TSA Encounter at SAN

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
62

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
And that would be a problem?

I doubt it.

I am sure someone will figure it out if he is able to make a buck off off it.

[/quote]

Wow, was THAT a weak response.

“I am sure someone will figure it out.”

Ha! [/quote]

No, that was actually a very clever response, for the simple reason that I do not think that anyone can know it all and that includes me.

Incidentally, that is eaxactly why top down economic planning does not work and the free market does.

The people running their businesses always know more about it than you, I, or any congressman does.

63

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Yeah, but I am totally on board with forcing you to pay for an army and a police force.

Thats right, I have just shown my totalitarian colors.

[/quote]

Why is it OK to FORCE me to do those things, but not others???[/quote]

Because it is unwise to compound necessary evils with unnecessary one?

[/quote]

Oh, I see.

YOU get to decide what is “necessary” and what is not.

Well, I know lots of folks who think this airport security is a “necessary evil,” too. I don’t necessarily agree, but their opinion is no less valid than yours.

So, in the end, you’re against government intervention in our lives.

Except when YOU want it.

Some would call that hypocrisy, Franz. [/quote]

Their opinion is horseshit because it has been demonstrated over and over and over again that this procedures do nothing to prevent stuff from being smuggled on board of an airplane.

It gets even more ludicrous when even the pilots are patted down, what is going to stop them from hijacking a plane that they actually, um, fly?

Also, to prevent people from coming to harm through the actions of others is the bare bones minimum almost all people can agree on whereas the extensive intrusion of governments on all of our lives is sometimes all people reject at some point or another and is more the result of political logrolling then an actual consensus.

65

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Also, to prevent people from coming to harm through the actions of others is the bare bones minimum almost all people can agree…

[/quote]

Ah, I see.

So, you’d be in favor, then, of a cop on every corner, doing random stop-and-searches, since that would “prevent people from coming to harm through the actions of others.”

Yeah, I know; THAT’S “unnecessary” in your view.

But the fact remains that you’re in favor of government intrusion when YOU feel it makes sense.

But everybody else is a nonthinking lackey for wanting the government involved in what THEY think is “important,” “necessary” and “almost all people can agree.”

Hypocrisy, Franze. Hypocrisy.[/quote]

Not really.

The desire to keep violence or the threat of violence to a minimum.

As long as government reduces violence, fantastic, when it starts to interfere everywhere it becomes the main source of it.

66

The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.

67

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.

68

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, what I am saying is what can the TSA do? What if the terrorist gets caught half way through the airport and detonates. How many people would die then?

Again what can the TSA really do? one push of a button is all it will take and BOOM, many many more people will die.

When you can give a credible way to stop someone from pressing a button then we can talk about TSA being worth a damn. Unless of course you believe the next step is we cut the hands off everyone who gets on a plane.

How does it feel to know that you have been beat by a bunch of uncivilized cave dwellers in Afghanistan? They have got you to not only not think rationally but surrender your freedoms.

69

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, I would rather have determining travellers on their own how much risk they are going to take and how much it is worth it for them then to have them go through a useless, yet very expensive charade.

70

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, what I am saying is what can the TSA do? What if the terrorist gets caught half way through the airport and detonates. How many people would die then?

Again what can the TSA really do? one push of a button is all it will take and BOOM, many many more people will die.

When you can give a credible way to stop someone from pressing a button then we can talk about TSA being worth a damn. Unless of course you believe the next step is we cut the hands off everyone who gets on a plane.

How does it feel to know that you have been beat by a bunch of uncivilized cave dwellers in Afghanistan? They have got you to not only not think rationally but surrender your freedoms.[/quote]

My freedoms are quite intact, thank you. If I am inconvenienced, I choose not to fly, but I do not whine endlessly about it. You, on the other hand, would let Afghan cave-dwellers murder 350 people because your delicate sensibilities are offended? How manful of you!

Next: you clearly do not understand this business about chemistry and explosives. Read up on it. You may discover that terrorism does not need to adhere to your childish scenarios or your hair-brained “solutions.”

Happy travels!

71

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, what I am saying is what can the TSA do? What if the terrorist gets caught half way through the airport and detonates. How many people would die then?

Again what can the TSA really do? one push of a button is all it will take and BOOM, many many more people will die.

When you can give a credible way to stop someone from pressing a button then we can talk about TSA being worth a damn. Unless of course you believe the next step is we cut the hands off everyone who gets on a plane.

How does it feel to know that you have been beat by a bunch of uncivilized cave dwellers in Afghanistan? They have got you to not only not think rationally but surrender your freedoms.[/quote]

My freedoms are quite intact, thank you. If I am inconvenienced, I choose not to fly, but I do not whine endlessly about it. You, on the other hand, would let Afghan cave-dwellers murder 350 people because your delicate sensibilities are offended? How manful of you!

Next: you clearly do not understand this business about chemistry and explosives. Read up on it. You may discover that terrorism does not need to adhere to your childish scenarios or your hair-brained “solutions.”

Happy travels!

[/quote]

Yes, I am make believing all the suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan. My friends who went there where lying there ass off telling me what they saw.

72

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, I would rather have determining travellers on their own how much risk they are going to take and how much it is worth it for them then to have them go through a useless, yet very expensive charade.

[/quote]
But without the charade, the risks to the terrorists drop and it make it more likely for everyone to be injured.

Travellers degtermine their risks?
Yes, and how do they weigh the “rational” risk of being blown up on a plane, or being shot down from the sky in your plan? Do you have figures in mind? Is there an actuary or an insurance company to back you up?

No, I thought not. There is no risk assessment here; to pretend that there is is to lie.

73

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
[/quote]
But without the charade, the risks to the terrorists drop and it make it more likely for everyone to be injured.

Travellers degtermine their risks?
Yes, and how do they weigh the “rational” risk of being blown up on a plane, or being shot down from the sky in your plan? Do you have figures in mind? Is there an actuary or an insurance company to back you up?

No, I thought not. There is no risk assessment here; to pretend that there is is to lie.

[/quote]

Has the market been allowed to create an insurance?

74

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, what I am saying is what can the TSA do? What if the terrorist gets caught half way through the airport and detonates. How many people would die then?

Again what can the TSA really do? one push of a button is all it will take and BOOM, many many more people will die.

When you can give a credible way to stop someone from pressing a button then we can talk about TSA being worth a damn. Unless of course you believe the next step is we cut the hands off everyone who gets on a plane.

How does it feel to know that you have been beat by a bunch of uncivilized cave dwellers in Afghanistan? They have got you to not only not think rationally but surrender your freedoms.[/quote]

My freedoms are quite intact, thank you. If I am inconvenienced, I choose not to fly, but I do not whine endlessly about it. You, on the other hand, would let Afghan cave-dwellers murder 350 people because your delicate sensibilities are offended? How manful of you!

Next: you clearly do not understand this business about chemistry and explosives. Read up on it. You may discover that terrorism does not need to adhere to your childish scenarios or your hair-brained “solutions.”

Happy travels!

[/quote]

Yes, I am make believing all the suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan. My friends who went there where lying there ass off telling me what they saw.[/quote]

Missed your ESL class?

75

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
You may discover that terrorism does not need to adhere to your childish scenarios or your hair-brained “solutions.”

[/quote]

Yeah, I imagine you and the TSA are in for a surprise as well.

76

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
[/quote]
But without the charade, the risks to the terrorists drop and it make it more likely for everyone to be injured.

Travellers degtermine their risks?
Yes, and how do they weigh the “rational” risk of being blown up on a plane, or being shot down from the sky in your plan? Do you have figures in mind? Is there an actuary or an insurance company to back you up?

No, I thought not. There is no risk assessment here; to pretend that there is is to lie.

[/quote]

Has the market been allowed to create an insurance? [/quote]

The answer is yes, and I would have thought that, from your fountain of wisdom, you would have discovered that by now.

