Have the Terrorists Won?
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

“Don't touch my junk man!”

Since: Nov 07

Middle of the Mitten, Michigan

#61 Nov 18, 2010
say what wrote:
<quoted text>
Angie, really I'm not missing your point. I'm just hearing a double message. On the one hand, we as citizens want to at least feel that those we entrust with our safety are doing their best to see to it that we are safe when we travel. On the other hand, as soon as it inconveniences us personally, we start screaming about 'personal liberties' being violated. Really, nobody is forcing anyone to fly and go through airport security. If you want to travel using that mode of transportation, then you have to decide whether you're willing to not only pay the price of your ticket, but also pay the price of losing that measure of privacy. I'd be willing to bet that if the scanners were banned and another attack were to occur, we would have to endure a long round of choruses from the same people that bitched about the scanners as to how the government 'should have done something' to prevent the tragedy. Frankly, they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. Would I be worried that screeners are going to be laughing about my 'junk' later? No more than I worry about my doctor or nurse laughing about it.
Ok...I'm open for suggestions. How do we 'do our darndest' to try and stop every attack without giving up some measure of privacy and what level of security are you willing to accept as 'non invasive' to your personal liberties? There is a very broad spectrum between 'do nothing' and 'full body cavity searches'. What would you suggest?
I honestly don't know say what. I'm open for suggestions as well. I just don't know. I see all sides of this issue, and change my mind constantly on what I think should be done.....I know we need to be kept safe. But still can't help but think of how quickly things could take a turn for the worse and boil out of control...

What happens if through all of this we're attacked via cargo? Or if there's an attack in a different venue? We can't stop them all that's for sure. We need to prevent as much as we can from happening though.

That's why I brought this up for discussion. I know there's no one answer...but at the same time I still say we really have to be careful what we wish for.
say what

Grand Rapids, MI

#62 Nov 18, 2010
Ms Angie wrote:
What happens if through all of this we're attacked via cargo? Or if there's an attack in a different venue? We can't stop them all that's for sure. We need to prevent as much as we can from happening though.
That's why I brought this up for discussion. I know there's no one answer...but at the same time I still say we really have to be careful what we wish for.
Trust me, incoming cargo is undergoing even more thorough searches than humans. There seems to be this perception that security is focused on airports and passengers alone and is lax or nonexistent elsewhere and that simply isn't the case. Advertising all your security measures tends to make them a bit less effective, don't you think?
Amazarak as a couple of times now referred to a 'false' sense of security and I wonder what that is based on? The fact that we can't prevent all attacks from every venue? The locks on my house aren't going to prevent a very determined burgler from getting in but I still lock them at night as I think most of the rest of us do. Why? Because it gives me some measure of security knowing that a locked door is enough deterrent in the majority of cases to discourage would be burglers. Is that sense of security false? I don't think so. I agree we have to be vigilent that we don't give up too much of our personal liberty for safety but what complicates that is the level of comfort varies from person to person. Mr Wiggley and I, for example, don't have our knickers in a twist over our current airline security protocol but lots of other posters here do, even those that don't even fly. How far is 'too far' is a subjective thing based on individual comfort levels.

“think for yourself”

Since: Aug 08

GR

#63 Nov 21, 2010
say what wrote:
<quoted text>

Amazarak as a couple of times now referred to a 'false' sense of security and I wonder what that is based on?
This is exactly what I mean about an "artificial" sense of security. It's all an act and a huge waste of money benefiting those with corporate affiliations only, and not our safety. But, let's continue to give up our constitutional rights to appease the corporate interests, please.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2...

Airport security in America is a sham—“security theater” designed to make travelers feel better and catch stupid terrorists. Smart ones can get through security with fake boarding passes and all manner of prohibited items—as our correspondent did with ease.
say what

Grand Rapids, MI

#64 Nov 21, 2010
Amazarak wrote:
<quoted text>
This is exactly what I mean about an "artificial" sense of security. It's all an act and a huge waste of money benefiting those with corporate affiliations only, and not our safety.
And your alternative would be? I like Mr. Wiggley's suggestion. Let's have two types of flights: Type A has the security in place today. Type B has the kind of security you and several other posters seem to want: none because, by your reasoning, at least you'll know for sure you're unprotected and won't have any false sense of security. I take it that you would prefer type B. Have a nice flight. I'll go with type A.
BTW...you didn't answer my previous question: do you lock the doors and windows to your home? If so, why? Locks aren't much of a deterrent to an experienced and determined thief and/or potential attacker.

“think for yourself”

Since: Aug 08

GR

#65 Nov 22, 2010
say what wrote:
<quoted text>
And your alternative would be? I like Mr. Wiggley's suggestion. Let's have two types of flights: Type A has the security in place today. Type B has the kind of security you and several other posters seem to want: none because, by your reasoning, at least you'll know for sure you're unprotected and won't have any false sense of security. I take it that you would prefer type B. Have a nice flight. I'll go with type A.
BTW...you didn't answer my previous question: do you lock the doors and windows to your home? If so, why? Locks aren't much of a deterrent to an experienced and determined thief and/or potential attacker.
I love how like to put words in my mouth and assume such things. Let me ask you, did you even read the article? I know, it is three pages long, so maybe it's a bit lengthy for you, but it points out how the system we have in place is only set up to catch stupid terrorists, and the correspondent tried to go out of his way to look nervous and suspicious, and boarded without ID and many banned items. Hence, artificial sense of security...security theatre. This is exactly how the xmas bomber boarded the plane. But, instead of fixing the system and putting the employees through longer, more intensive training, they lobby for porn scanners so they can make a few million and stomp on our rights while they're at it.

Asking me if I lock my doors is as irrelevant as me asking you if you wear your seatbelt. It may make you feel safe, but there is no guarantee on your safety, and in some rare cases has been the cause of death in motor accidents. But, you feel safer, huh?

I said this before and will again. Think of it as a computer. Everything is hackable, even security. The more technology we acquire, the more the smart ones will learn to hack it. There will always be human error and all we can do, even with all the new and improved technology, is just hope we are not on the flight where it is hacked.
Go Blue

Lake Worth, FL

#66 Nov 22, 2010
You all know, they are all just making this stuff up, as they go along....it's all rooted in whatever the last terrorist tried to do....I think, we need to get over ourselves and step into the scanner or get patted down, your choice. If not, rent a car and drive wherever you are going....it's not that big of a deal....Even the government and TSA are just doing the best they can, in the world's new reality.....
RFist333

United States

#67 Nov 22, 2010
yes they have.

all they need to do is put all the security at international airports only, and specifically look for Arabs more than others.

but everyone should get the third degree if they are comming in from another country.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Grand Rapids Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why Trump is running for prez 10 hr Gville Jim 6
Old things and places we remember from the Gran... (Feb '09) 12 hr JOJO 1,079
News a Very conservativea platform, Pence VP pick me... Mon DR X 29
Local News Women (Apr '09) Jul 25 T-Man 2,668
Adult theater Cina-Mini two (Mar '13) Jul 22 Idea Maker 11
Politics aside, I'm sick of Beyonce Jul 22 Idea Maker 1
Give Yourselves To Muhammad! Jul 21 BubbaAli 2

Grand Rapids Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Grand Rapids Mortgages