Curse

Winterclaw · Feb 16, 2010, 05:48 AM // 05:48

At least the TSA thinks so. Given the outbreak of disabled pre-6 year old suicide bombers of late I'm sure this move is perfectly justi... oh wait, there has been no outbreak of disabled pre-6 year old suicide bombers.

So, feel safer yet?

gone · Feb 16, 2010, 06:21 AM // 06:21

recon & probing the security standards is good. Now some of us know that leg braces laden with bomb parts, shanks, and/or drugs might be safe from search. good job Bob Thomas, you've just made air travel/security safer.

Rocky Raccoon · Feb 16, 2010, 02:00 PM // 14:00

If that is the average intelligence of the people protecting us, we are in a world of hurt.

gone · Feb 16, 2010, 04:27 PM // 16:27

I wonder what lawsuit the aggrieved was plotting towards Disney world. Taking a 3, turning on 4yr old underdeveloped child there seems suspect to me. I mean...think of the leg braces.

Winterclaw · Feb 16, 2010, 08:55 PM // 20:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocky Raccoon

If that is the average intelligence of the people protecting us, we are in a world of hurt.

That.

Some airlines invest in having smart guards first and then add other stuff. I think the US's problem is it is giving smart technology to stupid, underpaid, under-trained guards and expecting the technology to do all the work.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure eventually terrorists will start getting around to turning kids into bombs, but there are people with actual physical ailments who aren't terrorists and need devices to move around. Assuming everyone is a terrorist is only going to keep your staff overworked and make them complacent.

Rocky Raccoon · Feb 16, 2010, 08:58 PM // 20:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

That.

Some airlines invest in having smart guards first and then add other stuff. I think the US's problem is it is giving smart technology to stupid, underpaid, under-trained guards and expecting the technology to do all the work.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure eventually terrorists will start getting around to turning kids into bombs, but there are people with actual physical ailments who aren't terrorists and need devices to move around. Assuming everyone is a terrorist is only going to keep your staff overworked and make them complacent.

There is something to be said for racial profiling when it comes to terrorists.

Lord Sojar · Feb 16, 2010, 10:03 PM // 22:03

I'm fine with racial profiling. If a specific race has a higher percentage of attempted attacks then another, profile them. Who gives a shit what they say?

Also, the way Israel does it is genius. Look for indicators of stress; pupil dilation/constriction, sweaty appearance, above normal resting heart rate, etc. It works, better than any full body scanner or whatever idiocy we will come up with in the West.

Winterclaw · Feb 17, 2010, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Yeah, people coming from terror "hotspots" like Yemen should get a little more screening not necessarily because they are all terrorists but because the odds are higher and lives are on the line.

El Al makes you go through 3 hours of screening and you have to be interviewed before getting on the plan, but when you get on, you get a real steak knife. Their planes also have a double door set up between the passengers and the pilots so it's harder to break in.

Kerwyn Nasilan · Feb 17, 2010, 02:33 AM // 02:33

Yeah it is stupid, but if for whatever reason he did have a weapon It could have been worse. It's pathetic that it is like this but necessary.

I pwnd U · Feb 17, 2010, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Not gonna lie, when I see someone in leg braces I gtfo because I know they gonna blow shit up!

I can't believe security there was so dense... Stupid idiots.

shoyon456 · Feb 17, 2010, 04:06 AM // 04:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

I'm fine with racial profiling. If a specific race has a higher percentage of attempted attacks then another, profile them. Who gives a shit what they say?

You certainly would if you belonged to that race.

The problem with this dangerous thinking is that it assumes the only thing that matters is physical life. While this may be the only thing you care about, its a very ignorant idea that fails to take into account the convictions and ideals that matter more to us than bodily harm. The conviction here is equal treatment under the laws, mandated by the Constitution.

A good example is that despite knowing full well soldiers will likely face harm and/or death, they still enlist and fight overseas. Different soldiers do it for different reasons, but many will answer that they do it for what the nation means to them. The physical harm they may face is overridden by standing on their principles. Isn't there an ideal you would sacrifice yourself to see preserved/reached?

Secondly, profiling based on behavior is not the same as "racial profiling." Profiling based on behavior is not only more efficient, but has little conflict with treating people equally regardless of race or ethnicity. I would have no problem with profiling based on behavior, as long as it is not used to promote stereotypes in a similar way racial profiling certainly would.

