Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TexasRepublic
Until American airlines become truely as serious about security as El Al, I will continue, as I have for the last 5 years, not to fly. Frankly, I don't expect it to happen.

And you'll be more likely to die in a car accident due to making that choice than you would taking the risk of flying with the security measures that are in place.

Those security measures have room for improvement, but those improvements involve invading passengers privacy, and I'm not just talking about invading the privacy of Muslims.

For example in Great Britain they actually scan passengers as well as baggage rather than just sending people through a metal detector.

This is a bit more intrusive and since it has similarities to looking at people nude, it is offensive to many.

Therefore we have been unwilling to require the use of those scanners here in the US.

What are we willing to accept in order to improve security?

Profiling helps concentrate attention on those who are the greatest risk, but it's not a solution by itself, and despite all the politically motivated spin on the word, profiling is done here in the United States, it's just not as broad as picking out specific races or only those who are obviously Muslim as the only factors.

11 posted on 08/22/2006 8:16:21 AM PDT by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: untrained skeptic
And you'll be more likely to die in a car accident due to making that choice than you would taking the risk of flying with the security measures that are in place.

Statistically, you are correct. That is a chance I'll take. Flying used to be a pleasurable adventure. People used to dress up for a flight. As the years passed, flying became a drudgery as informality set in. Crammed stinky slobs packed into a cattle car. 911 and its consequences were the final tipping point. It is not worth it to fly. I remain unswayed.

13 posted on 08/22/2006 8:35:55 AM PDT by TexasRepublic (Afghan protest - "Death to Dog Washers!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: untrained skeptic
This is a bit more intrusive and since it has similarities to looking at people nude, it is offensive to many.

Since there have been so many prosecuted instances of men inappropriately using security cameras to view women's chests, cameras located in women's bathrooms, shoe and bag cameras to view under women's clothes, you know the jokers at the TSA will do the same. Therefore, unless the TSA can get real professionals into the job, it is a bad idea to give this capability to people very likely to abuse it.

Additionally, would this capability have detected anything a non-professional screener would have connected as being capable of being used as a terrorist tool ? I think not. TSA screeners are not hired for their background in the use of ordinary items as weapons.

14 posted on 08/22/2006 8:59:57 AM PDT by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: untrained skeptic

The solution is not just "profiling". With all the personnel doing mindless dragnet of the entire traveling population, for the same price ($BILLIONS!), you look at passengers in advance; Arabic? Middle Eastern? Islamic ties? Travel history? When people arrive, they get scrutiny based on information provided to get ticket, as well as the observations of security personnel.


23 posted on 08/22/2006 5:44:59 PM PDT by jschwartz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson