History Repeats itself if you don't learn

[Greenday]

You're going to compare no-fly lists and being falsely arrested for child porn to being held for years in jail because you are a terrorist? You can do better than that.

[Andara Bledin]

Do you really think we just arrest people with no proof?

Yes. We do it all the time. If you don't think we do, then you need to do a little more research to learn just what sort of country we have ourselves, because it's ignorance like that that allows such situations to continue.

Well, seeing as I'm not making IEDs and blowing people up, I don't have to worry about that.

You'd like to think so.

But when a man who in no way resembles the description of a wanted fugitive but has the same first and last name (middle name, age, height, weight, ethnicity, social security number, address... all different) spends three months in jail before they finally realize they have the wrong guy, you'd be wrong.

This man spent 9 days in jail for a murder committed by another man, although in his case, there is much more in common between the two. But even a cursory perusal of a picture of the actual murderer should be enough to prove that this wasn't him.

This one spent 60 days in jail.

This 44 year old man spent a week in jail on a warrant for a 21 year old man with the same name.

This man won a $120,000 award after spending a month in jail and has since been arrested for the same thing twice more. And the last time, they strip searched him.

^-.-^

[Rapscallion]

It's also worth noting that there are so many 'terrorists' in Gitmo that - several years later - have never been charged. I find this disturbing. I also take it to mean that there's no actual proof against them, or they would have been charged.

Rapscallion

[Greenday]

Right now, I can only speak about the terrorists in Afghanistan and I can say that we aren't arresting people without any proof.

[insertNameHere]

You're going to compare no-fly lists and being falsely arrested for child porn to being held for years in jail because you are a terrorist? You can do better than that.

Actually, I made this as a open discussion of rights/lack of rights and how history repeats itself. So I call it fair game.

Bonus points if you find out that the police used the new anti-terror laws to get the power to bust into his house.

And in response to previous posts, technically, they don't have to charge you with anything to kick in your door, throw a black bag over your head and spirit you away.

Also for the nail clipper thing, people need to learn to fight and resist. If a terrorist KNEW nail clippers wouldn't work, he would probably need new tactics.

All that being said, I really do not like to give up my freedoms for any reason, especially if it makes you feel better.

[FArchivist]

And considering most of the worker's rights fought for by the unions are now ensconced in law, it's not that easy to change or repeal laws.

I would disagree with this. All it takes is getting 2/3 of Congress on your side and an amenable President. That's all it took to repeal the laws implemented during the Depression that allowed sub-prime mortgages and bad banking practices to cause the housing bubble/crash.

I really want to know how would actually give in to someone wheeling nail clippers. I hope someone came up behind him and snapped his neck.

If those nail clippers are at the carotid artery, I'm giving up real fucking quick. And as soon as Mr Hero comes up and -starts- snapping his neck, that's my arterial blood spraying across the cabin. Nice job breaking it, Hero.

allowing employers to prohibit employees legal firearms in their personal vehicle while on company property?

I have absolutely no problem with this one thing for one reason: it's private property. I don't allow people with firearms onto my property unless they are law enforcement of some sort. I see no reason why any employer should not have the same freedom.

And frankly, after some incidents involving firearms at work, I'm real leery of seeing even the security guard having a firearm. If I see a regular co-worker packing, I'm turning around and going back home.

Do you really think we just arrest people with no proof? LOL No evidence. Yes there is. We don't pick out terrorists by playing Eenie meanie miney moe.

Unfortunately, we ARE guilty of that. In terms of arresting possible members of Al Qaeda, something like 54% of the people we socked away in Gitmo and other black prisons in other countries were the wrong guys. Because of how we did it, we didn't bother to do more than maybe match blurry photos. No DNA, no fingerprints...just, "We're capturing some brown dude named Ahmed Massjouian. Here's a blurry photo." 2 years later, "Fuck, this is the wrong Ahmed. Oh well."

And the CIA? Blithely has admitted it. And then said, "Who the fuck cares? It's just some Afghani raghead. We'll just dump him back in his village, oh noes."

[Rageaholic]

Also for the nail clipper thing, people need to learn to fight and resist. If a terrorist KNEW nail clippers wouldn't work, he would probably need new tactics.

Yeah I have a hard time believing that nail clippers can be dangerous enough to need banning. If nail clippers really are that dangerous, than we are fucked. By that logic, anything remotely sharp would need to be banned as it could be used as a weapon.

Now I personally don't have a problem with no nail clippers as it's only a minor inconvieniance. However, the reasoning for the ban can easily be used to justify banning millions of other things. What makes nail clippers different from pens, pencils, or hell even extremely sharp fingernails?

[insertNameHere]

Yeah I have a hard time believing that nail clippers can be dangerous enough to need banning. If nail clippers really are that dangerous, than we are fucked. By that logic, anything remotely sharp would need to be banned as it could be used as a weapon.

Now I personally don't have a problem with no nail clippers as it's only a minor inconvieniance. However, the reasoning for the ban can easily be used to justify banning millions of other things. What makes nail clippers different from pens, pencils, or hell even extremely sharp fingernails?

