| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/21/2010 07:32:14 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by CJinCA:
How soon we forget. :-(
Crotch bomb |
His flight originated overseas and I'm not convinced yet they would have found that even with a good crotch rub. |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 07:35:02 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Mick:
[Originally posted by genghis:
What are you folks trying to hide anyway? |
You are missing the point entirely. It's not about trying to hide anything, it's about preserving our constitutional rights. Simply put, what the TSA and DHS are doing is illegal in this country. I don't know what country you live in, but citizens of the USA have rights. |
Indeed they do...and the right to fly ain't one of them.
Ray
|
|
|
|
11/21/2010 07:38:37 PM · #28 |
...best you start worrying about this one...Link
I don't think this could be found with existing mechanisms...but I could be wrong.
Ray |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 07:40:35 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Mick:
[Originally posted by genghis:
What are you folks trying to hide anyway? |
You are missing the point entirely. It's not about trying to hide anything, it's about preserving our constitutional rights. Simply put, what the TSA and DHS are doing is illegal in this country. I don't know what country you live in, but citizens of the USA have rights. |
Indeed they do...and the right to fly ain't one of them.
Ray |
I believe he is referring to having his 'junk' played with not a right to fly. You touch my junk and I'll shoot you. :-) |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 07:45:26 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by kawesttex:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Mick:
[Originally posted by genghis:
What are you folks trying to hide anyway? |
You are missing the point entirely. It's not about trying to hide anything, it's about preserving our constitutional rights. Simply put, what the TSA and DHS are doing is illegal in this country. I don't know what country you live in, but citizens of the USA have rights. |
Indeed they do...and the right to fly ain't one of them.
Ray |
I believe he is referring to having his 'junk' played with not a right to fly. You touch my junk and I'll shoot you. :-) |
He might be, but what he is saying is NOT true. There are certain legal entities that can do that legally (within boundaries of course). In the current scenario, there does exist a recourse for people who are adamant that they will not undergo further searching... they can travel by some other means.
It could well be that public pressure will see changes, but for the time being, the law is on the side of the TSA and DHS.
Ray |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 07:48:54 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by kawesttex:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Mick:
[Originally posted by genghis:
What are you folks trying to hide anyway? |
You are missing the point entirely. It's not about trying to hide anything, it's about preserving our constitutional rights. Simply put, what the TSA and DHS are doing is illegal in this country. I don't know what country you live in, but citizens of the USA have rights. |
Indeed they do...and the right to fly ain't one of them.
Ray |
I believe he is referring to having his 'junk' played with not a right to fly. You touch my junk and I'll shoot you. :-) |
He might be, but what he is saying is NOT true. There are certain legal entities that can do that legally (within boundaries of course). In the current scenario, there does exist a recourse for people who are adamant that they will not undergo further searching... they can travel by some other means.
It could well be that public pressure will see changes, but for the time being, the law is on the side of the TSA and DHS.
Ray |
That is the point of this whole thread, is what they are doing 'legal'. We have seen some pretty shady things done by our (US) government lately that are bordering on unconstitutional. |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 08:21:56 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by CJinCA:
How soon we forget. :-(
Crotch bomb |
I'm betting they would not even find a bomb like this during their free feel, I truly believe we are not safer because of the action being taken but it just confirms the terrorist have won once again.
Message edited by author 2010-11-21 20:22:22. |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 08:26:15 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by kawesttex:
Originally posted by CJinCA:
How soon we forget. :-(
Crotch bomb |
His flight originated overseas and I'm not convinced yet they would have found that even with a good crotch rub. |
I also remember the crotch bomber, and the shoe bomber, and also the guy who had a bomb in him.
My question was not had someone used their crotch, its a question of effective use of defensive effort.
I have not seen any reports of these so called safety measures actually stopping or preventing acts, each one is created in response to an attack.
Its all part of the "we have to do something" mindset that breeds actions but not necessarily good or effective ones.
Everyone is for everything provided it keeps us and our kids safe.
But be careful you do not end up buying an Iraqi bomb detection system in the rush to do "something"
//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8471187.stm |
|
|
|
11/21/2010 11:16:14 PM · #34 |
I had heard about a bomber that stuffed C4 up his... The naked scanners and the feel up wouldn't catch that. I also heard about explosive breast implants.
