View Single Post
Old 11-19-2010, 03:17 AM   #4
Darth Avlectus
@Darth Avlectus
I'd buy that for a dollar
Darth Avlectus's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: My pervert mansion
Posts: 4,397
Current Game: A dirty old man.
^^^Missed that one. I'll check it out...

Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis View Post
Frankly, I don't see why it's acceptable to be molested by poorly paid TSA agents when you don't have to endure that kind of treatment simply getting into your own car, which is a bit more dangerous than flying on an airplane, even considering terrorism.
Oh I don't think it is acceptable, personally. Where it was only a ...nuisance before, it is now bordering on atrocious. Oh and uhh, don't wear even rubberized stud bracelets and sport a freeflowing long mop, seems that missouri airport security lackeys love to pull you aside and harass you a little extra b/c you're a California headbanger, and they aren't beyond stealing things blind, either.

As Lloyd Christmas said: "Statistically you're more likely to get killed on the way to the airport." lol

Or how you're not allowed to bring even small energy drinks onboard.

I'm not traveling by air in the near future, nor do I plan to. I've recently traveled by rail, though, which was very pleasant. If one were really concerned about people getting killed by terrorists, one would petition the government to prevent all mass gatherings, protests, or any other activity in which it is easy to kill many people. However, that is not done. As such, I believe that the TSA's job is simply "security theater" -- in which the appearance of security is given, but where one's actual safety on a personal basis is not really affected.
I remember it was in the news (sometime before 2008) some guy was independently testing out the whole system awhile back and found several flaws. When he came to them and told them, they wanted to grind his bones rather than hire him--don't know of the outcome. It's ridiculous, though.

Hell, it's mind boggling how we have so much put into just the airports where they could just simply walk right over the borders with no questions asked.

To be honest, I think that terrorism hysteria has reached such extremes that is no longer relevant to the real world. Such measures that the TSA says are "necessary" are not even required by Israel, which is a far more common target of terrorism than the US.
Agreed, it's overblown. Not to mention some of that funding could be better used elsewhere, even security wise. Here's an idea: use that additional funding to pay our vets what we rightfully owe them--just saying.

I was a libertarian before I was anything else (I've merely gone from being an extreme left green party to a now medium right independent) and I was criticizing this whole thing once I understood it permanently took away rights and freedoms, still do in fact. In turn it is giving the general population more of a hassle than people actually fitting the terrorists lineup in all its forms.

Now for having a cricket sized pocket knife on your keychain you'll be arrested and jailed for felony weapons possession. OK, I'm pretty sure most people can't kill anyone with a little blade not even 2" long and maybe half inch wide, 10 sheets of paper thick.

Oh wait, that's right the dreaded box cutters. How could I forget?

To be afraid of air travel by terrorism you must also be (rather more) afraid of the simple act of getting into a car -- and I'm not sure that's a real consideration by anyone. The TSA simply produces these procedures in a CYA maneuver. Personally, I will not use air travel until the TSA becomes significantly more reasonable in its restrictions.
Yeah. Both my trips to Missouri have been by airplane and looking back both had weird, *stupid* little incidents in the airport terminals. Now that I think about them, one was obviously some hick messing with me b/c I'm a CA headbanger, and the other was an "accident" which they forcefully defended with vague reasoning and implied threat of more procedure. (IMO it's a redundancy "shadow policy" that works rather well to invent reasons for interrogation and easy labeling of "suspicious" for regular people.)

Pilots being terrorists? Seriously? If they're in control, there's nothing that can be done to stop them from crashing the plane.
Unless that icy blue eyed "Fonz" haircutted air marshal can get into the cockpit and also has piloting skills--by then, it's already too late, though. A little mental health evaluation screening in job application and interview presumably would take care of this and if I'm not mistaken this is the case as piloting is serious business.

Honestly, what is the purpose of screening them for explosives every time they get on a plane when their position makes such possession of such explosives superfluous?

3 year olds being having concealed explosives on their persons? Sure, it is possible: but fantastic reasons can be invented for any scenario, no matter how extreme. Even if this has happened before (which it has, I might add), there is simply no accounting for crazies. Which is what terrorists are. Crazies. One shouldn't account for them as a credible threat against anything. If they do happen to attack something successfully, it should be taken note of-- but people should not be molested to accommodate a marginal increase in the threat of terrorists taking over a plane. Hardened cockpit doors seem to have taken care of most of the threat in this regard.
Don't forget, granny might have something in her dress as well.

No wait, I know, let's see if those cards in your wallet are real or if one is made from plastic explosive.

What about this magnesium block on your keys? You might try to start a fire! (Nevermind the smoke alarms are the most sensitive anywhere and the penalty is hefty for smoking onboard.)

Of course, I understand why this is happening-- like I said, it is a CYA maneuver -- but I don't see why government agents should be responsible for the unforseeable (which is, after all, crazies). So anyone holding the government responsible for people who are insane and do insane things should be treated as they really are-- people with ridiculously unreasonable expectations of air travel and the government.
The status quo is unfortunately more profitable for them. Seriously, can you honestly tell me it isn't?

As soon as "victory against terrorism" is defined as "0 people killed by terrorism", the terrorists really have won. There is danger in everything; it is the mark of the mature person to put it into perspective. I think our government is failing in its duty to do so... and citizens who expect such a track record are simply the victims of fearmongering.
Sad but true. Though I think America's population is waking up as people of all persuasions are seeing reason in this. Now just to see if those in charge will listen to us.

That's right, Bixby Snyder folks.
Darth Avlectus is offline   you may: quote & reply,