| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DebMer
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 232
Location: Southern California
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:26 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| EFLeducator wrote: |
| Zero wrote: |
| Quote: |
| There has to be some kind of criteria for deciding who gets patted down, like DebMar, I don't think people over 75 should be subject, or children under a certain age. |
The moment they stop checking people under or over a certain age is the moment that terrorists will decide that members of that group are the perfect vehicles for bombs. Simple as that. It's not a violation of your human rights. You do not have to fly. Humans got by for quite a while before commercial flights were possible. You can stay home. |
Right!!! |
This way of thinking is the same kind that has allowed the U.S. government to pass and perpetuate the so-called Patriot Act, do unwarranted searches of private property, SWAT-style raids on farms and food co-ops, do cavity searches on citizens regardless of reason for or validity of arrest (as happened to this guy: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/supreme-court-oks-routine-jailhouse-strip-searches ), etc.
When they start with the "Papers, please" to everyone on the streets, you'll be cheering on the sidelines. Guilty until proven innocent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
choudoufu
Joined: 25 May 2010
Posts: 3325
Location: Mao-berry, PRC
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zero wrote: |
| Quote: |
| There has to be some kind of criteria for deciding who gets patted down, like DebMar, I don't think people over 75 should be subject, or children under a certain age. |
The moment they stop checking people under or over a certain age is the moment that terrorists will decide that members of that group are the perfect vehicles for bombs. Simple as that. It's not a violation of your human rights. You do not have to fly. Humans got by for quite a while before commercial flights were possible. You can stay home. |
so true.
you do not need to fly. or take a train. or a bus. or a subway.
or a taxi. or..................enter a stadium or shopping mall or....
use any form or transport, go to any location outside your own
home....can (will be) subject to search.
not that it does any good, it's just for show. it's actually very easy
to get a knife or gun past the tsa goons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zero
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 1402
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can do all the slippery-slope arguments you want. If anything is "unfair," it's checking some classes of people while excluding others (such as the elderly, or the very young, or sharp-looking white guys in suits). There are still a good number of people who would like to get a bomb onto a plane. I wouldn't fly on the plane where all old men are given a pass at security. You can fly on that plane.
Women become more useful as suicide bombers because everyone expected men. The aged or, scary as it sounds, the very young could easily become vehicles for bombs. I'm glad the TSA realizes that, even if some Dave's posters have trouble believing it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zero
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 1402
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So, choudoufu, would you fly on an airline system where they just quit checking? "There are lots of crowded places, and you can't check 'em all."
Call me paranoid, but personally, I'll take the security. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
choudoufu
Joined: 25 May 2010
Posts: 3325
Location: Mao-berry, PRC
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
they can check. or not. it amounts to the same thing.
it's all theatre to make you feel safe and cozy.
the only ones who get caught are those who forgot
the nail clippers in their carry-on bag.
anyone who truly wants to get a weapon on board
can do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DebMer
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 232
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zero wrote: |
So, choudoufu, would you fly on an airline system where they just quit checking? "There are lots of crowded places, and you can't check 'em all."
Call me paranoid, but personally, I'll take the security. |
There are better ways to ensure a high degree of security.
Israel doesn't have terrorists boarding its planes, nor does it have the scanners: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/01/whats_so_great_about_israeli_security.html
It's already proven that dogs are far more effective (and infinitely more economical) at explosives detection: http://www.consumertraveler.com/columns/tsa-full-body-scanners-are-a-bust/
Having an air ranger on each flight was a great idea that got shot down, so to speak, very quickly.
Why keep the inferior and extremely expensive technology? Because those who benefit from it financially control the government: http://thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary-mainmenu-43/5240-getting-rich-from-the-naked-body-scanners
Build fear and hype on the news, get people so scared they're willing to accept anything and, voila! Instant sheeple making money for Soros, Chertoff and their ilk.
Benjamin Franklin was correct: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zero
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 1402
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2012 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Did you even read your own link? Do you really think this type of security offers more protection to your civil liberties? Somehow I have a feeling that people such as yourself would be the first to complain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DebMer
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 232
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2012 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Be asked questions while being observed for consistency rather than get radiated and/or groped? Absolutely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Rape of the Sabine Women, the Rape of Ganymede. None of these were really connected to what the English word means today, i.e. sexual violation. It referred more to abduction, kidnapping, rapaciousness as in greedy thieving, based on the Latin raptio.
Not what any airport security in the civilized world engages in.
So, in answer to the thread, no, it isn't rape at all, unless the experience transports you away in rhapsodies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Qaaolchoura
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Posts: 539
Location: 21 miles from the Syrian border
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLeducator wrote: |
| Zero wrote: |
| The moment they stop checking people under or over a certain age is the moment that terrorists will decide that members of that group are the perfect vehicles for bombs. Simple as that. It's not a violation of your human rights. You do not have to fly. Humans got by for quite a while before commercial flights were possible. You can stay home. |
Right!!! |
Why are either of you positing on an ESL forum? Are you Europeans working in Europe, or Americans working in Mexico? I can't imagine any other situation in which getting from home to work destination without flying is remotely plausible.
Believe me, I avoid flying when at all possible. It takes about two days to get from Izmir to Adana by train and a couple hours by flying guess. Which one I chose? But getting from New England to Turkey by ship is not an option. Nor is it practical to get around a large country like Turkey or the US via ground-based transit if you have a job which requires you to visit multiple cities frequently.
By your logic you could suggest that the government has an automatic right to tap your phone lines without a warrant, because you can always choose not to make phone calls. I mean, there are other means of transportation, and we've done without phones for most of our history.
~Q |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wangdaning
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 3154
|
| Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Qaaolchoura wrote: |
| EFLeducator wrote: |
| Zero wrote: |
| The moment they stop checking people under or over a certain age is the moment that terrorists will decide that members of that group are the perfect vehicles for bombs. Simple as that. It's not a violation of your human rights. You do not have to fly. Humans got by for quite a while before commercial flights were possible. You can stay home. |
Right!!! |
Why are either of you positing on an ESL forum? Are you Europeans working in Europe, or Americans working in Mexico? I can't imagine any other situation in which getting from home to work destination without flying is remotely plausible.
Believe me, I avoid flying when at all possible. It takes about two days to get from Izmir to Adana by train and a couple hours by flying guess. Which one I chose? But getting from New England to Turkey by ship is not an option. Nor is it practical to get around a large country like Turkey or the US via ground-based transit if you have a job which requires you to visit multiple cities frequently.
By your logic you could suggest that the government has an automatic right to tap your phone lines without a warrant, because you can always choose not to make phone calls. I mean, there are other means of transportation, and we've done without phones for most of our history.
~Q |
Trains aren't safe either. Neither are cars, or anyplace or anything you do. Terrorists are after you, you personally. They want to blow up everyone and everything. The question remains, who are they? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 5:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Terrorists: the new Communists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
horse
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 37
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm sure we all know what a communist looks like, Sasha, but what does a terrorist look like? 
A definition of that and/or the ''suspicious'' behaviours referred to above might well cut the number of people we need search in the first place. Anyone? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnslat
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 13859
Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear horse,
Well, here's someone who certainly knows what "commies" look like:
"Moderator: What percentage of the American legislature do you think are card-carrying Marxists or International Socialist?
Alan West: It's a good question. I believe there's about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party. It's called the Congressional Progressive Caucus."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/allen-west-democrats-communist-party...
Them commies is mighty sneaky.
Regards,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hic!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
