I'm not saying that the guards couldn't be privately employed (which is the case in SFO, for an example) - as long as they have to enforce TSA stupid rules, that doesn't matter (anecdotal evidence suggests the guards in SFO are friendlier than average, but this can have many causes).
I was referring to making security a private concern in the same way operating an airline is a private concern - that I struggle to see how would work: How do you align the long-term interest that a terror attack doesn't occur with the short-term horizon of an industry that bankrupts itself every decade?
On the other hand, FAA seems to be mostly sane and evidence-driven, so they might take on the task of creating and maintaining the regulatory framework that private airport security would operate under.
I was referring to making security a private concern in the same way operating an airline is a private concern - that I struggle to see how would work: How do you align the long-term interest that a terror attack doesn't occur with the short-term horizon of an industry that bankrupts itself every decade?
On the other hand, FAA seems to be mostly sane and evidence-driven, so they might take on the task of creating and maintaining the regulatory framework that private airport security would operate under.