Yesterday, news broke that Metro would start conducting random bag searches in hopes of sniffing out and preventing any terrorist attacks against the transit system. Then Metro Transit Police Chief Michael Taborn showed us precisely how agents would be going through your stuff. This morning, the Washington Post flushed out more logistics regarding the searches in a front-page article. The Post reports that police at select stations will aim to search every third passenger, using explosives-screening equipment and bomb-sniffing dogs to detect any potential threats.

Ironically — and hilariously — in the Post’s print version, the article is directly above a related article on security measures at airports. Check out the title — “Agony at the Airport: Revamping of Checkpoint System Urged.” The article discusses “an emerging consensus among experts and lawmakers that the checkpoint-heavy approach — searching nearly every passenger — may not be the most effective.”

Moreover, Anne Kornblut and Ashley Halsey III write, “Some critics have given the labyrinthine airport security system the nickname ‘security theater,’ saying it is riddled with loopholes.”

Let’s get this straight. Experts seem to agree that searching every passenger getting on a plane isn’t the best approach. Metro will be searching every third passenger, making it roughly 66 percent less effective than a system that’s not totally effective to begin with. And if the security at airports can best be called “theater” that’s “riddled with loopholes,” what exactly would one call Metro’s planned bag searches? After all, the loophole in Metro’s plan is literally as big as a single station — if you see cops at one, you can just walk to the next.

Normally, we’re not ones to bet — but who wants to wager that, a year from now, the Post will have an article about the Metro plan with the headline “Misery at Metro: Experts Question Value of Bag Searches”?