TSA strip searches 7 year old

[brandonb]

I'd rather have it pre 9/11/01, terrorists and all.

 

[Patranus]

No fucking way would they EVER strip search my child. Ludicrous. I'll stick to driving from now on.

Well, if you can't control your child while getting through a security checkpoint you certainly have no business bringing them onto an airplane.

 

[shira]

Arguing with blatant stupidity is an exercise in futility. I stopped trying to argue with you months ago. No one can simultaneously claim to be an engineer and that any of these measures are effective, as any engineer worth a damn knows exactly how useless they are.

If you "stopped trying to argue," then why are you writing responses to my posts? This is the same level of stupidity as making a comment, "I'm not communicating with you right now."

And why would you think that an engineer would be the best judge of the effectiveness of a security protocol? An engineer would be in a position to determine if a technology was capable of detecting explosives. Assuming the technology was adequate, an expert on both terrorism and human factors would be in a position to judge whether the protocol was likely to be effective at reducing terrorist attempts.

 

[shira]

I'd rather have it pre 9/11/01, terrorists and all.

Tell it to the righties: They're the ones who thought invading Iraq as counter-terrorism exercise was a wonderful idea. 1$ trillion and the lives maimed bodies of 25,000 soldiers? No problem. But ask them to undergo a body scan? No way.

 

[dali71]

Using out of context video to scare the people about the TSA... nice!

Almost as nice as claiming that George Bush "straight up said" that Kanye West was a racist, then disappearing from the thread when asked by several people for proof. Stay classy...

 

[spittledip]

They have already demonstrated a technique that will defeat the current "improved" security measures quite easily. With that in mind, have they made you any safer or have they just made you think you are safer?





So why is it we only care about airplanes? Why not the mass of humans that the security creates? Why not malls? Outdoor concerts? Festivals? Using your logic pretty much any place that has 200 or more people at once should have a TSA checkpoint in order to enter.

Furthermore, if your concern is saving lives then why aren't you advocating the TSA be in your bathroom? You are more likely to be harmed or killed while taking a bath then you are from a terrorist on US soil. Statistically, less then 400 people a year over the last 10 years have died from terrorists on US soil. That is absurdly low. Damn near everything you do during the course of your day carries more risk. Being injured or killed due to a terrorist on a plane ranks up there with checking your mail on the risk scale.

So, why are YOU so selfish as to waste all those resources NOT saving lives when they could be used to secure you and your family from the dangers of your bathtub? They could inspect it for proper function before each use and once you or your family member begins taking a bath they can read the safety instruction card that tells them how to operate the faucet, drain, shower, etc. and they can remind you to hold your breath before going underwater and to wait until you are back above the waters surface to breath again. If anything goes wrong during the course of you or your family members bath they will be right there willing and able to offer assistance.

I bet you think that the risks involved with taking a bath are acceptable though and that only relatively small actions/steps are required to mitigate most of that risk (perhaps adding some of those non-slip things to the bottom). If so, why is the more dangerous of the two (flying and bathing) an acceptable risk while the other is not?

4 paragraphs does not equal sound thinking. The incredibly obvious answer is that we already have security in place where it is needed on the ground. That is how we have stopped bombing attempts on the ground (and in the air). We don't need more security on the ground. It appears that the most successful terrorist attacks involve high-jacked planes. Again, it is fairly obvious that planes get high-jacked b/c they provide an isolated environment that can be successfully controlled without interference from govt agencies, and that planes can be used as huge bombs to attack ideological targets. Terrorists could just blow themselves up in a crowded airport, but somehow, that just doesn't seem to be what they are aiming for.

 

[CycloWizard]

If you "stopped trying to argue," then why are you writing responses to my posts? This is the same level of stupidity as making a comment, "I'm not communicating with you right now."

I can point out your stupidity without arguing with you. How exactly does that make me stupid?

And why would you think that an engineer would be the best judge of the effectiveness of a security protocol? An engineer would be in a position to determine if a technology was capable of detecting explosives. Assuming the technology was adequate, an expert on both terrorism and human factors would be in a position to judge whether the protocol was likely to be effective at reducing terrorist attempts.

You assume that the technology is adequate. As an engineer, you (should) have the skills to evaluate this assumption. Instead, you just roll with it, proceeding in willful ignorance.

 

[Mark R]

Seriously. Should have gone to another airport after telling the pedobear brigade to go fuck themselves.

Tricky.

It's not permitted for a person to leave the security checkpoint once they have stepped over the line, unless they have been cleared to pass through.

If you attempt to turn back, the TSA staff are required to call law enforcement and have you arrested.

 

[alkemyst]

Here's how all this mumbo jumbo comes about: No one thinks it's going to happen to them!

Fucking patriot act is the mindbender. We as a nation fucked ourselves straight up the ass with that move.

People are gungho on profiling, sobriety checkpoints, wiretaps, airport screenings as long as its not them being approached.

Just look at how many people that are on HOA boards that violate the rules they are supposed to enforce.

 

[her209]

Almost as nice as claiming that George Bush "straight up said" that Kanye West was a racist, then disappearing from the thread when asked by several people for proof. Stay classy...

WTF? Maybe you need to go back and read the article, but if its too much, go watch the video of the interview. Bush said Kanye West was calling him a racist. That's straight up calling Kanye West one in Republicanland.

But sounds like you're still hung up on it.

 

[Darwin333]

4 paragraphs does not equal sound thinking. The incredibly obvious answer is that we already have security in place where it is needed on the ground. That is how we have stopped bombing attempts on the ground (and in the air). We don't need more security on the ground. It appears that the most successful terrorist attacks involve high-jacked planes. Again, it is fairly obvious that planes get high-jacked b/c they provide an isolated environment that can be successfully controlled without interference from govt agencies, and that planes can be used as huge bombs to attack ideological targets. Terrorists could just blow themselves up in a crowded airport, but somehow, that just doesn't seem to be what they are aiming for.

And your single paragraph doesn't equal anything remotely close to an intelligent rebuttal because I can destroy the entire argument you posted above with 4 simple words.

Locked reinforced cockpit doors......... it really is that simple.

Your "reasoning" has already been defeated with a simple fucking lock.

I would really appreciate it if you tried a bit harder, since we have eliminated the "flying missile" argument we are back to body count and fear. They have already won the "fear" part because we are having this argument so we are down to body count.

 

[Darwin333]

Tricky.

It's not permitted for a person to leave the security checkpoint once they have stepped over the line, unless they have been cleared to pass through.

If you attempt to turn back, the TSA staff are required to call law enforcement and have you arrested.

I have only heard of one Sheriffs office threatening to arrest people for turning around and even then it was "detainment with possible arrest". Other than that the TSA threatens with civil suits of $10K for refusing to complete the process. Reason number 857 that what they are doing is fucked up.

 

[JS80]

Wear a bikini to the airport = no pat down? http://www.nbclosangeles.com/traffi...holiday-travel-thanksgiving-110384004.html?dr

 

[spittledip]

And your single paragraph doesn't equal anything remotely close to an intelligent rebuttal because I can destroy the entire argument you posted above with 4 simple words.

Locked reinforced cockpit doors......... it really is that simple.

Your "reasoning" has already been defeated with a simple fucking lock.

I would really appreciate it if you tried a bit harder, since we have eliminated the "flying missile" argument we are back to body count and fear. They have already won the "fear" part because we are having this argument so we are down to body count.

Have you been on a flight recently? You know how often those doors are just left open? That is all it takes. Or, some prompting from a terrorist who threatens to blow the plane up or kill a flight attendant. So, the locks have 2 weaknesses- human will and just plain being left open. This is why there needs to be multiple ways to prevent these scenarios. And possibly the most obvious thing of all is that the best scenario is to not have a terrorist on the plane to begin with...

 

[alkemyst]

Wear a bikini to the airport = no pat down? http://www.nbclosangeles.com/traffi...holiday-travel-thanksgiving-110384004.html?dr

This is where is sort of gets wierd. I am sure out of all the TSA's of the country, one is going to think self-promotingly, she may have a box cutter in her ass cheeks. I better get up in that.

I know as a whole the TSA means well but some of their staff are downright assholes...like most low level workerbees we all deal with.

 

[Scotteq]

Almost as nice as claiming that George Bush "straight up said" that Kanye West was a racist, then disappearing from the thread when asked by several people for proof. Stay classy...

