Lucy: "I don't want to go to Disney World anymore"

[Jack Brickman]

The problem with applying the Constitution to this case, is that our forefathers didn't count on terrorists hijacking, bombing or flying gigantic gasoline-filled machines into massive buildings full of other Americans.

Never in my life have I felt uncomfortable being searched at an airport, and I can remember a few occasions where I was dusted, take aside for individual screening and a variety of other bullshit. I mean, it sucked in that it took up some time and some of the employees seemed to be either incompetent or new at their jobs, but I just didn't see any reason to complain or not just follow the rules.

I just can't bring myself to feel like my rights are being trampled upon by people who are instructed to find weapons or dangerous material on the person of people who intend to kill me. And if they're carrying drugs on them knowing that they're illegal...well, fuck them. They're illegal. If you really want to do drugs, do them at home and take the minimal risk that a cop will knock on your door and arrest you.

The issue I have is that if anything, they need to be thinking ahead and researching what terrorists are going to do rather than reacting to them. Attaching bombs to women and children is a pretty common strategy in the middle east. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't bring that flavor over here eventually and frankly, I'm shocked it hasn't happened yet.

As for the woman that made this video, my very first thought was exactly what Max said: she went into the situation intending to create a scene and create a stir on the internet. She's after attention more than anything. A couple of the agents didn't know what the fuck they were doing, but at no point did I see any molesting, attacking or otherwise mis-handling the child. Everything the mother said was combative and scripted. At no point was the kid in danger of anything, other than losing her Lamby for 10 seconds while she and it were screened.

Sucks she's in a wheelchair, but she's a person boarding a plane and people boarding planes get searched. Why should she be exempt?

Perhaps a better question to ask is:

Is it fair that your average, hard-working American doing a shitty, thankless job in the name of making flying safer for everyone has to be subjected to fat bitches exploiting their daughters for a couple thousand hits on YouTube?

 

[caf]

The founders have nothing to do with it. A right is a right. I don't need permission to exercise the right to be secure from unreasonable searches, no matter how many guns the oppressor has pointed at me telling me I do.

If safety is the issue, if there were armed security, armed pilots, and even armed passengers on those planes, 9/11 would never have happened. Why doesn't the solution look more like that? Because that would defeat the purpose of the TSA, which is to show Americans who has the real power and condition them to accept it.

No. The answer isn't more guns. The answer is no guns.

A stray bullet puncturing the hull of a pressurized airplane travelling near the speed of sound would be very, very bad. Or it could hit important electrical/hydraulic cables. These are very bad consequences that have a high chance of killing everyone on board.

It is better to be proactive than reactive in this case. Some of their screening methods need to be reevaluated for effectiveness and necessity. But some type of screening is required.


As to your other point. 9-11 wouldn't have happened if they had reinforced cockpit doors like they do now. If you can't reach the cockpit/pilots a large threat is immediately mitigated. No need to give a pilot a gun and run the risk of it falling into the wrong hands. Plus, they would be untrained and therefore indirectly dangerous even using a gun in the first place.

 

[The Oi]

Perhaps a better question to ask is:

Is it fair that your average, hard-working American doing a shitty, thankless job in the name of making flying safer for everyone has to be subjected to fat bitches exploiting their daughters for a couple thousand hits on YouTube?

Do we know for a fact that she's fat? Because that would make this all better.

 

[Surge]

The founders have nothing to do with it. A right is a right. I don't need permission to exercise the right to be secure from unreasonable searches, no matter how many guns the oppressor has pointed at me telling me I do.

If safety is the issue, if there were armed security, armed pilots, and even armed passengers on those planes, 9/11 would never have happened. Why doesn't the solution look more like that? Because that would defeat the purpose of the TSA, which is to show Americans who has the real power and condition them to accept it.

So we shouldn't expect a reasonable amount of safety when on an airplane, in a stadium, etc.?

These are confined areas where companies are trying to compete for paying customers. The majority of customers have the expectation that the company will make efforts to provide a "safe" environment to enjoy their product (flight, game, etc.). It's the same reason people prefer to live in safer neighborhoods. If given a choice between safety or not, even if perceived, people choose safer.

What is hilarious to me is that your first sentence says "no matter how many guns the oppressor has..." Then your next paragraph says "if there were armed security, armed pilots, and even armed passengers..." So you want to take the guns away, but add more? What's worse, you trust people's safety with Delta enforcing their own rules over government regulators? Who are the tyrants with all the power and control then? And guess what, they are only checked by people with bottom lines on their minds.

