Guy takes on TSA, gets arrested, gets acquitted just as fast

[fusion]

Wouldn't that apply to any method we put into play? There will always be a work-around for security, and nothing will ever be 100% secure. Once we pin down a certain area, they will find a new one to breach.

The idea is to not concentrate on an area like we do too often, but to find a reasonable holistic approach to security.

[Steve Butters]

Yep, but if we stop 50% of shoe bombers at the airport for $100M + 20mins/person, or we could do another method and stop 30% of shoe bombers at the airport for $100k + 5mins/person -- what's more effective?

Depends on your objectives I suppose. Is +20% and 15 mins more time worth a 100,000% cost increase? We are talking about multimillion dollar planes and lives here... and that's why we're having this debate.

I get where youre coming from, but I do think we've strayed a long way from shoe scanning being unconstitutional....however, i understand how we got here lol.

I'm not totally sold on putting a dollar sign on a life, but I do realize that without doing so, big issues like these can't be solved.

So with that, I think ill end my part of this debate and let you boys get back to it. Debating with you wears my brain out, guess I'll just put you back on ignore. lol jk

The idea is to not concentrate on an area like we do too often, but to find a reasonable holistic approach to security.

This is the best response ive read in this thread so far (concerning security).

[Sapphy]

lol

[Cheech]

Oh, I can't resist...

How do you propose it should be fixed? If you were head of the security team for an airport (theoretically, TSA is not involved) - how would you have the security checkpoints set up?

I dunno... what's my budget? I can only do so much with the means I'm given. You have to optimize the system within your financial constraints, because that's how everything works in modern society -- we all could have flying cars too if people were willing to pay for them.

This is a logical response, Tyler, however it's pretty well assumed that the TSA budget under DHS is damn near unlimited seeing as they are completley reactionary, and as a result has to "react" to any "perceived" threat immediately which results in buying a bunch of shit it doesn't need as fast as it can.

Here goes:

The two most important and most effective security changes since 2001 are 1) securing and reinforcing the cockpit door (planes can't be co-opted or used as missiles to kill other innocents, the only at-risk people are the passengers) and 2) the passengers understanding that if they are in fact presented with a threat, that they are in mortal danger and need to defend themselves at all costs. Just look at the last few "foiled" plots, the underwear asshole, the shoe dickhead, the Middle Eastern guy who "took too long in the bathroom, he must be plotting". Everything that leads up to getting on the plane is just weeding out the big stuff, the guy with sticks of dynamite wired to a ticking clock, the guy trying to bring on .50AE hand cannon, stuff like that. So, now that the preamble is done...

Magnetometers and x-ray machines are fine since they are non-invasive. Wanding is fine when it's necessary because it's non-invasive and treats people like humans instead of peanut butter jars that the TSA has to get their hands all up in. Fire the guy at the front that shines the light on your ID and provides a scrawl on your boarding pass that I'm sure is a closely guarded national security secret, and don't replace him. ID checks are done at the check-in already, and the 9/11 people had authentic ID's anyway, so this does absolutely fuck-all. Only prohibited items are things that go boom or anything that goes bzzzzz (tasers, stun guns, anything that puts out a high electric shock that could be used to screw up the plane's wiring) Blades are fine due to point 2 above, once the asshole(s) out themselves the passengers are going to take them down. You aren't talking about a group of highly trained ninja assassins here, you're talking about people with spurious "military" training in a tent somewhere in Pakistan. The people are going to take them down, and they will be armed with their own blades (and for those proponents of OC or CCW, this is just another extension of that) for that eventuality. Level playing field.

Everyone from the baggage people to the guys on the tarmac gets background checked and goes through the same security protocol as passengers do. Pilots/flight attendants, same thing. Since we're lightening the standards a bit, this shouldn't be a big deal.

