I guess the "winners" of this competition won´t be highly pleased:
http://www.privacyinternational.org/activities/stupidsecurity/

You know what the worst part about alot of those stories is? It's that they don't even really suprise me.

About a month ago I took some friends who were in town down to the Air and Space Museum in DC and encountered their new "security measures." When I saw the metal detectors, I told the guard that I had a pocket knife and asked if that was allowed
"well, how big is it?"
"3.5 inches"
"No, you can't have that, it's too big"
"Oh, sorry, I have my other one with me" at which point I produced my leatherman squirt
"Yeah, that one's ok"
So I proceded to walk right through the metal detector with my SOG autoclip.

But my favorite is when I was told at the airport that I had to place my empty, clear plastic waterbottle on the x-ray machine. Gotta tell ya, I felt much safer after that.

Chris.

What bothers me most about these is that these imbeciles give me and my fellow security practitioners a lousy reputation. These idiots are security experts; they are, at best, bungling amateurs, and at worst, petty bureaucrats with an axe to grind. The result is that people who need security refuse to implement any, on the mistaken grounds that it's "too costly" or that it will prevent them from getting any work done.

From another link to the same page, I concur wholeheartedly with the Director of Privacy International, Simon Davies:

"The extraordinary number of nominations indicates that the situation has become ridiculous. Security has become the smokescreen for incompetent and robotic managers the world over. The situation has become more than an irritation to the public. It has become an outright danger".
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/30162.html