Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Once again the TSA is overreacting to an isolated incident and treating everyone like criminals.http://gizmodo.com/5434592/the-new-terrifying-no+electronics-us-flight-security-rulesElectronic devices: cannot be brought into the cabin of the plane on international flights to the United States. Patdowns: Required, for now. Items on laps: No blankets, bags, suitcases, purses, etc on your lap during the last hour of flight. Your hands must be visible at all times. No potty breaks: Passengers cannot get out of their seats for the last hour of a flight.All in the name of public safety right? No thanks, I'll pass on flying internationally for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin0469 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I think maybe those things should only apply to international flights?I hate (kinda) to say it but when will they just start profiling people based on nationality or citizenship? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Goddamnit, I still have to fly to Australia and back. If those cocksuckers think that my noise-canceling headphones are an "electronic device", I'm going to go apeshit.Maybe I should just stay there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) Goddamnit, I still have to fly to Australia and back. If those cocksuckers think that my noise-canceling headphones are an "electronic device", I'm going to go apeshit.Maybe I should just stay there...Should be ok. I'll wear mine today on a flight and see if I get any crap. Once was told to shut player off before landing, which I do anyway. (I was asleep that time and missed it.)TSA website says no changes for domestic flights. Zero. Some of the airlines haven't figured that part out yet. Possible extra security on screening, at random, might be encountered.The changes are for international flights arriving in USA. No nothing for the last hour before landing. No leaving seats, no accessing overhead or stuff, and nothing on the lap. Put it all away. Pocket stuff like headphones and player should be ok. Laptops no. Cameras, well, cameras are touchy anyway Some airlines already had a rule for no photos allowed at all. We'll see. Additional undescribed security features at the point of departure for USA bound flights will be encountered. Most airlines will take the easy way out, and request limited carry-on.This is all TSA has said so far about international flights into the USA:Q: What additional security measures are being taken for international flights to U.S. destinations?A: TSA issued a directive for additional security measures to be implemented for last point of departure international flights to the United States. Passengers flying into the United States from abroad can expect to see additional security measures at international airports such as increased gate screening including pat-downs and bag searches. During flight, passengers will be asked to follow flight crew instructions, such as stowing personal items, turning off electronic equipment and remaining seated during certain portions of the flight. Edited December 28, 2009 by ReconRat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Yes to international only... slowly they strip away everything possible you can do on a flight... they already keep you hostage at the terminal/gate for up to 8 hours when they can't take off... I already find flying unbearable, so I don't do it... this is just more straw on the camel's back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I'm glad I haven't been on a commercial flight since 2000! Geesh! What BS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 All in the name of public safety right? No thanks, I'll pass on flying internationally for now.Guilty until proven innocent? Seems like it to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Guilty until proven innocent? Seems like it to me!I hate the TSA just as much if not more than the next guy, but it's not a question of guilt vs. innocence. You aren't on trial, you haven't been convicted, indicted, or even accused of anything.Where the problem lies here is a complete spinning of events and the predictable over-the-top government knee-jerk reaction. Napolitano had the theoretical balls to go on TV and said the system worked. The Dutch guy (who received TSA training, by the way. Everyone on my flight from Amsterdam to Detroit a month ago had to pass through secondary screening at the gate itself) let the guy on the plane, ergo, the TSA has some responsibility for this cocksucker being on board. The only part of this "system" that worked is the passengers realizing after 9/11 that if some guy (especially a foreigner of non-European/American descent) starts doing dumbshit on a flight, there's going to be someone out of the 200+ people on that plane that's going to stop him. What's better, to risk personal injury trying to disarm/stop the terrorist or to hope the bad man goes away and you all die?Then there's the aforementioned knee-jerk reaction. Clearly terrorists are stupid enough to attempt the exact same attack exactly the same way as before, so now we all have to remove the conditions of that attack. Because no one is going to go to the bathroom 1:10 instead of 1:00 before the flight lands, and good luck getting 200+ people to sit straight with their hands visible at all times for an hour on a red-eye flight to Detroit.At the end of the day, it's just more of the same: plain and simple security theater. Guilt and innocence have nothing to do with maintaining the illusion that air travel is 100% completely risk free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 So couple things here. Flying out of JFK we had to go through security twice... once the normal thing, second time just before boarding the flight... they checked EVERYTHING. Sent it through xray, opened everything, all liquids purchased after the first checkpoint (3 hours earlier) had to have a receipt or you pitched it....That was flying OUT of the country... flying back in they didn't even check anything... I have my CPAP as my extra carry-on, in the US they checked it at both security points (it's a square box with a bunch of wires... suspicious from Xray), most of the time they swap it for explosives as well... flying back in they stopped me, asked what it was, I said "CPAP..... respirator....