Not convinced

The only people this arugment would make sense to are those who have no knowledge of the facts of the Richard Reid (the shoe bomber) case. In that instance, authorities pulled Reid out of line (on a hunch) and subjected the man to many hours of interrogation. They finally let him go to fly the next day. It was only the fact that the man walked around Paris in the pouring rain (and wet his shoe laces) that saved US aviation from another disaster. If Reid hadn't had trouble lighting his shoe laces (because they were still wet) the flight attendants would not have had an opportunity to pounce on him, preventing the completion of his plan. This is just another argument for cutting in line. I don't buy it.