I consent to being searched/patted down at any event or mass public gathering. It just makes sense. You know why I don't care, because I have nothing to hide, but I want the ones who do searched. If everyone stopped being attention-whoring dumb-asses and just followed the instructions, it would take minimal time to get through security. But no, morons like this lady would rather make a YouTube video and "Stand up to the man!"

A bigger threat to this country than TSA pat-downs is the stupidity epidemic.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Do we know for a fact that she's fat? Because that would make this all better.

No but she's American, so it's at least a 50/50 chance.

I also feel like making a video like this is a very "fat white trash" thing to do.

 

[The Oi]

She titled the video, "TSA wants to touch your kids," which is misleading and inflammatory. I have the feeling she's one of those people that nobody likes.

I think in a lot of cases, TSA agents are on a power trip...but again, I've traveled through the Orlando airport dozens and dozens of times. The worst beef I've ever had is with one of the guys that talks with everybody for way too long and slows the line down. Otherwise, the people seem to do a reasonable enough job. TSA apologized for the actions of their agents, and frankly the worst thing they did was call the video illegal and have a lack of understanding of what was legal and what wasn't.

The easy solution here is two-fold:

(1) TSA needs to be proactive in predicting what kind of ways terrorists are going to attack via airplane and ensure methods are in place to prevent it, including screening

(2) People need to shut their yaps and consent to a generally reasonable search process that everybody goes through every single time at the airport.

I HATE it when people stand around and complain that they're getting searched, patted down, etc because of some class that they fit into ie old lady, young kid, etc. It is what it is. Fly or don't fly. I've seen people complain about this and look around for sympathy and seen everyone around me roll their eyes and do the hand roll "GET THE FUCK MOVING IDIOT" move. They're people that have no social awareness and seem to have no ability to follow rules and some general sense of entitlement.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

I am in no way in favor of the govt taking our right to own firearms, but having guns on a plane is just a bad, bad idea. Nothing good is going to come from that. For every thwarted attack, you'd have at least another 10 with severe consequences. Unfortunately, with today's world the way it is, these searches have to take place. Even then, the travelers still assume an inherent risk of some sort of terrorist act. It's just a part of the gig.

 

[Man Called X]

No. The answer isn't more guns. The answer is no guns.

A stray bullet puncturing the hull of a pressurized airplane travelling near the speed of sound would be very, very bad. Or it could hit important electrical/hydraulic cables. These are very bad consequences that have a high chance of killing everyone on board.

It is better to be proactive than reactive in this case. Some of their screening methods need to be reevaluated for effectiveness and necessity. But some type of screening is required.


As to your other point. 9-11 wouldn't have happened if they had reinforced cockpit doors like they do now. If you can't reach the cockpit/pilots a large threat is immediately mitigated. No need to give a pilot a gun and run the risk of it falling into the wrong hands. Plus, they would be untrained and therefore indirectly dangerous even using a gun in the first place.

Curious, you ever watch Mythbusters? Shooting a gun in a pressurized cabin isn't going to cause everything to get sucked out in a vaccuum, nor will it create enough spark to ignite an explosion/fire short of shooting an oxygen tank.

Also, 9/11 wouldn't have happened if this country didn't want to get into another war. A modern day Pearl Harbor.

 

[caf]

Curious, you ever watch Mythbusters? Shooting a gun in a pressurized cabin isn't going to cause everything to get sucked out in a vaccuum, nor will it create enough spark to ignite an explosion/fire short of shooting an oxygen tank.

Also, 9/11 wouldn't have happened if this country didn't want to get into another war. A modern day Pearl Harbor.

I miss spoke. I didn't mean the hull, I meant the window.

 

[Man Called X]

I miss spoke. I didn't mean the hull, I meant the window.

Even a window getting shot out isn't going to mess everything that up.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Even a window getting shot out isn't going to mess everything that up.

I think we can agree that it wouldn't be good, though.

 

[caf]

Even a window getting shot out isn't going to mess everything that up.

Yes it would. The cabin would depressurize in a few seconds. The masks would drop and if those dont work, youre dead. The added drag would push the structure of the plane to its limits. A lot of debris would be getting sucked out. People near the blowout window could be sucked out.

 

[Man Called X]

I think we can agree that it wouldn't be good, though.

Good no, something that is going to cause a lot of harm? No. I mean, you haven't really lived until you've ridden in a plane or heli with a few bullet holes in it.

 

[Tlyons]

All this shit because of box cutters and a shitty cockpit door.

 

[Marcus]

Good no, something that is going to cause a lot of harm? No. I mean, you haven't really lived until you've ridden in a plane or heli with a few bullet holes in it.

:chuckles::chuckles::chuckles: