Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 103
  1. #61
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    29,525
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    20235
    Quote Originally Posted by Nan View Post
    Another look at "pat downs:"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7ssGEIXRlg
    Lindt chocolate--I'd confiscate it too.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  2. #62
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    RYAN BRADLEY - 2011 US NATIONAL CHAMPION
    Posts
    782
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by WindSpirit View Post
    entire post


    THANK YOU!!!

  3. #63
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    1,836
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I'm listening and I'll reiterate a few points I'm not sure everyone gets.

    1. There is NO solution that is economically feasible and will make flying safe. Can make it safer, but that's it. The solutions being implemented are not intended to be a total fix so I would ask some to stop dismissing solutions because they won't make the skies perfectly safe.

    2. When I used to live in the West Indies they had a saying. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die. That means people expect a lot but have little interest in sacrificing. I recommend that the public get off the notion that security can be improved markedly without some privacy invasion. Wave your constitution, champion your rights all you want...that's fine. But you don't get if you don't give.

    3. You can always find a handful of examples of poor execution of a strategy. The media lives on this premise. Don't be too tempted to use them to dismiss a solution if the idea itself is really not a bad one.

    4. Corruption will always happen. Get over it. If any of as are in a position to help our friends based on our power or contacts we do. Starbucks employees give free coffee to their friends. I've given away a few DVDs. It's human nature that runs right up to the highest levels with bigger stakes. Sure, can still be called out and challenged, but don't be so self-righteous to think that you'd be any different. I've come to realize over the years that temptation affects most of us.

    So that's the game. Figure out what the public will accept in terms of a sacrifice and in exchange for improved security. All wrapped around economic realities and the bumps along the way in implementation. I don't think any solution will satisfy 100% of the public, but I agree options should regularly be put on the table that explore this balancing act of security-privacy. But for what's currently in place, I have to decide if the general direction is good for me and the general public...even if it's a little unsettling. And I'm good with it, so I'll leave y'all to this topic while I go stir the pot in others.

    Peace be with you.

  4. #64
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    533
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock2 View Post
    1. There is NO solution that is economically feasible and will make flying safe. Can make it safer, but that's it. The solutions being implemented are not intended to be a total fix so I would ask some to stop dismissing solutions because they won't make the skies perfectly safe.
    Yeah, I'm just not interested in sacrificing my 4th Amendment rights for the sake of elaborate kabuki theater at the airport. If this backscatter and groping stuff did somehow guarantee 100% safety every time you fly, then *maybe* I'd think about it as a somewhat fair exchange (although I'd still be extremely troubled by the long list of privacy issues already mentioned in this thread and probably would still think it's a bad idea).

    But can anyone give a good explanation of how it makes flying even one tiny little bit safer? You're either safe from a terrorist attack or you're not, and as others have said, any determined terrorist with at least the intelligence of a 5th grader would have worked out how to get past the scanners/pat-downs long before either of you reach the security gate.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Not after the same people as Theatregirl
    Posts
    21,705
    vCash
    350
    Rep Power
    15439
    Quote Originally Posted by zippy View Post
    But can anyone give a good explanation of how it makes flying even one tiny little bit safer? You're either safe from a terrorist attack or you're not, and as others have said, any determined terrorist with at least the intelligence of a 5th grader would have worked out how to get past the scanners/pat-downs long before either of you reach the security gate.
    Except they haven't.

  6. #66
    Hey, Kool-Aid!
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    11,155
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1504
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock2 View Post
    I'm listening and I'll reiterate a few points I'm not sure everyone gets.

    1. There is NO solution that is economically feasible and will make flying safe. Can make it safer, but that's it. The solutions being implemented are not intended to be a total fix so I would ask some to stop dismissing solutions because they won't make the skies perfectly safe.

    2. When I used to live in the West Indies they had a saying. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die. That means people expect a lot but have little interest in sacrificing. I recommend that the public get off the notion that security can be improved markedly without some privacy invasion. Wave your constitution, champion your rights all you want...that's fine. But you don't get if you don't give.

    3. You can always find a handful of examples of poor execution of a strategy. The media lives on this premise. Don't be too tempted to use them to dismiss a solution if the idea itself is really not a bad one.

    4. Corruption will always happen. Get over it. If any of as are in a position to help our friends based on our power or contacts we do. Starbucks employees give free coffee to their friends. I've given away a few DVDs. It's human nature that runs right up to the highest levels with bigger stakes. Sure, can still be called out and challenged, but don't be so self-righteous to think that you'd be any different. I've come to realize over the years that temptation affects most of us.

    So that's the game. Figure out what the public will accept in terms of a sacrifice and in exchange for improved security. All wrapped around economic realities and the bumps along the way in implementation. I don't think any solution will satisfy 100% of the public, but I agree options should regularly be put on the table that explore this balancing act of security-privacy. But for what's currently in place, I have to decide if the general direction is good for me and the general public...even if it's a little unsettling. And I'm good with it, so I'll leave y'all to this topic while I go stir the pot in others.

