there was no airport security screening. None at all! I know that's hard to believe, but we've all gotten used to it since we've had something in place now for about 40 years.
There has to be something we can do to ensure safety, but that's less overbearing than today's TSA.