And THIS is why I support "Racial profiling"

Shockwave

Banned
Sep 16, 2000
9,059
0
0
Article

Aug. 30 issue - Before he passed away in March, Allen O. Hughes took his final trip East. He came with Ruby, his wife of 56 years. They came not because they liked to travel?they came because Allen had lymphoma and he wanted to visit his only daughter and his granddaughter and his two great-grandchildren one last time.

The last I saw of him, a burly airport screener was forcing my frail and faltering 78-year-old father to stand at attention?arms spread?for a wand search. As I watched from the other side of the security gate I saw the man in the uniform point to my father to sit down and take off his shoes. These were the very shoes I'd just seen him wrestle on at home. He hadn't noticed me in the guest room doorway in the predawn light, but I had nearly cried as I watched him groaning his way into those shoes. Old-man shoes, I thought?you know, the ones with the Velcro straps?but they were about all he could manage.

Even hoisting himself up into my Jeep seemed a chore. As we headed for the airport I heard my husband, Michael, say, "Nice to have you here, Allen. Keep up the battle." Dad just dipped his chin and said softly, "I will."

My father was a man of few words: a proud man who had served his country during World War II, who had left the Navy and taken Uncle Sam up on the offer of the GI Bill to start his own business in Albuquerque, N.M. So he never said a word as he was plucked out of the line of travelers at the Westchester airport in New York. He'd already taken off his jacket. He'd untangled himself from the oxygen finger-cuff he wore on a string around his neck and put it in the little basket gliding down the conveyor belt. I held my breath as Dad shuffled through the electronic archway. Something made it squeal, and that's when the burly man motioned my father to the side.

You have to understand: my dad grew up dirt-poor in the northern reaches of North Dakota. He endured a terrible childhood and somewhere early on he taught himself pride and the importance of struggling through. So as sick as he was, as exhausted as the weeklong trip to New York had to have been, he did as he was told.

The man who never broke a law in his life stretched out his arms, stared straight ahead and waited as the wand passed over him. I heard the beep as the wand passed his left wrist. Without asking permission, the screener pulled back my father's sleeve to reveal the $20 watch he had bought because it had big enough numbers to read without his glasses. That damn wand kept going. Down to my father's belt buckle where I heard another beep. Again, without a word, the screener yanked up my father's flannel shirt, slipped his hand down around the buckle and tugged on it. I watched helplessly, knowing that if I shouted out my increasing rage I'd humiliate my father even more. I could see Dad clench his jaw as the last tug on his belt nearly made him lose his balance. Did the screener really think my father might wreak havoc on a planeload of people?

I'm not blaming the airport screener. He was just doing as he's trained to do. And I haven't forgotten what a handful of maniacs did on American soil nearly three years ago?but come on! Is this our best answer?

I waited on the visitors' side of the metal-detector station until my father struggled back into his shoes. My mother was standing at the end of the conveyor belt where she'd gathered up his coat, oxygen meter and wallet. As he shuffled over they spoke a few quiet words and my mother pointed to their gate. I don't know if it was embarrassment or fatigue, but Dad forgot to turn around for a final wave.

I have seen elderly people put through similar indignities at airports in Dallas, Cincinnati and Los Angeles. I remember the Dallas incident with clarity because the subject of the search reminded me of my father, except that the man was traveling alone and carrying a cane. The screener took away his cane, made him remove his belt and shoes and then left him to sit there while the screener consulted with his supervisor about how best to scan the cane.

Even as Dad battled his illness my parents still performed great acts of charity in their community. They read the newspaper so they could cast informed votes on Election Day. They went to the Albuquerque Fleet Reserve Club once a week to stay in touch with friends, where I'm sure my father never mentioned the scene at the airport. Instead, he would have told his Navy buddies stories about watching the Yankees on his son-in-law's big-screen television. But I remain indignant.

Of course we need to screen airplane passengers, but I think there is a better way. My first suggestion is to include in the security training this mantra: "You must look into the passenger's eyes. People should be treated with respect." Isn't that the way of life we're all fighting to keep?
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
We actually do profile in airports. There are "suspicious" passenger lists, and people get flagged for having certain names or backgrounds. We add some random screening on top of that.
 

Whisper

Diamond Member
Feb 25, 2000
5,394
2
81
Sorry, but I see nothing wrong with that. There's no way of knowing just who might pose a threat on an airplane; who might be "in on" an attempt to hijack another aircraft, or who might simply be crazy and have gotten it into his head that he was going to try and hurt someone that day. Terrorists aren't the only ones to be worried about on airplanes. So what, now we're supposed to narrow the searches to those that only seem "physically able" of causing havoc? Who knows what kind of shape someone is in, whether or not they're elderly; perhaps that person's limp is a ruse, etc. Just because someone is old, white, or an armed services veteran does not make them harmless.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,519
2
81
Originally posted by: Whisper
Sorry, but I see nothing wrong with that. There's no way of knowing just who might pose a threat on an airplane; who might be "in on" an attempt to hijack another aircraft, or who might simply be crazy and have gotten it into his head that he was going to try and hurt someone that day. Terrorists aren't the only ones to be worried about on airplanes. So what, now we're supposed to narrow the searches to those that only seem "physically able" of causing havoc? Who knows what kind of shape someone is in, whether or not they're elderly; perhaps that person's limp is a ruse, etc. Just because someone is old, white, or an armed services veteran does not make them harmless.