Actually, I find a standard BIC pen to be tactically better for taking out someone than say, A small piece of metal that is only 1.5in long If your a motivated terrorist or someone who's life is in danger a pen makes a pretty damn good weapon. Aim for throat or up nose into brain. I am of the mindset that if someone is motivated enough anything is possible.

Eventually, everything will be too dangerous and we will only fly naked because sure the guy in the transporter moves uses his shirt as a weapon, but really, anything is possible.

[Greenday]

A pen or pencil can have an actual valid use on an airplane. Clipping your nails on an airplane? Not so much.

[Andara Bledin]

A pen or pencil can have an actual valid use on an airplane. Clipping your nails on an airplane? Not so much.

So? They're more dangerous than the clippers, and half the passengers have them, and more than likely can get the flight attendants to give them one.

If a pencil is more dangerous than nail clippers and your allowed to keep the pencil, then taking away the nail clippers is another episode of Security Theater and a complete waste of time. It's feel good activity to mollify the gullible while accomplishing absolutely nothing but wasting a shitload of money and time.

^-.-^

[protege]

What gets me about all this insanity...is how stupid it is. I flew to Albany, NY the week after 9/11. I dealt with the security lines, the armed guards, and even being crammed in like a damn sardine on the return trip. Seems that so many flights had been canceled, that the airlines were stuffing planes to capacity. Anyway, what got me about the entire thing...is that I couldn't even get a plastic knife in the Albany airport to cut my sandwich. Yet, upon getting home, I heard that someone got a box cutter onto another plane. Aren't the X-ray machines and other measures supposed to stop such things?

[Gravekeeper]

I still can't get over the part where you get to pick between being violated via radiation or being violated via direct molestation just to get on a plane in the US. It's an insane overreaction to something that was ludicrously rare to begin with and pretty much impossible now. Due entirely to the fact the passangers on board would beat you to death the second you made so much as a suspicious move now.

As for nail clippers.....yeaaah, no. You're just not going to get anywhere near the cockpit in this day and age with any sort of melee weapon or hostage taking tactic. The passangers *will* kill you with their bare hands. Hostage be damned.

[Greenday]

I still can't get over the part where you get to pick between being violated via radiation or being violated via direct molestation just to get on a plane in the US. It's an insane overreaction to something that was ludicrously rare to begin with and pretty much impossible now. Due entirely to the fact the passangers on board would beat you to death the second you made so much as a suspicious move now.

As for nail clippers.....yeaaah, no. You're just not going to get anywhere near the cockpit in this day and age with any sort of melee weapon or hostage taking tactic. The passangers *will* kill you with their bare hands. Hostage be damned.

Well, since it won't happen most of the time, I guess we can just assume it won't ever happen. That's nice that you might be willing to risk your life on that chance, but I'm not cool with that.

As for the passangers, I'm not sure which humans you are talking about, but the humans on this planet, specifically in our region, are too big of sissies to do anything in a situation that requires action. Cause someone else will do it, right?

[Gravekeeper]

Well, since it won't happen most of the time, I guess we can just assume it won't ever happen. That's nice that you might be willing to risk your life on that chance, but I'm not cool with that.

First of all, nice conclusion jump. Second of all, hah. You have a better statistical chance of being struck by lightning. Do you hide inside all day because you don't want to risk your life to lightning? Much as I hate to borrow a cliche, long as you have TSA agents groping 6 year olds, the terrorists have won.

As for the passangers, I'm not sure which humans you are talking about, but the humans on this planet, specifically in our region, are too big of sissies to do anything in a situation that requires action. Cause someone else will do it, right?

Seeing as passangers did something on one of the flights of 9/11 itself to begin with and now everyone is acutely aware of the possibility. Seeing as its happened since. Yeah, people would flip and jump you. I would. Without question. Besides, considering US passangers flip the hell out if anyone even speaks a foreign language on a plane now, I'm pretty sure someone making a suspicious move would get mob beaten pretty quick. Especially if they were unfortunate enough to be brown.

[Boozy]

First of all, nice conclusion jump. Second of all, hah. You have a better statistical chance of being struck by lightning. Do you hide inside all day because you don't want to risk your life to lightning?

No, but most people don't stand in the middle of an open field when during thunderstorms, either.

There's always something we can do to mitigate risk. The question is how far do we go to do so. You have to look at the risk, the consequences, and the costs of mitigation.

I think what many people forget when discussing this topic in vague generalities is how devastating a second major terrorist attack would be to US. The risk of a terrorist hijacking a plane is very small, and the number of lives lost is not likely to be large (most planes don't cause towers to collapse). So why are we spending so much time and money on security?

Because the consequences of a terrorist attack - especially using a plane - are so huge. I don't think that the economy and society will bounce back so quickly again, and neither does the US government. Terrorist attacks have ripple effects far beyond the lives lost in the attack. It's why terrorists do what they do.

Whether or not you feel that the TSA has "gone too far" is one thing. But there's no question that some security measures need to be in place, and those measures will always mean that "the terrorists have won". They have inconvenienced us and cost us money. But the alternative - not doing enough - is also not a good idea.

There's a middle ground, but only a omniscient being would know where that is.