No-fly lists are replaced by watch lists, and pruned regularly. Watch lists are only updated by intel agencies, this eliminates the problem of a well-connected screener getting your name on it just because they are having a bad day. If your name is on the watch list, you get the prize of having a air marshal on your flight. No air marshal available, then you don't fly. On the list in error? Plead your case to a impartial judge in closed session (since I'm assuming the evidence would be classified).

[alienpi]

If I were a terrorist, based on these recent reactionary approaches, I would propose that a certain type of scanner should be added to support air port security. Then after talks are initiated I would work with the CIA on a "training exercise" that tests airport security. And then after the patsy in the exercise hurts himself, and causes fear, I'd increase the price of the scanners and suggest they be used everywhere, despite the health risks.

Then I could make a ton of cash and decrease the population slowly by inducing cancer.

[BikerBoy]

Reading this made me not looking forword for my over seas flight through chicago , that is supposed to happen soon ....

Profiling might not be done by the goverment , but i am SURE people do it by them selfs at Airport , Busses and where ever else .

I've been there , i know

[RSVDon]

When flying to Vegas and back, the TSA agents required me to remove my flip-flops. I just laughed and threw them over.

That's all I have to add to this thread.

[FZRMatt]

Just a little perspective. There are 100 people at the top of the Terrorism Watch List. There are 50 states in our country. Of those top 100 people on the list, 9 of them live in the greater Columbus area. 7 of those 9 live in Hilliard! I fly at least 1 time per year with my family. I am more than happy to spend a little extra time in security being searched. I have been searched, my wife has been searched, and each of my children's things have been searched. If they find something on 1 person out of a million the search is worth it (to me). Avoiding the devastation of mass deaths and family tragedy is worth a little invasion of your "privacy". If you are not attempting to sneak bombs or other weapons onto a plane then you will move through without a problem. People bitching about searches being unconstitutional and making a spectacle about their rights are the ones that are going to get people killed.

If the airlines would get smart, they would just refuse service to anyone refusing a search. If you don't want to conform to their rules, you don't have to use their product. A business can refuse service to anyone not conforming to their rules.

Is this a 10/10? Or at least higher than 4/10?

[Sapphy]

[Disclaimer]

Protip: When trolling, if you're cereal about it, is not to mention you're trolling

[RSVDon]

Just a little perspective. There are 100 people at the top of the Terrorism Watch List. There are 50 states in our country. Of those top 100 people on the list, 9 of them live in the greater Columbus area. 7 of those 9 live in Hilliard! I fly at least 1 time per year with my family. I am more than happy to spend a little extra time in security being searched. I have been searched, my wife has been searched, and each of my children's things have been searched. If they find something on 1 person out of a million the search is worth it (to me). Avoiding the devastation of mass deaths and family tragedy is worth a little invasion of your "privacy". If you are not attempting to sneak bombs or other weapons onto a plane then you will move through without a problem. People bitching about searches being unconstitutional and making a spectacle about their rights are the ones that are going to get people killed.

If the airlines would get smart, they would just refuse service to anyone refusing a search. If you don't want to conform to their rules, you don't have to use their product. A business can refuse service to anyone not conforming to their rules.

Is this a 10/10? Or at least higher than 4/10?

Can someone pull out that ol' Ben Franklin quote please? This is a picture perfect time.

[Disclaimer]

Matt's a cop though, so he's been given the liberty to enforce security.

[FZRMatt]

Protip: When trolling, if you're cereal about it, is not to mention you're trolling

I can't catch a break! Too many rules to follow when trying to stir the pot. However, the information presented is true.

[jbot]

i am in total agreement with FZRMatt.

i, for one, am willing (eager, even) to allow the soft hands of the tsa go to 2nd base with my sweet children for the sake of obsolete safety. or if they're feeling a little exhibition-y, we'll have them do a little dance on the screening cam.

and if my sweet little broodling look at me with pleading eyes while they're learning about erogenous zones and bad touch from the mouth breathing, barely high school grad TSA "agent", I'll smile and wink and say in a cheerful sing song voice: "don't worry little one! you have nothing to fear! you don't have a bomb strapped to your chest or genitals... not even a little one! So, this is OOOOOOKAAAAY! YAY!"

am i right? FZRMatt, how about you and me create a non-profit org called "Finger Fuck My Children for Great Flying Fucking Justice".

