|
|
NJ Legislation Bans TSA Scanners + more
 Phoenix.KojoForum Moderator
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 12308
By Phoenix.Kojo 2010-12-07 11:32:50
Ramuh.Vinvv said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: Ramuh.Vinvv said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: The TSA is about as beneficial as life insurance on a cancer patient lol, which is not possible to say the least. how beneficial is life insurance on a cancer patient? I'm sure your question was implying how is it not beneficial, but it's just a matter of perception between the TSA and the consumer. 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.
Many life insurance policies, IIRC, won't cover pre-existing illnesses. As for their stand on Cancer being any different, I don't know. But if you have cancer and go to get life insurance and die, they won't pay your family.
By Luz 2010-12-07 11:32:54
Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
You Are a Lost cause. Go argue with someone else. I've not changed my "topic" since i first posted. If we weren't discussing the same thing you should never have replied.
Check the quote train, you replied to me first on multiple grounds and I chose first to discuss the effectiveness of safety procedures. You're getting so mad and it's cute.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2205
By Asura.Karbuncle 2010-12-07 11:33:53
Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
You Are a Lost cause. Go argue with someone else. I've not changed my "topic" since i first posted. If we weren't discussing the same thing you should never have replied.
Check the quote train, you replied to me first on multiple grounds and I chose first to discuss the effectiveness of safety procedures. You're getting so mad and it's cute.
Actually, I believe i just won the argument.
You're pulling "Umad" Cards instead of responding. Thanks :)
Maybe now you wanna talk about not having time to waste on me cause you need to hit up the club?
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2010-12-07 11:34:54
Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
You Are a Lost cause. Go argue with someone else. I've not changed my "topic" since i first posted. If we weren't discussing the same thing you should never have replied.
Check the quote train, you replied to me first on multiple grounds and I chose first to discuss the effectiveness of safety procedures. You're getting so mad and it's cute.
Actually, I believe i just won the argument.
You're pulling "Umad" Cards instead of responding. Thanks :)
Maybe now you wanna talk about not having time to waste on me cause you need to hit up the club?
Mad.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2205
By Asura.Karbuncle 2010-12-07 11:35:34
Shiva.Flionheart said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
You Are a Lost cause. Go argue with someone else. I've not changed my "topic" since i first posted. If we weren't discussing the same thing you should never have replied.
Check the quote train, you replied to me first on multiple grounds and I chose first to discuss the effectiveness of safety procedures. You're getting so mad and it's cute.
Actually, I believe i just won the argument.
You're pulling "Umad" Cards instead of responding. Thanks :)
Maybe now you wanna talk about not having time to waste on me cause you need to hit up the club?
Mad.
I hate you :(
Okay, I am a little mad. But is it unnatural to be angry about injustices? I THINK NOT!
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2010-12-07 11:36:06
Phoenix.Kojo said: Ramuh.Vinvv said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: Ramuh.Vinvv said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: The TSA is about as beneficial as life insurance on a cancer patient lol, which is not possible to say the least. how beneficial is life insurance on a cancer patient? I'm sure your question was implying how is it not beneficial, but it's just a matter of perception between the TSA and the consumer. 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.
Many life insurance policies, IIRC, won't cover pre-existing illnesses. As for their stand on Cancer being any different, I don't know. But if you have cancer and go to get life insurance and die, they won't pay your family. Hence the health care bill that passed.
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2010-12-07 11:36:49
Asura.Karbuncle said: Shiva.Flionheart said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
You Are a Lost cause. Go argue with someone else. I've not changed my "topic" since i first posted. If we weren't discussing the same thing you should never have replied.
Check the quote train, you replied to me first on multiple grounds and I chose first to discuss the effectiveness of safety procedures. You're getting so mad and it's cute.
Actually, I believe i just won the argument.
You're pulling "Umad" Cards instead of responding. Thanks :)
Maybe now you wanna talk about not having time to waste on me cause you need to hit up the club?
Mad.
I hate you :(
<3
It's ok to troll/spam this topic, it's just another TSA rant.
Trolly trolly spam and rolly
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2205
By Asura.Karbuncle 2010-12-07 11:37:34
Shiva.Flionheart said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Shiva.Flionheart said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
You Are a Lost cause. Go argue with someone else. I've not changed my "topic" since i first posted. If we weren't discussing the same thing you should never have replied.