Winterclaw · Feb 17, 2010, 05:09 AM // 05:09

I don't think the equal clause applies to who you focus your attention on so long as you have some sort of evidence or proof to back up your actions. IE there are two counrties, Abrug and Bburg. Aburg produced 0 terrorist/hijacking attempts. Bburg produced 20 and is the origin of 80% of terrorists/hijackers. Historical says that unless something changes, Bburg has been and will continue to be the main country of origin.

Prudence dictates that when you have a finite amount of resources, you should spend them wisely. In this case you would be extra cautious with people from Bburg. Now you don't outright forbid them from boarding (which would be racist) but giving the situation you double check them and keep an eye on them and as long as they don't do anything, wrong allow them to board (which isn't racist). In other words you ask a few more questions, keep an eye on them longer, pay closer attention to body language, etc.

Rocky Raccoon · Feb 17, 2010, 05:12 PM // 17:12

It's sad that a small percentage of people from a particular group of people cause such grief for the majority of said group. But if you were to focus your attention on who would be most likely to be a terrorist with a bomb, it wouldn't be a 75 year old white women from England that would fit the profile. Perhaps it should be called terrorist profiling so as to be "politically correct"(<==a whole other story) these days.

EragonSorceror · Mar 02, 2010, 11:39 PM // 23:39

Are you guys really that oblivious? There is absolutely no justification for racial profiling, even aside from the obvious moral consequences. There have been two counterexamples in the past 3 months alone. In your ideal airport security, both of these terrorists would be waved through on merit of their race. It has nothing to do with "political correctness," it is just plain stupid. I understand wishing that your status as a white male bought you a "get through airport security free" pass, but you must understand that that is not how the world works and that yes, it is racist.

Winterclaw · Mar 03, 2010, 12:30 AM // 00:30

The second guy had a private plane, he probably wouldn't have even been searched so how you search doesn't apply. And since you are either 100% illiterate or an ideologue, I also mentioned people coming from Yemen should have extra attention paid to them. I never said anything about race.

Evasion Twenty · Mar 03, 2010, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocky Raccoon

If that is the average intelligence of the people protecting us, we are in a world of hurt.

Standard Procedure, Ma'am.

Reformed · Mar 04, 2010, 12:46 AM // 00:46

I have a better idea, how about instead of worrying about profiling we just dramatically change foreign policy. The "they hate our freedom" crowd are a bunch of morons. The real reason there is opposition to the west is our willingness to fight forever-wars by proxy for a certain middle eastern nation under false pretenses. Stop blowing them up and they might do the same to us...what a concept.

EragonSorceror · Mar 04, 2010, 04:11 AM // 04:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

I never said anything about race.

Other people did:

Quote:

There is something to be said for racial profiling when it comes to terrorists.

Quote:

I'm fine with racial profiling. If a specific race has a higher percentage of attempted attacks then another, profile them. Who gives a shit what they say?

I thought it was clear that you were not the main target my comment.

Quote:

The second guy had a private plane, he probably wouldn't have even been searched so how you search doesn't apply.

I think it beautifully illustrates my point that middle easterners aren't the only people with a desire to crash planes into government buildings.

Quote:

Now you don't outright forbid them from boarding (which would be racist) but giving the situation you double check them and keep an eye on them and as long as they don't do anything, wrong allow them to board (which isn't racist).

A little bit off-topic, but I'm interested in your definition of racism. It may just be because I'm "either 100% illiterate or an ideologue", but I cannot imagine one where the first scenario is racist and the second isn't.

And finally, to end on a positive note:

Quote:

Yeah, people coming from terror "hotspots" like Yemen should get a little more screening not necessarily because they are all terrorists but because the odds are higher and lives are on the line.

This makes a lot of sense to me. It is a condition that is not forced upon you for your entire life and there is evidence to back it up. Like I said before, you really were not the primary target of my comment.

Neo Atomisk · Mar 08, 2010, 06:52 PM // 18:52

Bracing for South Park parody.

Winterclaw · Mar 08, 2010, 06:56 PM // 18:56

So would Timmy, Jimmy, or both be the terrorist in question?