I bet you support these cops' actions too, right?: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1554119
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Well I think random searches are silly, but I'm not ready to support racial profiling. There does need to be a system of what constitutes a threat. Even with random screening you aren't going to catch every whacko, and the fact remains that terrorists recruit and come in all shapes, ages, races and whatever. 9/11 of course had a particular type of hijacker, but over our history just about every race has attemped or has hijacked a plane. The conclusion is that profiling will only work to an extent, and it is pretty much unconstitutional to begin with. So what do we do? There is no current way to assure that terrorists cannot hijack another plane. None.
 

Shockwave

Banned
Sep 16, 2000
9,059
0
0
Originally posted by: Mill
Well I think random searches are silly, but I'm not ready to support racial profiling. There does need to be a system of what constitutes a threat. Even with random screening you aren't going to catch every whacko, and the fact remains that terrorists recruit and come in all shapes, ages, races and whatever. 9/11 of course had a particular type of hijacker, but over our history just about every race has attemped or has hijacked a plane. The conclusion is that profiling will only work to an extent, and it is pretty much unconstitutional to begin with. So what do we do? There is no current way to assure that terrorists cannot hijack another plane. None.

Except elderly.
Aside from that, theres a large difference between hijacking a plane to fly to the other country and hijacking a plane to hold hostages or fly it into buildings......

Otherwise, since I value my posting rights I'll keep my opinion to myself. By this point there should be no doubts as to how I feel on certain subjects, this of course being one of them.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Shockwave
Originally posted by: Mill
Well I think random searches are silly, but I'm not ready to support racial profiling. There does need to be a system of what constitutes a threat. Even with random screening you aren't going to catch every whacko, and the fact remains that terrorists recruit and come in all shapes, ages, races and whatever. 9/11 of course had a particular type of hijacker, but over our history just about every race has attemped or has hijacked a plane. The conclusion is that profiling will only work to an extent, and it is pretty much unconstitutional to begin with. So what do we do? There is no current way to assure that terrorists cannot hijack another plane. None.

Except elderly.
Aside from that, theres a large difference between hijacking a plane to fly to the other country and hijacking a plane to hold hostages or fly it into buildings......

Otherwise, since I value my posting rights I'll keep my opinion to myself. By this point there should be no doubts as to how I feel on certain subjects, this of course being one of them.

Sure there have been elderly hijackers. I can't remember the date, but I do slightly remember a case of a guy over 60 that hijacked a plane in an extortion attempt. You have to realize that there have been numerous hijackings since commerical airlines started.
 

Shockwave

Banned
Sep 16, 2000
9,059
0
0
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Shockwave
Originally posted by: Mill
Well I think random searches are silly, but I'm not ready to support racial profiling. There does need to be a system of what constitutes a threat. Even with random screening you aren't going to catch every whacko, and the fact remains that terrorists recruit and come in all shapes, ages, races and whatever. 9/11 of course had a particular type of hijacker, but over our history just about every race has attemped or has hijacked a plane. The conclusion is that profiling will only work to an extent, and it is pretty much unconstitutional to begin with. So what do we do? There is no current way to assure that terrorists cannot hijack another plane. None.

Except elderly.
Aside from that, theres a large difference between hijacking a plane to fly to the other country and hijacking a plane to hold hostages or fly it into buildings......

Otherwise, since I value my posting rights I'll keep my opinion to myself. By this point there should be no doubts as to how I feel on certain subjects, this of course being one of them.

Sure there have been elderly hijackers. I can't remember the date, but I do slightly remember a case of a guy over 60 that hijacked a plane in an extortion attempt. You have to realize that there have been numerous hijackings since commerical airlines started.

That wasnt the deal where he hijacked it in the Northwest and then parachuted out of it in flight was it?
 

McCarthy

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,567
0
76
Originally posted by: Shockwave
That wasnt the deal where he hijacked it in the Northwest and then parachuted out of it in flight was it?

Sounds like DB Cooper. He was 43
 

Whisper

Diamond Member
Feb 25, 2000
5,394
2
81
Originally posted by: rbloedow
Originally posted by: Whisper
Sorry, but I see nothing wrong with that. There's no way of knowing just who might pose a threat on an airplane; who might be "in on" an attempt to hijack another aircraft, or who might simply be crazy and have gotten it into his head that he was going to try and hurt someone that day. Terrorists aren't the only ones to be worried about on airplanes. So what, now we're supposed to narrow the searches to those that only seem "physically able" of causing havoc? Who knows what kind of shape someone is in, whether or not they're elderly; perhaps that person's limp is a ruse, etc. Just because someone is old, white, or an armed services veteran does not make them harmless.

I bet you support these cops' actions too, right?: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1554119

Of course, because they're exactly the same situation and the same severity.