Check the quote train, you replied to me first on multiple grounds and I chose first to discuss the effectiveness of safety procedures. You're getting so mad and it's cute.
Actually, I believe i just won the argument.
You're pulling "Umad" Cards instead of responding. Thanks :)
Maybe now you wanna talk about not having time to waste on me cause you need to hit up the club?
Mad.
I hate you :(
<3
It's ok to troll/spam this topic, it's just another TSA rant.
Trolly trolly spam and rolly
At least you were courteous enough to spoiler our quote train, 10$ says he doesn't when responding to me.
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2010-12-07 11:42:29
I'm a super guy
 Ramuh.Vinvv
Server: Ramuh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 15542
By Ramuh.Vinvv 2010-12-07 11:42:50
Phoenix.Kojo said: Ramuh.Vinvv said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: Ramuh.Vinvv said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: The TSA is about as beneficial as life insurance on a cancer patient lol, which is not possible to say the least. how beneficial is life insurance on a cancer patient? I'm sure your question was implying how is it not beneficial, but it's just a matter of perception between the TSA and the consumer. 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.
Many life insurance policies, IIRC, won't cover pre-existing illnesses. As for their stand on Cancer being any different, I don't know. But if you have cancer and go to get life insurance and die, they won't pay your family. I just fail to see the correlation between life insurance and TSA :/
It's easy to say TSA is as bad as X.
TSA is about as beneficial as africanized bees.
TSA is about as beneficial as the genital flap on underpants.
TSA is about as beneficial as HIV/AIDs.
I can keep on going if you like.
I just find it silly to make a blanketed statement like that without saying a bit more as to why it is :/
you still didn't answer my post about the first terrorist act kojo.
Leviathan.Chaosx
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2010-12-07 11:44:48
Shiva.Flionheart said: I'm a super guy LOL!
I started this thread for the sake of I promised more news on this date and I did.
Me = win.
NJ = win (imo).
Bahamut.Jetackuu
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2010-12-07 12:03:59
Cerberus.Kalyna said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Cerberus.Kalyna said: USA is filled with a bunch of idiots who think "oh they won't attack us via airplane again"
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-yemen-planned-northwest-flight-253-bomb-plot/story?id=9426085
2009 christmas -- attempted bombing plot that ALMOST made it.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/11/11/ink-cartridge-bomb-found-at-east-midlands-could-have-exploded-over-america-115875-22708013/
Even tho it was probably faked, it still became an issue. what if someone did smuggle a bomb on a plane that way?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/canada/8113296/Asian-man-boards-plane-disguised-as-old-white-man.html
that's how easy it is to get on board a plane ELSEWHERE
So seriously, do you really think terrorists are thinking "We already used the plane, let's not do it again"?
Terrorist are Terrorist, they'll use ANYTHING to attack us, whether it's anthrax, planes, car bombs, so on. They'll keep doing it whether you *** like it or not. TSA scanners help the chances of such things from happening become lower than it was before they adopted it.
You idiots need to think before you get pissed off. They did that for YOUR own safety. If you have nothing on you, then you shouldn't even be worried about it for the slightest bit. Do you just want it gone because you, yourself, are a terrorist?
you had a good point until this, and quite frankly you are *** stupid for saying it.
People don't like the scanners because they'd rather deal with a possible threat than having their personal liberties violated, and I applaud them for it, that's the kind of thing America was founded on, and that's true American value, not being pussies being afraid of some nut jobs that want to kill us, the governments job is to eliminate the threat, not violate our liberties at a slim chance to deter it. lol I know it's because of personal liberties being violated, I just wanted to point out that if they don't abide by the new safety, then give them an Idea on what TSA and the government might think about that certain individual when they make a huge fit about it, like that one radio talk show host girl.
You're going on a plane, for pete sake. You're going high in the sky where it'll take more than a good while for help to arrive IF there's a terrorist on your plane mid-flight. They're trying to prevent that. You getting in the way of it makes you look like a terrorist yourself (that's the point i was trying to make)
1. no way in these measures is preventing a terrorist from getting on a plane, it limits what they can do on one but it is not preventing one from getting on.
