-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Winner: Airport security - Have changes made since 9/11 done more harm than good? Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:49:14 -0600 From: The Economist Debates <publications@newsletters.economist.com> Reply-To: The Economist <reply-fea015727064007d76-6462_HTML-35219801-1059199-3@alerts.economist.com> To: <demartin@polito.it> View in browser <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c354c7fd0e8093dce9bb3aa6e...> | E-mail a friend <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35f988e9ca4abaad49193cb4...> The Economist <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35ecbe174c249149e26522ac...> Friday, March 30th 2012 t <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c357aca77004da0ac038e8f17...> f <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c358a166df870f0754ab93144...> in <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c3560fe20d52bae67dd96bfaa...> rss <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c353a685931af1364552f49df...> The Economist Debates Business & finance <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35b9f556aec4cfb1724e2a9a...> | Science & technology <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35b13cc77ac55bd1f525d3e7...> | Economics <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c350f6388549d4e295fd32b28...> | Culture <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c3596dc57b238818c9c3cf567...> | Blogs <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35b0b7d375e6fc0997e34c47...> | Multimedia <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35f7c8bcececb2da31c8750b...> | Newsletters <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35c0a34741e9ab42c4242ede...> Airport security /Motion: "This house believes that changes made to airport security since 9/11 have done more harm than good."/ Enter Debate Series <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35a512c0710c18f53a445881...> *Live dates*: March 20th-30th 2012 *Current round: *Winner announcement Dear Reader, Our debate has now ended and those supporting the motion have won handsomely. This house does believe that "changes made to airport security since 9/11 have done more harm than good". I thought Kip Hawley would have the tougher role as the opposer, but I have still been surprised at the vehemence and quantity of the views expressed in favour. Voters have roundly declared that the frustrations, the delays, the loss of liberty and the increase in fear that characterise their interactions with airport-security procedures vastly outweigh the good these procedures achieve. Many thanks are due to our two debaters, Bruce Schneier and Mr Hawley. Particular thanks, if that is fair, to Mr Hawley, who was not given an easy ride by commenters. Thanks too to all those commenters who felt aggrieved at treatment they had received in airports, but managed to keep the discourse civil. And although voting is over, the floor remains open for your further comments until midnight tonight. I have been a fascinated onlooker throughout and I hope you got something out of it too. Our new debate begins next week and we very much hope you will join us then. We'll be in touch soon with details. Moderator Block *Moderator* *Adam Barnes* /Editor, The Economist online and Gulliver/ *Final vote* Pro 87% Con 13% Moderator Block *Defending the motion* *Bruce Schneier* /Author, "Liars and Outliers: Enabling the Trust Society Needs to Survive"/ Moderator Block *Opposing the motion* *Kip Hawley* /Author, "Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security"/ Debate Schedule *March 30th* Winner announcement *Customer service* To change your subscription settings or to unsubscribe please click here <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c356e7e603f15bf7ac6e0294c...>, (you may need to log in) and select the newsletters you wish to unsubscribe from. As a registered user of /The Economist/ online, you can sign up for additional newsletters <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c356e7e603f15bf7ac6e0294c...> or change your e-mail address by amending your details <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c356e7e603f15bf7ac6e0294c...>. If you received this newsletter from a friend and you would like to subscribe to /The Economist/ online's wide range of newsletters, please go to /The Economist/ online's registration page <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c3565bdf9804ed8a0e76ec19a...> and fill out the registration form. This mail has been sent to: *demartin@polito.it* Questions? Comments? Use this form <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c357a8e53b56808b234e12cc6...> to contact /The Economist/ online staff. Replies to this e-mail will not reach us. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Go to /The Economist/ online <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35bc7bc07974a65ea4d51144...> Copyright <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c350a07d160cb13877cc3f972...> © The Economist Newspaper Limited <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35af612562a1833d3f37e26d...> 2012. All rights reserved. Advertising info <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35e753b3c3d4d529691fc295...> | Legal disclaimer <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35212f311987f702c66c88bb...> | Privacy Policy <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35d60a217bd2c91ae5a38364...> | Terms & Conditions <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35c641be7090fe2c2b6b70e7...> | Help <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35935bfb2d5413fe6a3c9f76...> An Economist Group business The Economist Newspaper Limited <http://click.alerts.economist.com/?qs=05694815799f6c35af612562a1833d3f37e26d...> Registered in England and Wales. No.236383 VAT no: GB 340 436 876 Registered office: 25 St James's Street, London, SW1A 1HG