77

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
You may discover that terrorism does not need to adhere to your childish scenarios or your hair-brained “solutions.”

[/quote]

Yeah, I imagine you and the TSA are in for a surprise as well.

[/quote]

I will not be surprised at all. I don’t speak for the TSA.
So I presume that you will be making your first trip to the USA on a private chartered plane–just to preserve your freedoms, eh?

78

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, I would rather have determining travellers on their own how much risk they are going to take and how much it is worth it for them then to have them go through a useless, yet very expensive charade.

[/quote]
But without the charade, the risks to the terrorists drop and it make it more likely for everyone to be injured.

Travellers degtermine their risks?
Yes, and how do they weigh the “rational” risk of being blown up on a plane, or being shot down from the sky in your plan? Do you have figures in mind? Is there an actuary or an insurance company to back you up?

No, I thought not. There is no risk assessment here; to pretend that there is is to lie.

[/quote]

There does not have to be an exact number, I doubt that anyone weighing road vs train travel or consenting to a medical procedure hires a statistician to determine his odds, and yet people make decisions of this kind all the time.

Amazing, isnt it.

Insurance companies however will hire statisticians and will come up with a price, there are very few risks as thourougly analyzed as the risks of air travel.

79

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
You may discover that terrorism does not need to adhere to your childish scenarios or your hair-brained “solutions.”

[/quote]

Yeah, I imagine you and the TSA are in for a surprise as well.

[/quote]

I will not be surprised at all. I don’t speak for the TSA.
So I presume that you will be making your first trip to the USA on a private chartered plane–just to preserve your freedoms, eh?[/quote]

I will avoid any further travel to the US if I can. and if I cannot, I would always opt for the pat down, just to make it as expensive and inconvenient for them as possible.

80

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
The TSA should be eliminated.

I have always wondered what exactly they would do if they found someone with a bomb on them, I mean really what the fuck could they do, the guy would just detonate it in the terminal and kill everyone anyways so really besides saving the plane they are not stopping anything.

I like Orions idea, let the airlines pay the military to shoot the plane down if it goes off course and isn’t responding.

But then again the evil freedom fighters, I mean terrorists must be stopped at all costs so what the hell lets feel up little boys and girls.[/quote]

So let’s be clear: you and orion would rather see 350 people die in a crash than be slightly inconvenienced at an airport?

Those are some mighty strong principles you cherish.
[/quote]

No, I would rather have determining travellers on their own how much risk they are going to take and how much it is worth it for them then to have them go through a useless, yet very expensive charade.

[/quote]
But without the charade, the risks to the terrorists drop and it make it more likely for everyone to be injured.

Travellers degtermine their risks?
Yes, and how do they weigh the “rational” risk of being blown up on a plane, or being shot down from the sky in your plan? Do you have figures in mind? Is there an actuary or an insurance company to back you up?

No, I thought not. There is no risk assessment here; to pretend that there is is to lie.

[/quote]

There does not have to be an exact number, I doubt that anyone weighing road vs train travel or consenting to a medical procedure hires a statistician to determine his odds, and yet people make decisions of this kind all the time.

Amazing, isnt it.

Insurance companies however will hire statisticians and will come up with a price, there are very few risks as thourougly analyzed as the risks of air travel.
[/quote]

As I thought; disguised by the muddled verbiage, you really do not know the risks, nor would you be able to assign a risk value to flying (with or without various screening procedures.)

When I give the risk of medical procedures, there is a confidence of the frequency of adverse unintentional events.

Not so with terrorism, I would think. An actuary may estimate the chances of random or natural events, but he cannot predict the risk for intentional malicious events with any degree of confidence. (Past experience is not a good predictor of the future behavior of terrorist bent on destructive acts.)

But good luck with your guesses.

I guess you have decided a pat-down is not such an invasion of your inviolate freedoms, after all. Funny how reality intrudes into even the most rigidly dogmatic mind.