2. no it isn't and you're stupid for suggesting it is. (that is the point)
Bahamut.Jetackuu
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2010-12-07 12:04:44
Leviathan.Chaosx said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Not that I agree with the TSA scanners but it seems that NOBODY has been to the actual TSA website. I've been there. I've seen the images the scanners take. You may as well be looking an ink blot of a person. There is no detail, there is no privacy invasion. People need to grow the *** up and do some research before they complain.
Furthmore, flying is a privilege not a right. If you don't want to obey laws to fly then don't fly. Personally, I think their methods are poorly chosen but I would rather support them until we find something better. Enter the privilege nonsense again.
I'd rather not be a pussy than scan and/or feel up anyone, but that's just me.
flying is a right just as much as anything else that they don't have a law against.
 Ramuh.Scizor
Server: Ramuh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1444
By Ramuh.Scizor 2010-12-07 12:06:05
So must ridiculous in one thread...just wow
Ramuh.Vinvv
Server: Ramuh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 15542
By Ramuh.Vinvv 2010-12-07 12:07:56
Lakshmi.Mabrook said: What I was trying to imply from that post Vinvv is that there is no benefit from life insurance in general.
Ya you can say life insurance will help you if you die in accident and the likes, but then that goes a bit farther and I wonder WTF you're doing with a family if you haven't already secured them mentally and financially?
And as Kojo said it isn't possible on cancer patients and it wouldn't be beneficial for them to do so from both sides of the matter either cuz it would just raise the prices for all consumers and prove to be a net-loss total. life insurance is useful if you murder your spouse for it and get away with it :/
also, my grandfather died of cancer, he had life insurance and it helped out with all the costs after the fact.... so I don't really know what you're talking about.
of course life insurance is silly "after" your sick, and they *** you over a lot if you don't know your ***.
but that doesn't make it not useful.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2010-12-07 12:10:45
Lakshmi.Aurilius said: 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?
they weren't sensitive enough would be a good reason, but iirc they were allowed on with them with them knowing about them, which was against the airport's safety guidelines.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2010-12-07 12:12:23
Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Luz said: 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 attributes 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.
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.
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 :\
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.
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 prevent 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?
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.
@ Karbuncle /clap
Phoenix.Excelior
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-12-07 12:42:39
Asura.Karbuncle said: x Phoenix.Excelior said: Phoenix.Kojo said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Fighting "Terrorism" by living in fear and depriving you of personal liberties is like trying to put out fire by fanning the flame. Taking precaution isn't living in fear. I'm not afraid of my house burning down, but I make sure I don't bring a can of gasoline inside. I'm simply preventing something from happening. 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 Are you like 11?
Are you naive or do you believe that internet posts have anything to do with maturity? If they do then we have a fine collection of 7 year olds on these forums.
Ramuh.Vinvv
Server: Ramuh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 15542
By Ramuh.Vinvv 2010-12-07 12:48:57
Phoenix.Excelior said: Asura.Karbuncle said: x Phoenix.Excelior said: Phoenix.Kojo said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Fighting "Terrorism" by living in fear and depriving you of personal liberties is like trying to put out fire by fanning the flame. Taking precaution isn't living in fear. I'm not afraid of my house burning down, but I make sure I don't bring a can of gasoline inside. I'm simply preventing something from happening. 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 Are you like 11?
Are you naive or do you believe that internet posts have anything to do with maturity? If they do then we have a fine collection of 7 year olds on these forums. Question still stands, are you 11?
If you are you happen to be a brilliant 11 year old if I must say so myself.
Karby does use more childish insults so I dunno.
Server: Ifrit
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24692
By Ifrit.Kungfuhustle 2010-12-07 12:49:56
Phoenix.Excelior said: Asura.Karbuncle said: x Phoenix.Excelior said: Phoenix.Kojo said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Fighting "Terrorism" by living in fear and depriving you of personal liberties is like trying to put out fire by fanning the flame. Taking precaution isn't living in fear. I'm not afraid of my house burning down, but I make sure I don't bring a can of gasoline inside. I'm simply preventing something from happening. , and now you post common sense. I think I may have to reevaluate my opinion of you. <3 Are you like 11?
Are you naive or do you believe that internet posts have anything to do with maturity? If they do then we have a fine collection of 7 year olds on these forums. first off, I lol'ed hard at the bold.
