Transportation Security Administration hard at work

[IBCoupe]

Wait, I want the old Wing back. He was a partisan hack, sure, but he wasn't going to lengths to offend people.

Bad troll, bad.

[AZhitman]

Big-boy pants, please. Let's remember, political correctness isn't our strong suit here.

Back on-topic, and hopefully to bring this barge back around full-circle:

Speaking of "hoods", and by that, I read "hoodlums", aka Chicago-style Unions / Big Labor.... How much of that such influence IS there on this latest TSA business?

[heliochrome85]

id suspect alot since the makers of such scanners are in the business of selling said scanners. so obviously they want things to be so scurry as to justify added security.


wanna know whats scarier?

most cargo at US ports is not scanned or checked. wanna know a great way of bringing in a bomb? its definately not a plane.

[AZhitman]

id suspect alot since the makers of such scanners are in the business of selling said scanners. so obviously they want things to be so scurry as to justify added security.

Say it ain't so.

Now, let's go ahead and make a Haliburton-style stretch, toss BO under the bus for selling out our freedoms in pursuit of financial gain, and call it even.

Whew. Finally.

most cargo at US ports is not scanned or checked. wanna know a great way of bringing in a b0mb? its definately not a plane.

Correct. But the minute we let our guard down [at the airport], we'll be sorry. But correct nonetheless.

[stebo0728]

Wanna know what else is scary? Flagging people for pat-downs based on metal detector buzzers, then searching for non-metallic items. Sorta like trying to pick out all the brown M&M's by grabbing all the blue ones?

[heliochrome85]

oh i know what you are gettign at, and just remember, he didnt institute the current tsa policies. these were drawn up a while ago, and have only come into place as the new scanners were completed and installed. so they predate him. that being said, if you were talking about say, someone in charge of policy for TSA, that may be where the influence is being placed. or the person who is drawing up the case for a specific method of searching.


and, i dont disagree about the planes. we obviously have to do all we can within reason. but its like taking care of the paper cut to make sure it doesnt turn gangrenous, but putting a bandaid over the neck laceration.

[AZhitman]

Yep. I'd be much happier with the "sniffers".

Again, this goes back to my call for more Air Marshals, eliminating the useless stewards, and more efficiency in processing fliers.

Honestly, flying would be SO much simpler if amateurs and frequent flyers had separate terminals / gates... and outlaw ALL carry-on bags. GODDAMMIT I hate people that carry bags on. Weld the overhead bins shut, check your bags.

Don't like it? DRIVE.

[RobPaulson]

United States government power > societal support power

I think you're confused. This is America, sir.
"government of the people, by the people, for the people"
-Abraham Lincoln

But freedom isn't free! It comes with its costs and, in contemporary times, those costs involve TSA policies that, while may be considered intrusive, are ultimately there to ENSURE your continued enjoyment of freedom (as apposed to injury or death).

1. You're in an intellectual discussion about politics. It's "Opposed". For future reference, check this one out big guy. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Apposed

2. ‎"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin I don't see how this quote could even come close to being misinterpreter by you. This is stated by one of the founding fathers of this great nation. I think he knows a bit more about what was intended by the power limitations set on this goverment than you, or even the current cluster f*ck of an administration. You are basically arguing against the core ideas and policies set forth when this nation was created. (same ideas/policies the entire government was originally designed around!)

The government can essentially do whatever they'd like.. including infringing on your freedoms/rights.

^ OMG he must be crazy for saying that!

Again. I think you're confused. This is America, sir. The government should be scared of its people, not the other way around. As Americans, WE hold the power to make these decisions, not the entity we have assigned as 'Government'. If we wish it as a people, we can abolish said government! THAT is the ideal power of the American people and that is the way this country was intended to exist!

So yes, YOU are crazy. And yes, I see what you're doing here. You're blindly promoting the "STOP WHINNING SISSY GIRLS!" mentality. You're also a prime example of how fear mongering molds the political beliefs of this countries sheeple.

