The "Underwear Bomber"...and yet more security checks

[Vagabond]

What if because we legalized interractial marriage people get it made legal to marry their dogs? It's a false argument.

A quick google search will reveal that someone has married the Berlin Wall, the Eiffel Tower, so someone marrying a dog would not shock me. www.listverse.com bizarre relationships
Also, there is a line between humans and animals, I would hope.

If things worked that way then gay marriage wouldn't be having any issues because we would be on a slippery slope started by legalizing interracial marriages.

Gay marriage is offensive to some, I think, because of the morality/religious issue. Also, there are some parts of the US where you will get funny looks for being an interracial couple (most notably the South). But as interracial couples are more accepted, eventually same sex couples will be more accepted.

People will evaluate each security measure taken on it's own merit not simply accept it because after all we allowed metal detectors might as well accept everything else.

I am evaluating the security measures. My first point is: I merely see body scans as a better mouse trap in a long line of security measures; passports & ID, no-fly lists, TSA, X-rays of carry-ons, TSA, metal detectors. I would just like to know what would be the end-all-be-all of security measures? You build a better mouse-trap and the mice will just get smarter. Metal detectors - you get a shoe bomber, you get shoe checks, you get an underwear bomber. Seems like a game of one-up-man-ship.
My second point is: How effective are these security measures? Who/whom are they really protecting? Or are they merely the illusion that something is being done to protect you? Didn't we have metal detectors at airports before 9/11?
To answer my second point - I fly about once or twice a year, for the past, 20 years. I regularly have on my person: 2 lighters, 2 pens, nail clippers, CDs & CD player and loose change. Any of which can be dangerous, any of which can also be purchased past the security check points (except maybe the lighters nowadays). The lighters have never been picked up by security yet.

We are here debating this rather than accepting it blindly after all.

I am not blindly accepting anything. I am seeking answers, clarification. My questions are based on past observations and some personal experiences.

[jackfaire]

People will evaluate each security measure taken on it's own merit not simply accept it because after all we allowed metal detectors might as well accept everything else.

Check what I quoted I was responding to the point put out there that if we accept one form of security check then we will blindly accept the next one.

I was refuting that thought and pointing out that we don't blindly accept Thing B because we accepted Thing A. Thing B still is scrutinized as much as Thing A was.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Check what I quoted I was responding to the point put out there that if we accept one form of security check then we will blindly accept the next one.

I was refuting that thought and pointing out that we don't blindly accept Thing B because we accepted Thing A. Thing B still is scrutinized as much as Thing A was.

Most hardcore slippery slope types I've conversed with don't care as much about each step being scrutinized. Instead, it's obvious that each step is 'inevitable' and yak yak yak.

However, there are some areas where the slippery slope has taken effect, largely due to people not considering it at all and just making/passing laws willy-nilly

*cough* Gun Control *cough* VCRA vs. UKARA *cough*

[Vagabond]

My apologies, Jackfaire.

[jackfaire]

My apologies, Jackfaire.

No problem

[ditchdj]

You will notice, on the small print of your airline tickets and/or boarding pass, that by boarding the plane you are waiving some of those rights.

Privacy may be a right, but flying is not.

You're right. That's why I won't fly.

[HYHYBT]

I'm boycotting the airlines! Oh, not over this; it's just that I don't have the money for tickets

[Slytovhand]

Question: Which has done more damage to the American psyche - terrorists, or the US government?

Sure, the 'terrorists' (and I'm not even remotely convinced it was 'external' organisations doing this stuff) do things so people get scared for a short period of time, but the government has been doing things, and fearmongering, for decades...


So, although the 'slippery slope' argument doesn't hold a lot of water, I would like to know what happens when these scanners are in place, tens of thousands of false alarms get triggered and hold up planes for hours, and the costs involved with this, when the next 'loophole' is found, and doesn't go off. Then, a new security measure will be introduced, which will get tens of thousands of false alarms.... etc etc etc...

[Greenday]

How exactly does an x-ray machine set off tons of alarms?

[Vagabond]

I think Sytovhand was meaning that the guard who *thinks* he sees something in the x-ray machine sets off an alarm.
Unless it's automated by then and can sound off an alarm by itself.

[MadMike]

I'm boycotting the airlines! Oh, not over this; it's just that I don't have the money for tickets

For me, it is over this, at least partly. I decided I was done with them when they got greedy and started charging for extras like "Do you want to bring any luggage?" ("Hell, no! I'll just go naked!")

I used to love flying. There was something peaceful about being way up above the clouds, and looking down on all the tiny houses and cars below. When my wife and I took our first cruise, we flew to our cruise point, and I loved it!

We took another cruise a little over a year ago, and with the bullshit the airlines were already pulling, we wanted nothing to do with them. Ended up taking a bus, which was a lot less hassle.

[jackfaire]

I wonder how much it costs to charter a zepplin.

[protege]

I gave up flying after 9/11. Several months before, I'd booked a trip to Albany, NY...for the week *after* 9/11. Then the planes hit the towers, and I really didn't want to travel by plane. I wasn't scared, but I didn't want to deal with the bullshit at the airport. Seriously, showing up 2 hours early and spending another 2 hours in line at the security checkpoint? Sorry, but fuck that.

If I'm doing any long-distance travel, I'll take the train. Sure, it will take longer, but I can carry liquid beverages on board, I'm not subjected to having my shit gone through, nor do I have to deal with my house keys setting off the damn metal detector. Plus, the seats actually recline, and you can sit wherever you want. Oh, and there aren't any bathroom restrictions either

[ArenaBoy]

God I would hope it didn't. Trigger a quiet investigation maybe send off warning bells. HELL NO. Imagine you have a family member pissed off at you and decides to raise concerns about you and because this person happens to be family you are detained and questioned for potential illegal activity. Arrested at work costing you your job, your reputation sullied, all because we took seriously someone whose judgment is suspect.

Slippery slope fallacy. Umar's father reported him because his son cut off all contact and attended a school in Yemen that is notorious for its links to terrorism.

What you're alluding to is far fetched and you're jumping to conclusions.

More so, all the signs were there. One way ticket, paid in cash, no luggage whatsoever, and the UK denied him a visa. Along with his father's concern that he had become radicalized.

The US is their own worst enemy and it's incidents like this where we need to pay attention. It's also incidents like this that cause us to have these brain farts.

[jackfaire]

Along with his father's concern that he had become radicalized.

Along with, not his concerns alone.

His concerns should be reason for investigating to see if there are other signs.

His concers should not be reasons to bar his son from flying.

My sister sometimes has her home investigated by CPS because she pisses off some member of her husband's family and so they call in a false report about her having weed or some other thing considered a threat to her children.

The investigations are inconvenient but haven't stripped her of any of her rights yet.

Imagine if the strength of the word of a member of your family was all it took to spark off a criminal or federal investigation into your activities.

Once they saw other signs were there in addition to his father's concerns your damn right they should investigate heavily but on the father's word alone no.