WTF? Maybe you need to go back and read the article, but if its too much, go watch the video of the interview. Bush said Kanye West was calling him a racist. That's straight up calling Kanye West one in Republicanland.

But sounds like you're still hung up on it.

Kayne West really did call GWB a racist.

So now we have a situation where someone calls you a Racist. And the fact that you report that this person called you a racist.. means you really *are* a racist.

Internet Logic at it's best.

 

[alkemyst]

WTF? Maybe you need to go back and read the article, but if its too much, go watch the video of the interview. Bush said Kanye West was calling him a racist. That's straight up calling Kanye West one in Republicanland.

But sounds like you're still hung up on it.

All I have to say is most of the Pro-Bush fuckers esp. from Texas are offensively racist. I am pretty tolerant and even use the "N" word at times, but no way in hell am I going to throw any label on an entire race of people.

I don't think the "Bush"es are totally bad, but they do play a big drum to the good ol' boys ready to beat their chests from their lazy boys and think they are supporting a nation.

 

[her209]

Kayne West really did call GWB a racist.

I think we all know the words he said.

So now we have a situation where someone calls you a Racist. And the fact that you report that this person called you a racist.. means you really *are* a racist.

Republican Logic at it's best.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Scotteq]

Riiight - I forgot the whole "We're Democrats and reserve the Right to call anyone and everyone a Racist In Order To Shut Them up" rule.

Excuse me for answering yet another one of your troll posts.

 

[Brainonska511]

Have you been on a flight recently? You know how often those doors are just left open? That is all it takes. Or, some prompting from a terrorist who threatens to blow the plane up or kill a flight attendant. So, the locks have 2 weaknesses- human will and just plain being left open. This is why there needs to be multiple ways to prevent these scenarios. And possibly the most obvious thing of all is that the best scenario is to not have a terrorist on the plane to begin with...

Have you pulled your head out of your ass and looked at the front of a plane while it is flying? I have always seen the cockpit door closed and locked.

 

[Darwin333]

Have you been on a flight recently? You know how often those doors are just left open? That is all it takes. Or, some prompting from a terrorist who threatens to blow the plane up or kill a flight attendant. So, the locks have 2 weaknesses- human will and just plain being left open. This is why there needs to be multiple ways to prevent these scenarios. And possibly the most obvious thing of all is that the best scenario is to not have a terrorist on the plane to begin with...

I have yet to see a single cockpit door opened during a flight after 9/11. Pretty sure it is against FAA procedures and could get a pilot in a whole heap of trouble.

What we have seen since 9/11 is the passengers won't let you do whatever it is you are trying to do in order to obtain access. ON 9/11 the passengers, after figuring out the intentions of the terrorists, prevented them from completing their mission and the terrorists already controlled the cockpit.

Sorry bud, that problem has been solved already so try again.

Even better is general aviation is not checked AT ALL. So you could load up a private jet full of C4 and fly it into whatever you want with absolutely no TSA. So is that really the bullshit story you want to stick with?

 

[spittledip]

Have you pulled your head out of your ass and looked at the front of a plane while it is flying? I have always seen the cockpit door closed and locked.

I have yet to see a single cockpit door opened during a flight after 9/11. Pretty sure it is against FAA procedures and could get a pilot in a whole heap of trouble.

What we have seen since 9/11 is the passengers won't let you do whatever it is you are trying to do in order to obtain access. ON 9/11 the passengers, after figuring out the intentions of the terrorists, prevented them from completing their mission and the terrorists already controlled the cockpit.

Sorry bud, that problem has been solved already so try again.

Even better is general aviation is not checked AT ALL. So you could load up a private jet full of C4 and fly it into whatever you want with absolutely no TSA. So is that really the bullshit story you want to stick with?

Seems like I am not the only one who has seen the cockpit door wide open during flight despite there being a rule about it. A quick Google search is all that took.
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&...=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=573da4ec7e15bdf2

So you are saying the problem has been solved b/c passengers will fight back? That is not a reliable solution at all. That isn't even a solution.

A small private jet full of C4 does sound like the easier route, but it hasn't been done yet. Seems like terrorists prefer commercial flights. Obviously the mentality of the terrorist is not to go the easiest route, but the one that will do the most damage to the psyche of the American people.