Second, here is a reason why they call it PRE-caution, thats when you PREpare for something that MIGHT happen, like fire insurance for a fire. What America is doing is looking at the LAST attack and trying to prevent THAT kind of attack from happening again, which blinds the government from something NEW happening that America will NOT be prepared for. Just sayin.
By Luz 2010-12-07 12:51:38
Ifrit.Kungfuhustle said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Asura.Karbuncle said: x Phoenix.Excelior said: Phoenix.Kojo said: Asura.Karbuncle said: Fighting "Terrorism" by living in fear and depriving you of personal liberties is like trying to put out fire by fanning the flame. Taking precaution isn't living in fear. I'm not afraid of my house burning down, but I make sure I don't bring a can of gasoline inside. I'm simply preventing something from happening. , and now you post common sense. I think I may have to reevaluate my opinion of you. <3 Are you like 11?
Are you naive or do you believe that internet posts have anything to do with maturity? If they do then we have a fine collection of 7 year olds on these forums. first off, I lol'ed hard at the bold.
Second, here is a reason why they call it PRE-caution, thats when you PREpare for something that MIGHT happen, like fire insurance for a fire. What America is doing is looking at the LAST attack and trying to prevent THAT kind of attack from happening again, which blinds the government from something NEW happening that America will NOT be prepared for. Just sayin.
Preparing for something you've already seen happen negates your ability to prepare for something you foresee happening?
Ramuh.Vinvv
Server: Ramuh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 15542
By Ramuh.Vinvv 2010-12-07 12:52:37
Luz said: Preparing for something you've already seen happen negates your ability to prepare for something you foresee happening? Yes it does.
If you submit to fear you let the tourists win.
 Cerberus.Kalyna
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 21615
By Cerberus.Kalyna 2010-12-07 13:03:16
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Cerberus.Kalyna said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Cerberus.Kalyna said: USA is filled with a bunch of idiots who think "oh they won't attack us via airplane again"
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-yemen-planned-northwest-flight-253-bomb-plot/story?id=9426085
2009 christmas -- attempted bombing plot that ALMOST made it.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/11/11/ink-cartridge-bomb-found-at-east-midlands-could-have-exploded-over-america-115875-22708013/
Even tho it was probably faked, it still became an issue. what if someone did smuggle a bomb on a plane that way?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/canada/8113296/Asian-man-boards-plane-disguised-as-old-white-man.html
that's how easy it is to get on board a plane ELSEWHERE
So seriously, do you really think terrorists are thinking "We already used the plane, let's not do it again"?
Terrorist are Terrorist, they'll use ANYTHING to attack us, whether it's anthrax, planes, car bombs, so on. They'll keep doing it whether you *** like it or not. TSA scanners help the chances of such things from happening become lower than it was before they adopted it.
You idiots need to think before you get pissed off. They did that for YOUR own safety. If you have nothing on you, then you shouldn't even be worried about it for the slightest bit. Do you just want it gone because you, yourself, are a terrorist?
you had a good point until this, and quite frankly you are *** stupid for saying it.
People don't like the scanners because they'd rather deal with a possible threat than having their personal liberties violated, and I applaud them for it, that's the kind of thing America was founded on, and that's true American value, not being pussies being afraid of some nut jobs that want to kill us, the governments job is to eliminate the threat, not violate our liberties at a slim chance to deter it. lol I know it's because of personal liberties being violated, I just wanted to point out that if they don't abide by the new safety, then give them an Idea on what TSA and the government might think about that certain individual when they make a huge fit about it, like that one radio talk show host girl.
You're going on a plane, for pete sake. You're going high in the sky where it'll take more than a good while for help to arrive IF there's a terrorist on your plane mid-flight. They're trying to prevent that. You getting in the way of it makes you look like a terrorist yourself (that's the point i was trying to make)
1. no way in these measures is preventing a terrorist from getting on a plane, it limits what they can do on one but it is not preventing one from getting on.
2. no it isn't and you're stupid for suggesting it is. (that is the point) I don't think they'd let you on the plane if you refuse to get scanned. (From what I've been seeing and reading). So if it prevents a terrorist from boarding a plane (either when he gets caught during the scanning or refuses) then all is good. Of course, It's all random so there is the chance of him boarding the plane.
Needs stricter rules. I think everybody should be scanned or patted down.
Besides, as someone pointed out earlier, flying on an airplane isn't your freedom nor is it your right, it's a privilege. Just like driving a car or motorcycle.