No, I don't support tasering 60-year-old women who honk at police officers. Searching someone causes neither physical harm nor trauma, at least in most instances. The man in the first article was a part of a random search, and the author used tear-jerker descriptives to garner sympathy. Do I feel bad that the man was searched when, in his daughter's mind, he was not a threat? Sure, but that doesn't mean I don't support the random search regulations that caused him to be stopped.
 

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
Screw random searches. They just need to search EVERYBODY. That's how it's done in a lot of other countries and granted it's annoying but it works.
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
So you think that elderly people should never be searched? If that were the case, then if I were a terrorist, I would find feebled people to sit next to a younger person and hide all sorts of stuff on the older person. You don't think it would happen?
 

GasX

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
29,033
6
81
Originally posted by: XZeroII
So you think that elderly people should never be searched? If that were the case, then if I were a terrorist, I would find feebled people to sit next to a younger person and hide all sorts of stuff on the older person. You don't think it would happen?
Hey, Grandpa, carry this bomb onto the plane or I will rape your granddaughter...
 

3chordcharlie

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2004
9,859
1
81
Wait would it be okay to do this to an elderly muslim and/or arab (not the same thing)?

What does this have to do with racial profiling?

The man in the story sounds like he had a great deal of strength and self-respect, and while the airport security guard may not have treated him with as much sensitivity as he should have, I still can't see the faintest connection to an argument for racial profiling.
 

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,844
1,049
126
I keep saying that as soon as you give the ok to a certain look/age/etc., that's when the terrorists will use it to their advantage.

Sorry but it's gotta be done. And I'm sorry old men and women have to endure it just the same.
 

3chordcharlie

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2004
9,859
1
81
Originally posted by: rh71
I keep saying that as soon as you give the ok to a certain look/age/etc., that's when the terrorists will use it to their advantage.
This is especially true for infiltration-type attacks. Hijackers are notoriously good at finding a way to bypass security without breaking any rules before the moment they actually take over. They work within the confines of the system, and find a way to create enough of a power-advantage within the confines of the rules to allow them to take control.
 

Kipper

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2000
7,366
0
0
Originally posted by: Shockwave
Originally posted by: Mill
Well I think random searches are silly, but I'm not ready to support racial profiling. There does need to be a system of what constitutes a threat. Even with random screening you aren't going to catch every whacko, and the fact remains that terrorists recruit and come in all shapes, ages, races and whatever. 9/11 of course had a particular type of hijacker, but over our history just about every race has attemped or has hijacked a plane. The conclusion is that profiling will only work to an extent, and it is pretty much unconstitutional to begin with. So what do we do? There is no current way to assure that terrorists cannot hijack another plane. None.

Except elderly.
Aside from that, theres a large difference between hijacking a plane to fly to the other country and hijacking a plane to hold hostages or fly it into buildings......

Otherwise, since I value my posting rights I'll keep my opinion to myself. By this point there should be no doubts as to how I feel on certain subjects, this of course being one of them.

An elderly person doesn't need to hijack a plane to be a terrorist. (S)he can simply blow it up, and virtually anybody is capable of doing that short of a newborn baby.
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
I don't see a problem here. The only things I would be concerned with is if security took shoes off a man who couldn't, by himself, get them back on. Thus security should help him get them back on I guess. But if someone is that old, they probably shouldn't be traveling alone as any number of things could happen to them and require outside help. I would be mad if security broke his hip or something, but I would just be mad at the people involved, not the procedure.

I held my breath as Dad shuffled through the electronic archway. Something made it squeal, and that's when the burly man motioned my father to the side.

He beeped when he went through an electronic archway. This isn't even random.
 

maziwanka

Lifer
Jul 4, 2000
10,415
1
0
i think the article was well written. the author never calls for "racial profiling" as the OP does. he states that there should be a better method for screening passengers, which i do agree with. at the very least, airport security should treat travelers with a certain minimum level of respect.
 

phantom309

Platinum Member
Jan 30, 2002
2,065
1
0
We have been conditioned to think that all Muslims terrorists are hairy, wild-eyed, dark-skinned men in their 20s. That is not by any means the case. The minute we start screening only dark-skinned males, Al-Queda will send Indonesian women, or light-skinned Turks, or misguided bourgeois American twentysomethings to do their suicide bombing for them.
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
Originally posted by: phantom309
We have been conditioned to think that all Muslims terrorists are hairy, wild-eyed, dark-skinned men in their 20s. That is not by any means the case. The minute we start screening only dark-skinned males, Al-Queda will send Indonesian women, or light-skinned Turks, or misguided bourgeois American twentysomethings to do their suicide bombing for them.



yea because what we need in this world is more people to be as enlightened as you :roll:
 

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,844
1,049
126
Originally posted by: phantom309
We have been conditioned to think that all Muslims terrorists are hairy, wild-eyed, dark-skinned men in their 20s. That is not by any means the case. The minute we start screening only dark-skinned males, Al-Queda will send Indonesian women, or light-skinned Turks, or misguided bourgeois American twentysomethings to do their suicide bombing for them.
exactly - anybody can be bought and worse yet - anybody can be blackmailed.