Obviously the one without security is far more vulnerable.

This is not obvious to me. The one without security will have passengers who
carry almanacs, ball point pens, letherman tools packaged in transparant
neutronium, nail clippers, Swiss army knives, steak knives, pottery, tool kits
(including hammers and screwdrivers), odd shaped metal things nobody can
identify except for the price tag, and maybe even the odd firearm or two (with
bullets). Any terrorist who tries anything will have to face all that in the
hands of an angry mob. Given that terrorists haven't done well lately with
even unarmed passengers, I'd say they haven't a chance.

The one with security will have a bunch of unarmed passengers eating squeeze
food with plastic utensils, who are used to being told what to do and when to
do it, and expect somebody else to dispense security for them. The terrorist
of course will be fully armed, because he (or she) knows how to get stuff on an
airplane. Granted an unarmed angry mob is nothing to sneeze at, but if I were
the terrorist, this is still the plane I'd pick to be on.


However, you seem to be equating pax-with-guns with security, with no
evidence to back you up. Last week someone posted the "Archie Bunker
security plan" (give every pax a handgun) which made the same error...


You state it's an error, with no evidence to back you up.

I'm not advocating giving everyone a machine gun. But I am advocating letting
them keep their ballpoint pens, almanacs, Swiss Army knives, and leathermen.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)