    Peace be with you.
    I've read this four times and I'm still not clear. Are you saying you are willing to be fingered by the government or not?
    Tessa and Scott: Thank you

  7. #67
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    An American Circumstance
    Posts
    4,650
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    Except they haven't.
    But that's a specious argument. That's like saying because a terrorist attack hasn't happened on 9/12, it's the safest day to fly.

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    123
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock2 View Post
    4. Corruption will always happen. Get over it. If any of as are in a position to help our friends based on our power or contacts we do. Starbucks employees give free coffee to their friends. I've given away a few DVDs. It's human nature that runs right up to the highest levels with bigger stakes. Sure, can still be called out and challenged, but don't be so self-righteous to think that you'd be any different. I've come to realize over the years that temptation affects most of us.
    Wow - way to justify being a criminal! I, for one, have never used my position at work to benefit a friend, especially in an illegal way.

    So now, we have the right to succumb to a violating search in order to fly or choose not to fly. Next, we will have the right to have our personal vehicles tracked by government GPS or we don't get a driver's license. We'll have the right to leave the state only if we file certain forms and get permission, the right to get married and reproduce (only in that order, please!) as long as we fit a certain profile. We'll have the right to access only sanctioned websites, and those will be recorded and scanned by government employees.

    Any other rights you want taken away, just so you have the illusion of safety?

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Not after the same people as Theatregirl
    Posts
    21,705
    vCash
    350
    Rep Power
    15439
    ooooh, the slippery slope argument!

  10. #70
    Alissa Fan Forever
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Age
    51
    Posts
    3,583
    vCash
    565
    Rep Power
    6940
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmeck View Post

    Any other rights you want taken away, just so you have the illusion of safety?
    Now that you mention it. The right to bare arms is a little outdated. Stricter gun laws sound good to me.

  11. #71

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    not retiring yet
    Posts
    9,818
    vCash
    13051
    Rep Power
    16054
    Quote Originally Posted by AliasJohnDoe View Post
    Now that you mention it. The right to bare arms is a little outdated. Stricter gun laws sound good to me.
    Mandatory sleeves for all!

  12. #72
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    350
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    Except they haven't.
    Not sure how this is evidence of anything. Who has tried and been caught by measures implemented by TSA? Hasn't the TSA already admitted that there's a good possibility the underwear bomber would have slipped through the new screening any way?

  13. #73

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Not after the same people as Theatregirl
    Posts
    21,705
    vCash
    350
    Rep Power
    15439
    I don't know. I thought the reasoning behind them was that it would have caught him.

    I just find it interesting that allegedly the "average fifth grader" can find all sorts of ways around these devices, and yet that doesn't seem to be happening.

  14. #74
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Lapsed skating fan
    Posts
    14,711
    vCash
    550
    Rep Power
    0
    Windspirit, you are right on.

    Flying is too friggin expensive for me to do with any regularity, so it's not an issue I really worry about personally, but I would like to travel again someday.

  15. #75

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,540
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6831
    Quote Originally Posted by AliasJohnDoe View Post
    I think he was looking for his 15 mins of fame. I believe he had an agenda before he even went to the airport. Oh, and he just happened to tape the whole thing from the start. Then he illegally left the airport terminal(which he may also be slapped with an $11k fine), and ran home and posted it on youtube to prove his agenda.

    And yes he has done interviews. From what I saw, I don't think any TSA agent would get a thrill touching his junk. Really creepy looking/talking guy.
    I think everybody who is for this policy has an agenda. They want the TSA to take images and touch their junk. They think, for safety reasons, their junk should be imaged and touched. They have concluded that unimaged and untouched junk is unsafe.

    . . . and they think this guy that does not want his junk imaged or touched is creepy

    Quote Originally Posted by AliasJohnDoe View Post
    Now that you mention it. The right to bare arms is a little outdated. Stricter gun laws sound good to me.
    I credit you with being a law abiding citizen, and I would like you to be an example to those who are not by walking through a neighborhood after these new gun laws are passed where you are the only one that no longer knows how to get a gun
    Last edited by bardtoob; 11-19-2010 at 03:31 AM.

  16. #76
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    533
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    I don't know. I thought the reasoning behind them was that it would have caught him.

    I just find it interesting that allegedly the "average fifth grader" can find all sorts of ways around these devices, and yet that doesn't seem to be happening.
    huh? These machines and groping policies have been around for what, 2 months? Maybe longer at a few airports, I don't know, but they certainly haven't been widespread until fairly recently. Give it some time and it will happen. Terrorist attacks aren't attempted and thwarted every day, after all! There was a good bit of time separating the shoebomber and the underwear bomber...

    Fluorescein is right on, I can't recall the last time any terrorists were caught at airport security - have they ever? As for whether the scanners would have caught the underwear guy, there's this, at http://grendelreport.posterous.com/a...ve-caught-und:

    While officials said [the scanners] performed as well as physical pat downs in operational tests, it remains unclear whether the AIT would have detected the weapon used in the December 2009 incident," the Government Accountability Office, Congress's audit arm, said Wednesday in written testimony to the House Homeland Security Committee.

