And stop advocating for lifting security requirements off pilots with ridiculous arguments like "pilots are - for the most part - the most stable people that I have ever met" and "he already has full control of the plane, so heck, he should be allowed to bring whatever the fuck he wants onboard anyway".
Scanning people shoes is useless. Full body scanners are useless. As the pilot said, what will they do when someone try to blow up a plane with dynamite in his rectum? Rectal check for everyone? This is absurd, expensive and serves only one purpose : covering TSA officials' asses.
See for instance some of these: http://www.schneier.com/essays-airline.html
Not once did he advocate not screening pilots, did he?
http://www.schneier.com/essay-304.html http://www.schneier.com/essay-245.html http://www.schneier.com/essay-299.html
Security in airports is already much too high, too annoying and too costly. There must be a point when it stops getting tighter and tighter. It won't catch the next terrorist anyway. We need a better use of resources and people (better than taking away mineral water bottles, and full-body scanning everyone and his dog).
But I'm still not seeing him advocating not screening the crew. And how could he advocate something like that.
It would be like him saying "use strong encryption to protect your information, but make sure that passwords are written on post-its so it won't get lost".
Pilots are - for the most part - the most stable people that I have ever met and in general will not get up to stuff like this nearly as often as 'regular' folks do.
If they did there would be suicide induced plane crashes every other day with the number of pilots in active service.
Incidents will always happen, the question is if you think that it is worth draconian safety measures to get the incident level down an unmeasurable fraction.
Again, all it would take for a major accident is for one guy to lift his foot for 2 seconds while taxiing.
You could not stop that if you wanted to.