By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - do you agree with the new TSA security measures?

 

do you agree with the new TSA security measures?

yes 24 25.26%
 
no 47 49.47%
 
don't care 11 11.58%
 
another great thread,from... 1 1.05%
 
it's all overblown 2 2.11%
 
the should use different tactics 9 9.47%
 
Total:94
mhsillen on 24 November 2010

Good news kids big sister wants to control you even more!

I am so happy that the government is incrementally controlling us even more

I hope they put the scanners in every conceivable place like in my toilet bowl  in case I planted a bomb in my ass.

But for some ok it's for our safety so move along nothing see here 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/130549-next-step-for-body-scanners-could-be-trains-boats-and-the-metro-

I believed the gov't profiled white hate groups when searching for the  Timothy James McVeigh

Do you think they checked everyone including African-Americans?



Around the Network
Rath on 24 November 2010
Gnizmo said:
twesterm said:


Well if it's a question of numbers then I would imagine it would take a lot less people and less resources to hijack a plane than an airport.

And the ultimate answer to why they don't invade an airport-- because it would be ultimately stupid and not really work.  At best they would annoy the nation by grounding all air traffic.


Ineffective doesn't add up for me. The kill count would be enormous, and there is little security outside of the security check points which, conveniently, have a large number of targets. Such an attack (or simple explosive)  would have ridiculous casualty rates, and really fuck up airport security. Looking to strike terror and make a statement? Go down as the guy who made everyone who goes near an airport needs to go through security.

An attack on an airport is actually less likely than an attack on a train station I think, train stations are more crowded and have less security. This style of 'Mumbai' attack is exactly what they're afraid of in Europe.



Raze on 24 November 2010

All I know is, i'll probably get in trouble if I have to be patted down, but for saying things like:

"After you're done, can you write your phone # on the back of my ticket for when I come home?"

"Should I call you Father Agent? What time are we having the next Mass at?"

"The airport should get rid of the smoking ban, because I'm going to need a cigarette after this"

"Thanks for the great time together. Call me!"



The Carnival of Shadows - Folk Punk from Asbury Park, New Jersey

http://www.thecarnivalofshadows.com 


Gnizmo on 24 November 2010
Rath said:

An attack on an airport is actually less likely than an attack on a train station I think, train stations are more crowded and have less security. This style of 'Mumbai' attack is exactly what they're afraid of in Europe.


That is also kind of my point. I can think of a dozen more effective and easier ways of causing a shit storm. Why so focused on airplanes?



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Kasz216 on 25 November 2010
Gnizmo said:
Rath said:

An attack on an airport is actually less likely than an attack on a train station I think, train stations are more crowded and have less security. This style of 'Mumbai' attack is exactly what they're afraid of in Europe.


That is also kind of my point. I can think of a dozen more effective and easier ways of causing a shit storm. Why so focused on airplanes?


Because it doesn't take  a dozen guys with weapons to hijack a plane?   It takes like... 3?



Around the Network
halogamer1989 on 25 November 2010

This user's post has been removed.



Rath on 25 November 2010
Gnizmo said:
Rath said:

An attack on an airport is actually less likely than an attack on a train station I think, train stations are more crowded and have less security. This style of 'Mumbai' attack is exactly what they're afraid of in Europe.


That is also kind of my point. I can think of a dozen more effective and easier ways of causing a shit storm. Why so focused on airplanes?


Because with a plane you can do a huge amount of damage with a small number of people. You are virtually guaranteed to kill all 150 people on board and also have the ability to kill more.

An attack on a train station or a train is likely to require more people and kill fewer.



halogamer1989 on 25 November 2010

@Gnizmo: B/c they are effective unconventional weapons systems with highly concentrated mass casualties. 



scottie on 25 November 2010

http://failblog.org/2010/11/23/epic-fail-photos-probably-bad-news-tsa-fail/

 

Body Scanner Operator caught masturbating at Colorado Airport

 

Voted no, cos it's fucking creepy and a bunch of journalists got around it within a week of it coming into use



Kasz216 on 25 November 2010
scottie said:

http://failblog.org/2010/11/23/epic-fail-photos-probably-bad-news-tsa-fail/

 

Body Scanner Operator caught masturbating at Colorado Airport

 

Voted no, cos it's fucking creepy and a bunch of journalists got around it within a week of it coming into use


Yeah... that's why i'd seperate men and women in scanning.