The bombs in London have proven again that Londoners are resilient, that they have learnt from the WWII blitz and the years of IRA attacks, how to cope with terror that would bring other cities to a screeching halt. And yet, I can’t help but worry what the reactions will be. Will the governments of the world now insist that everyone getting on a bus or train go through metal detectors, or worse, be scanned by the incredibly privacy-invading backscatter X‑ray scanners? (See Bruce Schneier’s blog for more discussion on this). I don’t care what anyone says, I don’t believe that making people go through X‑ray machines is healthy, even if the amount is low — having trained as an experimental nuclear physicist, I’ve learned that even low dosages are cumulative.
Screening public transit passengers would slow down public transport and force more people into their cars; it’s just not practical in London rush-hour traffic to completely screen every person getting on to every train or bus at every stop and station without bringing the system to a complete halt. And the traffic congestion in London is so bad already that encouraging people to drive won’t solve any problems either!
Tony Blair insists that the terrorists won’t win — but then why is the British government trying to push through legislation on ID cards that has significant privacy and cost implications (thanks to Robin Wilton for the link) ? The attacks on September 11, 2001, proved that suicide terrorists will go to extreme lengths to ensure that their identity papers look right, and that they have built up a reasonable history (the hijackers had valid ID and were frequent flyers, in part in order to plan the attacks meticulously). Making people carry identity cards will just make life difficult for ordinary people, not for the terrorists who will be prepared with all the identification (fake or real) that they need.
I don’t know what can be done to solve the terrorist problem but making life more difficult for ordinary people trying to go about their lives without a definite benefit (for example, the x‑ray machines mentioned above can’t search in body cavities so it’s also of limited use) really seems to me to be letting them win. Yes, there are definite things people can do — the classic advice to not leave luggage unattended and to avoid suspicious packages, for example. And some amount of security checking when you board aircraft is reasonable — I wouldn’t want someone with a gun on board or a long knife, even if they’re not terrorists, in case of accidents. But the more draconian parts of the various Acts that many governments rushed to pass after 2001 are not necessary. There’s an old saying that the police generally tend to treat all people as criminals who haven’t been caught yet (and given that they usually deal with criminals all day, one can forgive their perception as to the relative proportions of criminals and honest people in the population). We need to ensure that we’re not all treated as terrorists-in-waiting, while balancing the security needed to catch the real terrorists.