Even if the 130 items were all assault rifles or bricks of C-4, it doesn't matter. That's only 130 items. We've spent billions to find 130 items? And we want to spent billions more for this purpose???
Sure, if you tell them you feel threatened, that's quite reasonable.
So I have to feel threatened before I can call the police? What if I think the guy is harmless, but want the police to make sure? Or if I recognize him as the seemingly harmless & homeless religious nut that normally stands on the corner, but I want the police to record the incident?
But that was never brought up before and I didn't think it's the siutation we were talking about.
It's possible that you and I have a different idea of the harmlessness of a 'religious nut', but it seemed pretty clear to me.
But unless you're so scared you don't want him to know you're home, you could always open a window.
Or I could just call the police, so that the incident is taken care of or, at the very least, recorded. You know, the police service that I pay taxes for? :)
Anyway, I do see what you mean, but I disagree. Officers aren't so busy that skipping calls like this is necessary, and they triage them, anyway, so a low-priority call like this isn't going to be attended to until they have time for it. Not in Oklahoma, anyway. Maybe in a state with bigger cities?
What about the doctor? Is the doctor's office also part of your "never under any circumstances" mantra?
I have three children. They have had several didn't doctors over the course of their lives, but none of them have ever touched them the way that TSA agents do, or even in the same areas. There's no need for that until the child hits puberty, and can then understand and consent to the procedure.
You'll tell your kids it's ok if the doctor touches them because the doctor is there to make sure your child is healthy!
No, I'll tell my teenagers that it's okay for them to undergo those procedures, because that's the truth. I wouldn't tell my teenagers that it's okay for them to be groped because there isn't any reason for them to be groped. Maybe you lie to your kids, but I don't lie to mine.
Well, like it or not, agree or disagree, the security agent is there patting people down to make sure NO ONE IS GOING TO BLOW UP THE PLANE.
Not true. The TSA scan-and-grope can't look in cavities, so while a health exam by a physician is useful, a grope by the TSA is not.
Look, I don't really believe that these pat-downs are going to catch anyone with a stick of dynamite hiding in their groin, but that IS the idea and that IS why it's being done.
If you don't believe that these measures are useful, then you should join us in protesting them. We should never waste time or money on things that don't work, and when you add the actual abuses and hurt that this causes people, it's time to stop.
That is just as good a reason for your child to "endure the horror" as it is at the doctor's office.
As I've shown, no, it's not.
Hey, at least at the airport they don't have to take their clothes off!
At their doctor's office, they have never been asked to remove their clothing. In the future, when they're teens and can understand and consent to the procedures, they'll be asked to change into a gown that still covers their body to undergo health exams by people that they know and are comfortable with.
At an airport, children have to get naked and be looked at by strangers and/or be groped and touched all over by strangers, without understanding, consent, or purpose.
I went through the normal pat-down while pregnant, and found it uncomfortable and painful. This enhanced pat-down is ten times worse. I'm surprised that a pregnant woman hasn't hormone'd out and assaulted a TSA agent.
Re: ...and I want Bacon Cheeseburgers without the fat.
If you want the peace of mind that someone's not going to pull out a box cutter and slit you carotid artery, you're going to have to deal with a disgruntled employee touching your junk.
It would be fairly easy to put a box cutter in a cavity, which the scanners can't see and the agents can't feel. Moot point, hon.
I don't like these new touchy-feely techniques, but what I don't like even more is the populous changing there minds so damn fast.
The 'populous' had nothing to do with rolling out these scanners or pat-downs. The use of these scanners is totally political. When they were first mentioned, there was a public outcry about their safety, effectiveness, and cost. That outcry is now coming to a crescendo.
Go back to the old security measures, tragedy strikes, everyone demand strict measures again, wait another 10 years... wash, rinse, repeat
Actually, that's not true. We've had plenty of terrorist actions without flipping out about security. We're not even flipping out now, you know? What's happening is politicians taking advantage of the situation to force changes that benefit their financial contributors that their constituents neither need nor want.
Why shouldn't I pressure TSA agents? I don't know if you noticed, but they're agents of the TSA. Who do you want me to complain to? Agents of AT&T? How would that help?
I guess if I called the cops, the first thing they would do is come and remove the guy from my property, and then ask to speak to me about the situation.
As I stated above, it's trespassing when a religious nut walks onto my property and begins preaching. I can absolutely have the cops haul them off without violating his right to free speech. :)
Yes! As I stated above, we should require that all publishers - advertising and otherwise - to get permission before depositing any materials on private property. That would make litter - all litter - opt-in instead of opt-out. I shouldn't be forced to choose between giving personally identifiable information to God-knows-who and enduring litter.
On the post: TSA Agents Have 'Limited Ability' To Spot Prohibited Items In New Naked Scanners
Re:
On the post: Botched TSA Pat Down Leaves Traveler Covered In Urine
http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/tsa-has-no-time-train-its-screeners
On the post: Botched TSA Pat Down Leaves Traveler Covered In Urine
Re: This might be a bit of a stretch,but...
On the post: Botched TSA Pat Down Leaves Traveler Covered In Urine
Re: Just goes to show..
That is absolutely true. Here is a link to the report that explains this: http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/tsa-has-no-time-train-its-screeners
On the post: Whether Or Not The TSA Has Ever Caught A Terrorist Is Apparently A State Secret
Whatever.
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So I have to feel threatened before I can call the police? What if I think the guy is harmless, but want the police to make sure? Or if I recognize him as the seemingly harmless & homeless religious nut that normally stands on the corner, but I want the police to record the incident?
But that was never brought up before and I didn't think it's the siutation we were talking about.
It's possible that you and I have a different idea of the harmlessness of a 'religious nut', but it seemed pretty clear to me.
But unless you're so scared you don't want him to know you're home, you could always open a window.
Or I could just call the police, so that the incident is taken care of or, at the very least, recorded. You know, the police service that I pay taxes for? :)
Anyway, I do see what you mean, but I disagree. Officers aren't so busy that skipping calls like this is necessary, and they triage them, anyway, so a low-priority call like this isn't going to be attended to until they have time for it. Not in Oklahoma, anyway. Maybe in a state with bigger cities?
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's pretty stupid, because it seems pretty dangerous to me. I'm saying that you're wrong, because if you're right, then it's stupid.
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re: Re: frak the children
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re: frak the children
I have three children. They have had several didn't doctors over the course of their lives, but none of them have ever touched them the way that TSA agents do, or even in the same areas. There's no need for that until the child hits puberty, and can then understand and consent to the procedure.
You'll tell your kids it's ok if the doctor touches them because the doctor is there to make sure your child is healthy!
No, I'll tell my teenagers that it's okay for them to undergo those procedures, because that's the truth. I wouldn't tell my teenagers that it's okay for them to be groped because there isn't any reason for them to be groped. Maybe you lie to your kids, but I don't lie to mine.
Well, like it or not, agree or disagree, the security agent is there patting people down to make sure NO ONE IS GOING TO BLOW UP THE PLANE.
Not true. The TSA scan-and-grope can't look in cavities, so while a health exam by a physician is useful, a grope by the TSA is not.
Look, I don't really believe that these pat-downs are going to catch anyone with a stick of dynamite hiding in their groin, but that IS the idea and that IS why it's being done.
If you don't believe that these measures are useful, then you should join us in protesting them. We should never waste time or money on things that don't work, and when you add the actual abuses and hurt that this causes people, it's time to stop.
That is just as good a reason for your child to "endure the horror" as it is at the doctor's office.
As I've shown, no, it's not.
Hey, at least at the airport they don't have to take their clothes off!
At their doctor's office, they have never been asked to remove their clothing. In the future, when they're teens and can understand and consent to the procedures, they'll be asked to change into a gown that still covers their body to undergo health exams by people that they know and are comfortable with.
At an airport, children have to get naked and be looked at by strangers and/or be groped and touched all over by strangers, without understanding, consent, or purpose.
In what way are these two situation analogous?
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re: Plan B
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re:
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re:
And if you don't have to pat-down twelve-year-olds, then you might as well not pat down anyone, unless they look or act suspicious.
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re: ...and I want Bacon Cheeseburgers without the fat.
It would be fairly easy to put a box cutter in a cavity, which the scanners can't see and the agents can't feel. Moot point, hon.
I don't like these new touchy-feely techniques, but what I don't like even more is the populous changing there minds so damn fast.
The 'populous' had nothing to do with rolling out these scanners or pat-downs. The use of these scanners is totally political. When they were first mentioned, there was a public outcry about their safety, effectiveness, and cost. That outcry is now coming to a crescendo.
Go back to the old security measures, tragedy strikes, everyone demand strict measures again, wait another 10 years... wash, rinse, repeat
Actually, that's not true. We've had plenty of terrorist actions without flipping out about security. We're not even flipping out now, you know? What's happening is politicians taking advantage of the situation to force changes that benefit their financial contributors that their constituents neither need nor want.
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re: Re: Keep up the pressure
On the post: TSA Agents Absolutely Hate New Pat Downs, Find Them Disgusting And Morale Breaking
Re:
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's S.O.P. in Oklahoma, anyway. :)
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re:
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re: Re: Phone book = junk mail
On the post: Yellow Pages Sues Seattle For New Law Letting People Opt-Out Of Getting The Phone Book
Re:
In both cases, the answer is the same. Get a permit and go preach religion and/or contact information on the courthouse lawn, instead. :)
Next >>