NJ Legislation Bans TSA Scanners + More

First you call Darki a flying hooker in her screen shot, and now you post common sense. I think I may have to reevaluate my opinion of you. <3

lol

I understand your point of view, in fact I do not enjoy arguing with you as you seem too far lost to understand any other view but your own.

But these "precautions" are not going to prevent it. If they wanted to find a way they will. These "Precautions" are only the illusion of safety.

Just like not bringing gasoline into your house, its an illusion of safety, but doesn't mean you're immune from an Arsonist.

Huge difference between something bring a can of gasoline versus an elderly person being felt up and disabled people being asked to walk.

x
Are you like 11?

To all the naysayers: you said all we do is ***. I then said wait until Dec. 6. Given today is Dec. 7th, I promised more news and here it is. I guess haters gonna hate.

Too many people pretending that you have a right to fly, or likening the irrational fear of body scanner images to being as terrifying as an attack itself. Seriously, tone it down. There is no unreasonable search being done (in my opinion) with body scanners when the images are as non-intrusive as they are, the images are not being circulated, they have no identification attached to them and terrorists are no longer seen as only people of Middle Eastern descent. Google Jihad Jane for example.

Hopefully airlines take it upon themselves to do these screening procedures sometime in the near future so people can't say it's unconstitutional. Non-invasive body scanning isn't exactly the beginning of a slippery slope to the erosion of freedom in my opinion. Also pretending that because they won't pull off as many attacks with the use of these machines isn't attributed to these machines is a pretty faulty rationale.

I honestly think at this point people are far more concerned with the nut-touching Boob-lifting Pat-downs than the Full-Body scanners, even though both are relatively pointless procedures. As you can guess Terrorists aren't exactly stupid. They know our Procedures as well as we do.

They can find a way around them.

You pay for a plane ticket. You're paying for the privelege to fly. How would you feel if you paid for a quarter pounder at McDonald's and they gave you a blood pressure and cholesterol test to make sure you were fit enough to eat the burger?

Stupid example, but I'm tired of hearing this privelege to fly ***. You're paying for it.

That they are forced to find a way around them because of the machines isn't a step closer to safety though? Is your logic that we shouldn't use these machines so that their primary method of attacking airlines is one we know of and choose to do nothing about? I don't get your point...

No, My logic is these procedures are simply Illusions of safety.

Terrorists can and will find a way around them.

Forcing a minor inconvenience to people as extreme as Terrorists, People who blow themselves up full well believing they will be rewarding, =/= Safety.

And if you even bothered to read my first post, I said I'm for Safety precautions, but when they violate Constitutional rights and Personal Liberties, They've gone too far.

I fear you may be too far gone to argue with as well though :\

I also love the fact that I get rated down for writing emails to congressmen.

9/11 happened because they hijacked planes with box cutters right? Well box cutters are razor blades, which are metal objects. Metal Detectors have been around well before this episode, but they failed to catch the bad guys.

To believe any enhanced security measures of this sort will be foolproof is moronic at best. What's to stop the terrorist working at the airline from letting his buddies in behind the scanners? I'd imagine thats possibly what happened with the box cutters. How else would they have gotten them by the detectors?

So the machines make us no more safe than we were without them? Safety isn't a black and white concept. It's not absolute, it's progressive. Wearing a seat belt doesn't ensure you're going to survive a car accident, but it does make you more safe. Why don't you go into more detail about what your concept of safety is before being preemptively dismissive.

Something like this, maybe?

how exactly is 9/11 the first terrorist attack?
if you want to get technical you could say this is the first terrorist attack:
link

or if you don't want to go that far back you can say:
durkadurrr

They did catch them with the box cutters, they let them on anyway... Metal detectors didn't fail to detect them.

how beneficial is life insurance on a cancer patient?

Luz, well then wouldn't that just be an issue of security on personel?

I actually believe Luz's explanation more Kojo, because last I checked they do not sell ceramic blade box cutters. Unless they started selling them recently. I doubt they had them back in 2001.

Manufacturers also include detectable amounts of metal in ceramic blades, that's not to say that a person with the right resources can't make their own, in whichever shape or form they wish.

Yah, You're a little too far gone. So i'll say this one last time.

I'm Completely For Safety Precautions. I want them to do as much as possible to provide* our safety on Airplanes.

But when those precautions set in place violate Constitutional RIGHTS and PERSONAL LIBERTIES, They have gone too far

I want to be safe, I WANT to be able to fly with at least the illusion i am safe, But i do not want to give up not only Constitutional rights but BASIC human rights in order to "Feel Safe".

Do you understand at least THAT?

how beneficial is life insurance on a cancer patient?
silly guy, sidestepping my questions.
just imagine i'm only curious about the life insurance for cancer patients stuff, forget that this is even a TSA thread.

Let us not forget that some of the planes on 9/11 took off from Newark, NJ.

Despite that fact, NJ saw these new procedures as more harmful than helpful.

You're not even on the same subject now. We weren't discussing the legality of a government agency's searches. We were discussing the perceived futility of the machines to create what you call an "illusion of safety." Why would the terrorists find a new way to attack airliners when we do nothing to prevent their older methods? Should we wait till we have planned a screening procedure for every conceivable method of attack before we attempt to make the skies safe?

Nice attempt to change the subject though.

Who the *** are "We'? I've always since my first post been talking about the same thing.