You are part of the problem. Put down the kool-aid and realize how far you've fallen.

also, this post was 8/10 in the grand scheme of things. troll harder.

[chevysoldier]

Can someone pull out that ol' Ben Franklin quote please? This is a picture perfect time.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Not in response to Matt, just in general.

[beezer]

i would agree if he was legitimately using his camera for something....his attitude and demeanor make it appear that he went in there for the sole purpose of causing trouble, right or wrong

yeah, let's give him five years in the slammer for bad attitude.

[Disclaimer]

how about you and me create a non-profit org called "Finger Fuck My Children for Great Flying Fucking Justice".

[Cheech]

Just a little perspective. There are 100 people at the top of the Terrorism Watch List. There are 50 states in our country. Of those top 100 people on the list, 9 of them live in the greater Columbus area. 7 of those 9 live in Hilliard! I fly at least 1 time per year with my family. I am more than happy to spend a little extra time in security being searched. I have been searched, my wife has been searched, and each of my children's things have been searched. If they find something on 1 person out of a million the search is worth it (to me). Avoiding the devastation of mass deaths and family tragedy is worth a little invasion of your "privacy". If you are not attempting to sneak bombs or other weapons onto a plane then you will move through without a problem. People bitching about searches being unconstitutional and making a spectacle about their rights are the ones that are going to get people killed.

If the airlines would get smart, they would just refuse service to anyone refusing a search. If you don't want to conform to their rules, you don't have to use their product. A business can refuse service to anyone not conforming to their rules.

Is this a 10/10? Or at least higher than 4/10?

Oh no no no. 10/10 is a picture perfect subtle troll, you are nowhere near.

Oh wait, am I to understand you're actually serious? Then this statement should speak for itself: The TSA has not, in the entire history of its organization, directly stopped a terrorist attack. Zero. No fuzzy math, no extrapolations. Not one. Every time there was a thwarted attempt, the assholes got through the checkpoints (even though they departed from outside the US, the passengers get secondary screening before they get into the gate boarding area from people trained in TSA protocol. Yes, you do have to take off your shoes) and in the end was stopped by the PASSENGERS.

As a police officer, do you stop and frisk every person you pull over? If not, why not? There's tons of documented instances where cops are attacked during traffic stops, why wouldn't you simply put everyone you encounter during your shift or on a stop through a security screening to ensure they don't pose a threat to you?

jbot has, in his usual eloquent self, covered all the other bases.

[Cheech]

i am in total agreement with FZRMatt.

i, for one, am willing (eager, even) to allow the soft hands of the tsa go to 2nd base with my sweet children for the sake of obsolete safety. or if they're feeling a little exhibition-y, we'll have them do a little dance on the screening cam.

and if my sweet little broodling look at me with pleading eyes while they're learning about erogenous zones and bad touch from the mouth breathing, barely high school grad TSA "agent", I'll smile and wink and say in a cheerful sing song voice: "don't worry little one! you have nothing to fear! you don't have a bomb strapped to your chest or genitals... not even a little one! So, this is OOOOOOKAAAAY! YAY!"

am i right? FZRMatt, how about you and me create a non-profit org called "Finger Fuck My Children for Great Flying Fucking Justice".

You are part of the problem. Put down the kool-aid and realize how far you've fallen.

also, this post was 8/10 in the grand scheme of things. troll harder.

alas, I can't rep you again. you're far too generous, I have it at 5/10. Marked improvement, but still a long way to go.

[FZRMatt]

i am in total agreement with FZRMatt.

i, for one, am willing (eager, even) to allow the soft hands of the tsa go to 2nd base with my sweet children for the sake of obsolete safety. or if they're feeling a little exhibition-y, we'll have them do a little dance on the screening cam.

and if my sweet little broodling look at me with pleading eyes while they're learning about erogenous zones and bad touch from the mouth breathing, barely high school grad TSA "agent", I'll smile and wink and say in a cheerful sing song voice: "don't worry little one! you have nothing to fear! you don't have a bomb strapped to your chest or genitals... not even a little one! So, this is OOOOOOKAAAAY! YAY!"

am i right? FZRMatt, how about you and me create a non-profit org called "Finger Fuck My Children for Great Flying Fucking Justice".

You are part of the problem. Put down the kool-aid and realize how far you've fallen.

also, this post was 8/10 in the grand scheme of things. troll harder.

I'm not saying that it is the perfect solution or even the right answer, but it is what we have for now. Have you ever seen an 8 year old carry a gun for dad because dad knows the cops will search him but not the kid? I have. Have you ever seen a man with a .32 stuffed in the crack of his ass hoping the cops won't do a thorough pat down? I have. Have you ever seen video footage of a 10 year old being fitted for a practice bomb to get him use to wearing one so he can be "martyred"? I have. These situations are real and take place more often than people will ever know.

I realize I am coming across as a dick with this post and I apologize because that is not my intention. One thing most of you need to realize is that 90% of the people you come in contact with on a daily basis are good people and 10% are turds. With officers, we have the inverse, 10% good and 90% turds. And where you see the 99% good people in the airport, we see the 1%, that given the right circumstances would kill every one of us. So yes, I will continue to drink the Kool-Aid and pour a glass down the throat of a turd if given the chance.

By the way, thanks for the 8/10. I think Cheech is just jealous!

Edited January 29, 2011 by FZRMatt

[Sapphy]

They have won. Terrorist have done what they set out to do. They have changed our way of life. They have convinced people it is ok to give our rights in the name of safety. Terrorist are winning we are willingly giving the government more control of our lives and bodies. Soon everone will have to fly naked tied to our seats, and we will accept this because we need to be safe.

Terrorist are defined as "organizations or persons that use fear to change the behavior of others". We changed our lives.

Molestation should never be a requirement to fly for anyone. Especially true for children. Digital nudity is not better either. The entire process needs to be taken back to reasonable. In IT security we balance "secure, cost, and usability". This has to be balance. This balance needs to be applied to airport security as well. All they are doing now is ineffective theatrics to make people think they are doing stuff.

[John]

If you are not attempting to sneak bombs or other weapons onto a plane then you will move through without a problem. People bitching about searches being unconstitutional and making a spectacle about their rights are the ones that are going to get people killed.

typical government response... if you dont have anything to hide, then you should not mind our searches.

Just a little perspective. There are 100 people at the top of the Terrorism Watch List. There are 50 states in our country. Of those top 100 people on the list, 9 of them live in the greater Columbus area. 7 of those 9 live in Hilliard!

yeah and what you arent telling us is that 5 of the 9 in columbus are acutally kids under eight years old and one is a person who was put on because he wrote an article critical of george bush.

Edited January 29, 2011 by John

[John]

Terrorist are defined as "organizations or persons that use fear to change the behavior of others".

by that definition every government, including ours, is guilty of terrorism.

[jporter12]

by that definition every government, including ours, is guilty of terrorism.

No argument from me on that statement!

[FZRMatt]

typical government response... if you dont have anything to hide, then you should not mind our searches.

yeah and what you arent telling us is that 5 of the 9 in columbus are acutally kids under eight years old and one is a person who was put on because he wrote an article critical of george bush.

Actually, not one is under the age of 18 and they are all either supplying material help to terrorism, or operating recruiting centers in the area. Yes, we have recruiting centers for terrorists in our area.