*made motion like an oxygen mask" they looked at me funny then said "go ahead"...I'm fine if they want to make getting ON the plane a bit more difficult, but once you're on the plane let it fucking go, just let people relax however they can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 And just to stoke the coals a little more... it stands to reason the same argument for concealed carry stands on an airplane.Criminals/terrorists/someone intent on harm WILL commit their harm, why not allow people to bring weapons? Airplanes are easy targets because they know noone has a weapon.Ok, so maybe ammunition on an airplane is a bad idea, how about knives? Asps? Blackjacks?.... does having a knife mean you're going to commit a crime? If the passengers on the flights on 9/11 had any way to defend themselves would they have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Firearms on an airplane is a bad idea, being that a shot going where it shouldn't could take an innocent life, or take down the plane. Air marshall's I'm sure are trained in this area, and should be fine. Knives should not even be questioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Unless you carry with frangible ammo, there is no way in hell I'd risk sitting next to a person with a weapon who has the capability of causing a cabin depressurization. I know, I know, explosive decompression with a bullet hole is a myth, but it's still not a good situation to be in.Bottom line, there are enough items on board your standard airliner to be able to subdue an attacker. If you want to be able to carry a collapsible baton or something to that extent, go right ahead. Passengers know they have to police themselves when the shit hits, and that's EXACTLY what happened here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 You guys should go back and watch Mythbusters episode... shooting a gun in a pressurized cabin won't cause the world to explode...I'll go ahead and ruin the ending... nothing happens.Although I agree on the other accounts, too hard to establish a safe beyond target in an airplane, EVERYWHERE you aim you'll have people behind your target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 You guys should go back and watch Mythbusters episode... shooting a gun in a pressurized cabin won't cause the world to explode...I'll go ahead and ruin the ending... nothing happens.Although I agree on the other accounts, too hard to establish a safe beyond target in an airplane, EVERYWHERE you aim you'll have people behind your target.I know, that's why I said EXPLOSIVE decompression won't happen. It's still not a good place to be, and assuming you pop off 4-5 rounds chances are better than even you'll be causing some collateral damage. Not to mention if you "forget" to set the safety correctly and the weapon discharges into the seat in front of you, behind you, or even worse below you and crack some hydraulics or sever some wiring.Frangible rounds takes a lot of that out, but checking everyone's ammo would be a little tedious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I know, that's why I said EXPLOSIVE decompression won't happen. It's still not a good place to be, and assuming you pop off 4-5 rounds chances are better than even you'll be causing some collateral damage. Not to mention if you "forget" to set the safety correctly and the weapon discharges into the seat in front of you, behind you, or even worse below you and crack some hydraulics or sever some wiring.Frangible rounds takes a lot of that out, but checking everyone's ammo would be a little tedious.Why would accidental discharge be any more common in an airplane then when I'm driving in my car?Now I agree, checking ammo is tedious... but, hear me out. What if the TSA offered ammo exchange or mag checks? Couple options there... if the TSA simply said "we only allow XYZ brand frangible rounds... you may purchase these rounds in the airport after security checkpoints. Please no loaded magazines pre-security"Then all they have to do is proactively check that firearms are unloaded (like at the gun show).... Now, I'm "against" this type of restrictions, but it's clearly better than what we have now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Ok' date=' so guns on a plane are bad, but this is ok...[img']http://samuelatgilgal.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/world-trade-center.jpgNo no, guns didn't cause that. Box cutters did. <---- makes you a hacker<----- makes you a terrorist <---- makes you a murderer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benyen Soljax Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 last international flight i took, everyone had guns. we all made it out ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Winnar ------------------------------------------------------------^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 last international flight i took, everyone had guns. we all made it out ok. Yah, I can't remember a time when a military flight was hijacked... or attempted hijacking... or an accidental discharge... or... well you get the idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Why would accidental discharge be any more common in an airplane then when I'm driving in my car?Now I agree, checking ammo is tedious... but, hear me out. What if the TSA offered ammo exchange or mag checks? Couple options there... if the TSA simply said "we only allow XYZ brand frangible rounds... you may purchase these rounds in the airport after security checkpoints. Please no loaded magazines pre-security"Then all they have to do is proactively check that firearms are unloaded (like at the gun show).... Now, I'm "against" this type of restrictions, but it's clearly better than what we have now.You are against what kind of restriction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 You are against what kind of restriction?"Guns allowed, but we must provide the ammo"... but I'm only "against" it in the sense that I have to make a compromise since our current restrictions are so dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 "Guns allowed, but we must provide the ammo"... but I'm only "against" it in the sense that I have to make a compromise since our current restrictions are so dumb."Be careful what you shoot at; most things in here don't react to well to bullets."Yeah, like me. I don't react too well to bullets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Yeah, like me. I don't react too well to bullets.How do you react to a crashing plane? Better right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/2752402/Here's the quote of the dayPassenger intervention saved hundreds of lives that billions of dollars in security measures could not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 How do you react to a crashing plane? Better right?I think you're making too many assumptions. You are assuming that the terrorist dickweed can crash a jetliner at will WITHOUT getting to the cockpit. One of the only sane, logical changes post-9/11 was to reinforce the shit out of the cockpit door, and put procedures in place where anytime that door would be opened (pilots going to the toilet, etc) there are obstacles in place that would allow time for the door to be closed quickly. In short, the easiest way to get to the cockpit would be to start taking hostages using deadly force. The passengers, knowing that they are going to die anyway, will quickly take down that threat (see personal injury vs. complete annihilation argument above).So where would the entrance of a firearm play into the passenger's favor? Assume that there are multiple dickweeds, one of them being behind the armed passenger. Now the terrorist has a firearm, and the entire balance of power changes drastically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.