Why don't you look at how many lives are lost every year from recent TSA oversights and security breaches(lets ROFL through it and assume 9-11 happens every year, just to inflate the numbers astronomically). Then look at the amount of lives lost on our highways. And lastly (oh noes, this is a 3 step realization, try to stay with me here) consider how much money is spent trying to regulate and make flights 'safer' compared to how much is invested in the research to make our roadways safer.

I'll tell you the money spent to people dying ratio is a bit overwhelming on the roads. Where is your outrage and outcry to regulate everyday motor vehicle traffic to reduce the thousands of unnecessary casualties?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vjrNmlU9is#t=3m20s

[heliochrome85]

Yep. I'd be much happier with the "sniffers".

Again, this goes back to my call for more Air Marshals, eliminating the useless stewards, and more efficiency in processing fliers.

Honestly, flying would be SO much simpler if amateurs and frequent flyers had separate terminals / gates... and outlaw ALL carry-on bags. GODDAMMIT I hate people that carry bags on. Weld the overhead bins shut, check your bags.

Don't like it? DRIVE.

i eagerly await when the great revolution comes, and they sweep you into power.

[RobPaulson]

oh and on a more irrational emotional note, if anyone ever treated my little girl like this, I'd be going to jail.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3niEaOBntqs#t=0m57s

[stebo0728]

Hey why not allow anyone legally registered to pack heat to take it on the plane? Thats part of the problem, all these stupid gun policies everywhere just embolden the crooks and criminals, and cripple the people. Again levels of gun crimes committed by people LEGALLY carrying them are so low they are virtually non existent. Whats the odds 9/11 would have happened if the douchebags hadnt known FOR A FACT that no one would have a gun on-board?

[heliochrome85]

because you dont want a hole in the pressure dome keeping the plane pressurized. otherwise it'll crumple at altitude like a paper cup.

[AZhitman]

because you dont want a hole in the pressure dome keeping the plane pressurized. otherwise it'll crumple at altitude like a paper cup.

Myth.

Busted.

Next.

[RobPaulson]

eff the end of pages. i'm reposting this.

United States government power > societal support power

I think you're confused. This is America, sir.
"government of the people, by the people, for the people"
-Abraham Lincoln

But freedom isn't free! It comes with its costs and, in contemporary times, those costs involve TSA policies that, while may be considered intrusive, are ultimately there to ENSURE your continued enjoyment of freedom (as apposed to injury or death).

1. You're in an intellectual discussion about politics. It's "Opposed". For future reference, check this one out big guy. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Apposed

2. ‎"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin I don't see how this quote could even come close to being misinterpreter by you. This is stated by one of the founding fathers of this great nation. I think he knows a bit more about what was intended by the power limitations set on this goverment than you, or even the current cluster f*ck of an administration. You are basically arguing against the core ideas and policies set forth when this nation was created. (same ideas/policies the entire government was originally designed around!)

The government can essentially do whatever they'd like.. including infringing on your freedoms/rights.

^ OMG he must be crazy for saying that!

Again. I think you're confused. This is America, sir. The government should be scared of its people, not the other way around. As Americans, WE hold the power to make these decisions, not the entity we have assigned as 'Government'. If we wish it as a people, we can abolish said government! THAT is the ideal power of the American people and that is the way this country was intended to exist!

So yes, YOU are crazy. And yes, I see what you're doing here. You're blindly promoting the "STOP WHINNING SISSY GIRLS!" mentality. You're also a prime example of how fear mongering molds the political beliefs of this countries sheeple.

Why don't you look at how many lives are lost every year from recent TSA oversights and security breaches(lets ROFL through it and assume 9-11 happens every year, just to inflate the numbers astronomically). Then look at the amount of lives lost on our highways. And lastly (oh noes, this is a 3 step realization, try to stay with me here) consider how much money is spent trying to regulate and make flights 'safer' compared to how much is invested in the research to make our roadways safer.

I'll tell you the money spent to people dying ratio is a bit overwhelming on the roads. Where is your outrage and outcry to regulate everyday motor vehicle traffic to reduce the thousands of unnecessary casualties?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vjrNmlU9is#t=3m20s

[heliochrome85]

well, that was th eonly explanation id ever heard. if its false, its news to me.

[AZhitman]

http://mythbustersresults.com/episode10

[heliochrome85]

INTERESTING
http://rt.com/usa/news/naked-body-scanners-usa/

[AZhitman]

Bad link... Copy/paste please?

[stebo0728]

Haha as I was typing I KNEW without a doubt the first argument against was gonna be the pressure dome argument. Thanks AZ for being quick on the uptake there. But aside from that, even assuming that myth was confirmed, you are making the assumption that having a firearm on-board means only that it will in fact be fired. But my argument is quite the opposite. Knowing that anyone and everyone could possibly be armed keeps the badies from ever formulating their hair-brained schemes, and gunfire on a plane would be less likely than being hit by a Miami Dolphins bus heading to the Superbowl.

[AZhitman]

Not only that, but if your Air Marshal does his/her job right, no bullets penetrate the fuselage - only bad guys' craniums.

Then again, knowing the bunch of entitled whining people in America, the rest of the passengers would demand that their clothes be dry cleaned and the airlines pay for their therapy.

[stebo0728]

Well would you want Al-Queda paying for the therapy?

[wingFeather]

nice. whats next? gonna drop a "jigaboo" comment? how bout one reminding us of the scurge of the "jungle bunny"?

Please delete your racist derogatory comment.

[heliochrome85]

Not only that, but if your Air Marshal does his/her job right, no bullets penetrate the fuselage - only bad guys' craniums.

Then again, knowing the bunch of entitled whining people in America, the rest of the passengers would demand that their clothes be dry cleaned and the airlines pay for their therapy.

are you advocating more air marshalls? then im totally down with that.

if you are advocating every passenger be allowed to have his or her weapon, then im kinda not in favor. its bad enough they are trying to allow phones on board.

[AZhitman]

More air marshals.

Less/no stewards/stewardesses.

No carrying of weapons by the general public, no (unless I can't have #1 above).

[heliochrome85]

OH THEN. YES HELL YES
more marshalls. i can get behind that. as for the stewardesses, only if they are hot. otherwise, fat camp.

[AZhitman]

Sadly, the liberals have systematically eliminated our "selection process" for stewardesses. Sorry. We tried.

[stebo0728]

Well cant speak for AZ, but as far as my opinion, I wouldnt have a problem in the world with legal gun carriers being allowed to have them on board, anyone legal, and citizen. These arent the people committing gun crimes, so whats the problem? But if we only went as far as to plant more air marshalls, then I like that idea as well. However, and I dont know the answer here, are air marshalls easier to spot and isolate on board? If anyone and everyone were a potential weapon carrier, the odds stack alot harsher against the perp. If the marshalls blend well and couldnt be singled out and dealt with, then maybe thats a feasible solution. But then Im one to never have a problem with legal gun carriers carrying them anywhere and everywhere, planes, schools, churches, bars (but I could see maybe having a law that prohibits alcohol consumption when carrying), hospitals, subways, anywhere. Again Im working of the statistically supported premise that legal gun carriers are not gun crime offenders. Will one pop up here and there? Sure but again FDA standards allow a certain percentage of feces in milk, albeit an extremely LOW percentage, the same statisctics apply to gun crimes by gun owners.

[heliochrome85]

Sadly, the liberals have systematically eliminated our "selection process" for stewardesses. Sorry. We tried.

thats why i only fly airlines that have exclusively male pilots. women in back serving food.


admit it greg, you want to move to the Agrabah, with me and Jasmine.

[srellim234]

My proposal from day one when security concerns started years ago (re: hijackings to Cuba) was for any law enforcement officer properly trained, certified and equipped with proper ammo be allowed to bring his/her weapon on board. Hijacker/terrorlst will never know whether there's no guns or an entire police convention on board. It also dampens the possibility of a rogue armed cop causing problems for the plane for exactly that same reason.

I see no reason why 100% of all cargo can't be screened. Probably 90% of those TSA agents could be diverted to cargo. Yes, it will take more technology, equipment, people to reach that 100% goal but it's a necessary step and an achievable goal.

[AZhitman]

^ I like this as well.

And on second thought, if I can carry my gun legally on a city bus, train, trolley, ferry, subway or light rail, why not an airplane?