When they inspect you for that, will you still fly?
links:
//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/28/eveningnews/main5347847.shtml
//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/7510350/Terrorists-could-use-exploding-breast-implants-to-blow-up-jet.html |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:46:00 AM · #35 |
If the unwarranted use of physical body searches and full-body x-ray scanning machines at airports is a good thing, then why not at other places? Shouldn't we allow random searches at other places where people congregate, like shopping malls, schools, or churches? For that matter, why don't we allow random no-knock home searches? Surely, you wouldn't mind if a bunch of heavily armed intruders busted into your home in the middle of the night to search for bomb making materials. After all, it would make us all "safer", right? Don't worry when they take your 14-year-old daughter into another room to "search" her body. I'm sure that no one employed by the government would ever do anything inappropriate with a young girl. We can trust the government to know and do what's best for us, right? Surely more searches would be better, wouldn't it?
What about photographers? Should we allow the police to randomly detain and search photographers? We already know that many public officials and police officers suspect that terrorists carry around DSLRs to photograph their intended victims, right? Why not let them act on those suspicions and search however and whenever they feel it's necessary? That's bound to make us all much safer, right?
It sounds ridiculous to me; unfortunately, that seems to where things are heading. I think we should put a stop to it, now, before it's too late.
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Benjamin Franklin
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 05:28:22 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by Mick:
Shouldn't we allow random searches at other places where people congregate, like shopping malls, schools, or churches? |
Once someone attacks a shopping mall a school or church in a very newsworthy way that inspires fear of "Them" you will see a change to the security as a reaction.
The USA's school shootings are all too common, but since they are our own kids there is less panic, They have had the reaction of metal detectors, cops on campus and, yes, random searches - but it does not seem to stop a determined individual.
Im most parts of the world an "Anti-Tiger rock" is 100% effective... (Mine works... no tigers here!) |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 06:32:02 AM · #37 |
Paranoia is the order of the day...
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:14:20 AM · #38 |
Couldn't an electronic sniffer or a dog pick up anything they can find with their see through machines and feel ups (other then maybe a plastic knife), and probably more? Maybe the dog trainers or sniffer makers need to offer Janet a cushy job when she leaves office?
And as Mick noted, why not the same level of security for the train, bus, subway, sporting events...? What about employees at dams, power plants, water treatment plants? Or employees at the factory where they build the airplanes? Airplanes are not the only potential target.
And funny story, I was talking this with a friend that travels a lot for work. She hasn't had to go therough the naked scanner or enhanced pat down yet, but she said last week she went through with a full bottle of water in her purse and they never caught it! As she grabbed her purse on the other side she seen it sitting in there. Hope you all feel safe while flying!
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 09:18:05. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:16:14 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by JulietNN:
LOL, I always beep and get pat downs , it is the underwire of my bra that does it.
Funnily enough, LAX is the worst for screening, I never beep |
too funny... I have the same problem! |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:27:26 AM · #40 |
if we would just back to profiling, this wouldn't be an issue.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:28:14 AM · #41 |
Personally I dont see what the big deal is...
1. Nobody is going to get their thrills groping my frumpy middle aged body.
2. I have nothing to hide...
3. Even if someone got their jollies grabbing my groin... who cares.
4. You have the choice not to fly.
We are all human, we all have bodies, none of our bodies are perfect.
The angle on this debate that I think is hilarious is Jesse Ventura's comments. A former Navy seal had to have taken a shower in front of hundreds of guys. He was a pro wrestler and wore tighty tights... We've seen his junk. Dude.... really???? |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:29:31 AM · #42 |
actually this overreaction by the TSA furthers the problem of why we worry about the things we shouldn't.
//thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/130243-analyst-new-tsa-procedures-will-kill-more-americans-on-the-highway
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 09:29:42. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:54:33 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I had heard about a bomber that stuffed C4 up his... The naked scanners and the feel up wouldn't catch that. I also heard about explosive breast implants.