  17. #77
    Alissa Fan Forever
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Age
    51
    Posts
    3,583
    vCash
    565
    Rep Power
    6940
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    I credit you with being a law abiding citizen, and I would like you to be an example to those who are not by walking through a neighborhood after these new gun laws are passed where you are the only one that no longer knows how to get a gun
    Not sure where you're going with that. Or if it even pertains to what I actually said.
    Last edited by AliasJohnDoe; 11-19-2010 at 06:24 AM.

  18. #78
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Rejecting your reality and substituting my own
    Age
    30
    Posts
    10,871
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    I don't know. I thought the reasoning behind them was that it would have caught him.

    I just find it interesting that allegedly the "average fifth grader" can find all sorts of ways around these devices, and yet that doesn't seem to be happening.
    Maybe because the smart ones gave each other high-fives over succeeding on 9/11 and moved on to other things?

    I think there are many other aspects of security that can be improved, that don't involve invasively screening EVERY passenger. Jon Stewart pointed out once on The Daily Show, how both the shoe bomber and underwear bomber paid for their one-way trips with cash, which obviously makes sense if they were planning to blow themselves up and cover their financial tracks. Maybe people who buy one-way tickets with cash would have to go through more extensive screening? Stuff like that. The TSA needs to be smarter about how they do this.

  19. #79
    OmnipresentAdmeanistrator
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    7,938
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock2 View Post
    1. There is NO solution that is economically feasible and will make flying safe. Can make it safer, but that's it. The solutions being implemented are not intended to be a total fix so I would ask some to stop dismissing solutions because they won't make the skies perfectly safe.
    I didn't dismiss the solution. I said the gain was too small for the sacrifice. I refuse to be groped and photographed naked because it makes flying a little safer. Especially since they don't have any clear rules for it. I'm OK with a thorough pat down that does touch the crotch/breasts but groping/twisting/lifting your genitals, especially underneath the clothes and by a different gender? I don't think so. And yes, it's happening. And if I refuse, they'll threaten to sue me?

    2. When I used to live in the West Indies they had a saying. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die. That means people expect a lot but have little interest in sacrificing.
    But I was perfectly fine with the security we had before the groping/scanners.

    Most of the cases if not all of the bombings/etc. happened because someone hadn't done their job properly. Intelligence and common sense should be used first. Most of those people had been on the CIA/FBI lists, they had their contacts/conversations, etc. For god's sake, the father of the underwear bomber had contacted the CIA himself. But many people are still using him as an excuse to justify the new Big Brother era.

    I recommend that the public get off the notion that security can be improved markedly without some privacy invasion. Wave your constitution, champion your rights all you want...that's fine. But you don't get if you don't give.
    Like I said, I was happy with how the things were before. And again, like I said, I would be fine with a reasonable thorough pat down, not the degrading and violating one. Oh, and yes, unconstitutional.

    As for the Constitution. It's there for a reason. If we're not going to use it, we might as well throw it all away.

    4. Corruption will always happen. Get over it. If any of as are in a position to help our friends based on our power or contacts we do. Starbucks employees give free coffee to their friends. I've given away a few DVDs. It's human nature that runs right up to the highest levels with bigger stakes. Sure, can still be called out and challenged, but don't be so self-righteous to think that you'd be any different. I've come to realize over the years that temptation affects most of us.
    I don't get this part. Are you talking about people getting off on fondling strangers or those who sell the scanners making the policies on how to use them?

    So that's the game. Figure out what the public will accept in terms of a sacrifice and in exchange for improved security. All wrapped around economic realities and the bumps along the way in implementation.
    I'm curious about the "all wrapped around the economic realities". You know, those scanners cost a lot of money.

  20. #80
    OmnipresentAdmeanistrator
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    7,938
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    Except they haven't.
    So because no one has tried to blow up a plane in the time we had the scanners/pat down that means they are working so well in preventing it from happening?

    Quote Originally Posted by PrincessLeppard View Post
    ooooh, the slippery slope argument!
    No. It's more like an educated guess based on what we've seen so far. And it's been progressing very fast, too. I mentioned in one of my posts that in January this year (and probably even two months ago) no one even dreamed of TSA agents touching your private parts, let alone groping/twisting/lifting them; exposing someone's breasts and putting their hands in their underwear. Especially by someone of a different gender. Or to your underage kids. But it's happening. I posted some of the links earlier, I can find those with two different men (two unrelated incidents) who were searched by someone who put their hand in their underwear and grabbed/lifted their bare testicles/penis.

    Sticking their fingers into every body cavity doesn't seem so far-fetched after all. It seems more like a logical progression. After all, why not? People can very easily hide stuff in their anus/vagina. If it makes us safer we should just deal with it, right?

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •