The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

[The Juan Percenter]

isn't refusing to go though a security checkpoint an inaction that may put others in harm's way?

No. Especially considering that we have never caught a terrorist at the security line. Standing up for your privacy rights (whatever happened to innocent before proven guilty) is not inaction.

[Chubbles]

that still doesn't address the whole "If this doesn't 100% protect all Americans than what is the damn point?" comment, cause if that is the standard, we should really get rid of a lot of laws and agencies

and, how does it not prevent attacks? Maybe not your 100%, but if we get rid of screenings (based on the fact that nothing will catch 100% of the dangers) then wouldn't it make it that much easier to get a gun / bomb / gas / ect on a plane?

where is your line?
and, if there was a perfect security device that did catch 100% of threats would you be willing to submit?

would it be better if the TSA was replaced by private security? Each airport had their own "police" force? That would take this completely out o the government's hands, but also become much more secretive

If screening is such a vital aspect to American safety then why not get highly trained individuals to do the job? Every day we are getting stories of incompetent TSA agents doing idiotic things. There is no way to 100% eliminate the threat of terrorist attacks so at what point will the gov't stop?

[GHERU]

No. Especially considering that we have never caught a terrorist at the security line. Standing up for your privacy rights (whatever happened to innocent before proven guilty) is not inaction.

so, you don't think that security check points discourage possible attacks? and if we got rid of the check points you don't think that there would be guns and the like on planes?

[GHERU]

If screening is such a vital aspect to American safety then why not get highly trained individuals to do the job? Every day we are getting stories of incompetent TSA agents doing idiotic things. There is no way to 100% eliminate the threat of terrorist attacks so at what point will the gov't stop?

there is no way to stop 100% of any crime, so why have police at all

[GHERU]

If screening is such a vital aspect to American safety then why not get highly trained individuals to do the job? Every day we are getting stories of incompetent TSA agents doing idiotic things. There is no way to 100% eliminate the threat of terrorist attacks so at what point will the gov't stop?

do you mean idiotic things like checking children after reports have come out saying that terrorists use children to get things past checkpoints?

[The Juan Percenter]

so, you don't think that security check points discourage possible attacks? and if we got rid of the check points you don't think that there would be guns and the like on planes?

They didn't discourage the 9/11 attacks. They didn't discourage the underwear bomber.

Who is saying that we should get rid of security? There is a difference between security and the airport police state we have now. I don't think people should be flying on a plane covered in their own urine in the name of "safety"

[Chubbles]

there is no way to stop 100% of any crime, so why have police at all

Laws are mean to show people what the consequences are AFTER a crime has been committed, not BEFORE

[Chubbles]

do you mean idiotic things like checking children after reports have come out saying that terrorists use children to get things past checkpoints?

There are no rules of engagement where terrorists are involved, does that mean we should follow their lead and de-humanize our elderly and children as well?

[The Juan Percenter]

do you mean idiotic things like checking children after reports have come out saying that terrorists use children to get things past checkpoints?

So let's let a bunch of HS dropouts molest our kids before they get on the plane!

[GHERU]

They didn't discourage the 9/11 attacks. They didn't discourage the underwear bomber.

Who is saying that we should get rid of security? There is a difference between security and the airport police state we have now. I don't think people should be flying on a plane covered in their own urine in the name of "safety"

and security has been modified to account for those attracts
we take our shoes off now and can't take canisters that hide box cutters into the cabin
the new scanners can see if there is another underwear bomber

do you not want policies to be updated as new methods are discovered? Should the security stay stagnant?

you are arguing to get rid of security: "if its not 100% whats the point?"

a police state is a situation where people have no choice, people do not have to fly.
a police state is a situation where people have no knowledge of what will confront them, the TSA advertises these changes to give people the chance to not go to the airport

flying is not a right, it is a privilege, and if you don't like the requirements for this privilege, make sure to vote for politicians who run on a "decrease security" platform

[dick buff]

People tossing around words like "groping" and "sexual assault" are retarded. ITS A PAT DOWN. A PAT DOWN PEOPLE. For gods sake quit being sissies. Your genitals are not some holy sanctuary that will be forever spoiled by a low wage security guard running his hand across them.

[The Juan Percenter]

and security has been modified to account for those attracts
we take our shoes off now and can't take canisters that hide box cutters into the cabin
the new scanners can see if there is another underwear bomber

do you not want policies to be updated as new methods are discovered? Should the security stay stagnant?

you are arguing to get rid of security: "if its not 100% whats the point?"

a police state is a situation where people have no choice, people do not have to fly.
a police state is a situation where people have no knowledge of what will confront them, the TSA advertises these changes to give people the chance to not go to the airport

flying is not a right, it is a privilege, and if you don't like the requirements for this privilege, make sure to vote for politicians who run on a "decrease security" platform

Never once said we should never have security. Go over my posts. I am against the new, invasive procedure.

Flying is not right - fine. But privacy is a right in this country. A in a stagnant economy, I would think we want to promote travel as much as possible.

[GHERU]

So let's let a bunch of HS dropouts molest our kids before they get on the plane!

or, we could raise taxes in order to train them

hey, I don;t like any of these policies, I hate taking my shoes off
but I hate taking 13 hours to drive somewhere that I can fly too in 4, everyone who flies (should) knows about these procedures and made a calculated choice between time and convenience and chose to be in that line.

personally, if some one runs as a "decrease the TSA's power" politician, there is a better than average chance I'd vote for them because I don't like the increased security. till then I choose not to fly...unless its more convenient for me to do so. Just like everyone else

[CountD]

People tossing around words like "groping" and "sexual assault" are retarded. ITS A PAT DOWN. A PAT DOWN PEOPLE. For gods sake quit being sissies. Your genitals are not some holy sanctuary that will be forever spoiled by a low wage security guard running his hand across them.

they made a breast cancer survivor take her fake boob out for inspection.

[The Juan Percenter]

or, we could raise taxes in order to train them

I guess you missed the part where the TSA is not required to do airport security