When they inspect you for that, will you still fly?
links:
//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/28/eveningnews/main5347847.shtml
//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/7510350/Terrorists-could-use-exploding-breast-implants-to-blow-up-jet.html |
Ummm.... when someone blows up a plane with a pooper bomb, I'll stop flying. Plain and simple. No need for a pat down to scare me away.
A further reaching thought... We are comming to an age when air travel will become less and less nescessary. We really don't need to travel for business anymore. We can express ideas just as effectively through wires now. What if the terrorists made us a more efficient society? Wouldn't it be ironic if the net result of their activities is that we stopped wasting resources on unneeded travel?
Air travel is a pleasant convenience. Our society survived before it, and it could survive without it if need be. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:59:42 AM · #44 |
Want to have some real fun in the airport? Offer the screeners a tip for a happy ending rub down... they'll love you for it.
Really, it's not that big of a deal.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:29:02 PM · #45 |
This would disturb me no end and I would be one extremely upset mother if one of my kids where stripped . This is just wrong on so many levels.
//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1331886/Invasive-airport-security-pat-downs-NOT-going-away-Thanksgiving.html
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:46:13 PM · #46 |
Saw an AP article in my morning paper, located this by googling: Fig Leaf Underwear :-)
R. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:49:45 PM · #47 |
One minor point that the FUD mongers out there don't seem to realize is that it's absurdly easy to kill people, even in large numbers. People and airplanes are both very fragile things. It doesn't take much to kill a human, and a lot of money and effort is necessary to keep an airliner flying even on the best of days. It doesn't take a bomb to destroy either one. And, if the terrorists are determined enough, then there is virtually nothing that anyone can do to guarantee your safety. Yes, if you are willing to give up enough time, effort, money, and freedom then you can make it more difficult for them, but you cannot make it impossible or even very difficult. How far are you willing to go? How much are you willing to trade for a relatively small margin of safety? Are you willing to give up your constitutional rights and let the government turn our country into a police state on the very minor chance that it might make you a tiny bit safer? I'm not.
There are reasons why most terrorists do what they do. A lot of reasons. It isn't as if they all woke up one day and just decided, "Hey, I feel like killing a bunch of people today. Let's go blow up a plane." Something made them want that, most likely something our government did to them or their loved ones. Wouldn't it make more sense to spend our time, money, and effort trying to prevent that from happening? Maybe we should be requiring full body-cavity searches of politicians instead of airline passengers (I̢۪d volunteer my time for that). If we were smart and tried hard enough, then maybe we could even be friends with our neighbors. After all, terrorists are people too, aren't they?
Stop living your lives in fear, people.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:50:31 PM · #48 |
And then you would go file a lawsuit against TSA, hopefully backed by the ACLU, to help set legal precedence. The court system is how the people get laws changed. Ideally, you'd get detained for standing up against the authorities and then file your suit. It's far from a perfect system, but it's how things are done.
Are we losing rights? Sure, we are. But, it's not entirely the governments fault - they have always been overzealous. Americans are victims of our own cowardice. We've not only fallen to fear of terrorists, but we have no "rebels" to challenge our own government.
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 12:59:48.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:54:23 PM · #49 |
This is mind-boggling to me:
"The TSA is also warning that anyone who refuses to undergo the method of inspection will not be allowed to fly, nor will they be permitted to simply leave the airport.
Instead, passengers will face questioning by the TSA and possibly local police.
A TSA spokesman told the Sun Sentinel: ‘Once a person submits to the screening process, they can not just decide to leave that process.’
He said that, if that was the case, terrorists could try time and again to breach security - opting out each time until they were successful.
He added that passengers who did refuse would be questioned ‘until it is determined that they don’t pose a threat’ to the public."
In other words, if I buy a ticket to fly, get in line, realize they are gonna x-ray me or do a pat-down, and for whatever reason decide "The heck with this, I'm not submitting to this indignity, I'll cancel my trip rather than do it!", well I'm flat out of luck because I no longer have that option.
If this isn't surrendering liberty, I don't know what is...
R.
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 12:54:46. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:56:22 PM · #50 |
You left out the $11,000 fine ...
What about you decide to leave because the delay at the security checkpoint has caused you to already miss your flight ...
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 12:57:50. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 03:51:28 PM EDT.