Gilgamesh.Tweeek
Server: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2169
By Gilgamesh.Tweeek 2010-12-07 13:04:52
cg Chaosx
Ramuh.Vinvv
Server: Ramuh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 15542
By Ramuh.Vinvv 2010-12-07 13:05:20
Cerberus.Kalyna said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Cerberus.Kalyna said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Cerberus.Kalyna said: USA is filled with a bunch of idiots who think "oh they won't attack us via airplane again"
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-yemen-planned-northwest-flight-253-bomb-plot/story?id=9426085
2009 christmas -- attempted bombing plot that ALMOST made it.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/11/11/ink-cartridge-bomb-found-at-east-midlands-could-have-exploded-over-america-115875-22708013/
Even tho it was probably faked, it still became an issue. what if someone did smuggle a bomb on a plane that way?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/canada/8113296/Asian-man-boards-plane-disguised-as-old-white-man.html
that's how easy it is to get on board a plane ELSEWHERE
So seriously, do you really think terrorists are thinking "We already used the plane, let's not do it again"?
Terrorist are Terrorist, they'll use ANYTHING to attack us, whether it's anthrax, planes, car bombs, so on. They'll keep doing it whether you *** like it or not. TSA scanners help the chances of such things from happening become lower than it was before they adopted it.
You idiots need to think before you get pissed off. They did that for YOUR own safety. If you have nothing on you, then you shouldn't even be worried about it for the slightest bit. Do you just want it gone because you, yourself, are a terrorist?
you had a good point until this, and quite frankly you are *** stupid for saying it.
People don't like the scanners because they'd rather deal with a possible threat than having their personal liberties violated, and I applaud them for it, that's the kind of thing America was founded on, and that's true American value, not being pussies being afraid of some nut jobs that want to kill us, the governments job is to eliminate the threat, not violate our liberties at a slim chance to deter it. lol I know it's because of personal liberties being violated, I just wanted to point out that if they don't abide by the new safety, then give them an Idea on what TSA and the government might think about that certain individual when they make a huge fit about it, like that one radio talk show host girl.
You're going on a plane, for pete sake. You're going high in the sky where it'll take more than a good while for help to arrive IF there's a terrorist on your plane mid-flight. They're trying to prevent that. You getting in the way of it makes you look like a terrorist yourself (that's the point i was trying to make)
1. no way in these measures is preventing a terrorist from getting on a plane, it limits what they can do on one but it is not preventing one from getting on.
2. no it isn't and you're stupid for suggesting it is. (that is the point) I don't think they'd let you on the plane if you refuse to get scanned. (From what I've been seeing and reading). So if it prevents a terrorist from boarding a plane (either when he gets caught during the scanning or refuses) then all is good. Of course, It's all random so there is the chance of him boarding the plane.
Needs stricter rules. I think everybody should be scanned or patted down.
Besides, as someone pointed out earlier, flying on an airplane isn't your freedom nor is it your right, it's a privilege. Just like driving a car or motorcycle. I think they should start patting down kids at highschools so they don't have any more Columbines.
>.>
<.<
[+]
Phoenix.Huginn
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 100
By Phoenix.Huginn 2010-12-07 13:05:27
Phoenix.Kojo said: Except for the guy masturbating to the scans.. Don't you think this is getting a bit outta hand? Do any of you guys actually fly anywhere? The scanner sends a non-detailed scan to a closed room where a guy may or may not be jerking it, no one actually sees it, you and the viewer never come face-to-face, and it's alot faster than individual pat-downs. what do you mean "non-detailed?" the images released to the public as well as those pilfered from the federal courthouse (with matching normal picture) in orlando are degraded from what the actual scan shows. the guys in the back with < hands > in < trousers >, < jerkin > are looking at crystal clear 3d images of you with a single color (shaded for detail) skin. they basically see you naked but with a thin layer of body paint
Server: Fenrir
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3351
By Fenrir.Terminus 2010-12-07 13:05:36
Ramuh.Ilvex said: So we should also take away the law that requires infants/toddlers to be in car seat, because *** the Man for telling my(made up) three year old how to roll, down with the MAN!!@!@!$#!@$
Yeah, cause obviously they have the cognitive power to decide how to live their lives. Or do you just want to not have to ride in a car seat anymore?
|
|
