EPThowever, I just don't see how this is worse than being frisked. I also think it's very negative how certain groups (well basically anyone looking reasonably arab) are more likely to be victim to "random security searches" and I think an indiscriminatory way of searching people is better in this aspect. I also think there needs to be _some_ security measures in airports even if they have gone too far now (I do however not think protecting our borders is the main way to combat terrorism or whatever. )
Naked Scanner - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Liquid`Drone
Norway28809 Posts
however, I just don't see how this is worse than being frisked. I also think it's very negative how certain groups (well basically anyone looking reasonably arab) are more likely to be victim to "random security searches" and I think an indiscriminatory way of searching people is better in this aspect. I also think there needs to be _some_ security measures in airports even if they have gone too far now (I do however not think protecting our borders is the main way to combat terrorism or whatever. ) | ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
^_^ I agree. **shuts up** | ||
|
1tym
Korea (South)2425 Posts
On October 17 2009 01:26 Mora wrote: that she's fat and self-conscious? lol certainly not that she's a terrorist and needs a pat down. LOL And that is exactly my point. The tendency to stereotype creates prejuduce and therefore forces people to go through the scanner even though they might be extremely uncomfortable with it. You want to avoid being perceived as grumpy fat woman refusing to go through the scanner even though it is your right to do so. Refusing to go through the scanner when everybody else is lined up like a obedient flock of herds also lay yourself open to suspicion, which may in some cases cause officers to go more than the necessary measure for manual check up, Furthermore as Alizee pointed out, you don't want to be seen as 'that guy' who creates delay in processing and seen as peculiar which can force people to go through the scanner despite their reluctance or aversion. There is an old saying 'A cornered stone meets the mason's chisel.' | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
I like my privacy despite not having any intent to blow up planes. It's more a case of do you think at some point there are limits to giving up your privacy or does safety go above all. If you answer yes to this question how can you say people would be better off not minding this scanner. You obviously have your own boundaries at some point as well. If you answer no then I suppose by all means you have every right to say this and live happily in a world with chips in your body. I don't even mind this scanner nor would I mind going through it. What I don't like about it is that it's yet another step into a direction I consider the wrong one. That's why I wouldn't want to see this at airports. | ||
|
MisteR
Netherlands595 Posts
Well, I can go on (seriously). I fly often because I attend fencing tournaments all over the world, and it is always a bad experience. I drive whenever I can even though it takes much longer and is often more expensive. Airports are already _this_ close to my threshold and if this is added as a requirement, I won't be flying again. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
On October 17 2009 02:56 Liquid`Drone wrote: dude im not saying im a fan of this and im wholeheartedly an opponent of the whole "if you're innocent you have nothing to hide" train of thought. I think privacy is worth protecting in itself and that privacy is important to have freedom. Please stop trying to attribute thoughts I dont have into my posts just so you can argue against me.. I think airline security, especially in usa actually (the only time I've ever been searched in an airport was also the only time I have been in usa - and ive flown a good 50+ times) has gone way overboard since 9/11.. however, I just don't see how this is worse than being frisked. I also think it's very negative how certain groups (well basically anyone looking reasonably arab) are more likely to be victim to "random security searches" and I think an indiscriminatory way of searching people is better in this aspect. I also think there needs to be _some_ security measures in airports even if they have gone too far now (I do however not think protecting our borders is the main way to combat terrorism or whatever. ) from personal experience airport security is much more strict at Heathrow. Granted I have US citizenship so maybe customs is different for non citizens? | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
On October 16 2009 20:40 Liquid`Drone wrote: im just saying they would be better off not finding it invasive.. there's just no way the information gotten through these scanners can be harmful towards anyone other than inside their own heads, because they are looked at by someone who looks at thousands of people and whom will become accustomed to all shapes pretty quickly, and then they are deleted from the system. I think this is very different from many other aspects of today's society focus on security rather than privacy. im not saying people regarding this as invasive, even if I feel they should not regard it as invasive, should be disregarded when deciding whether to apply this or not. not to mention what are the odds you will EVER run into these people again in your life? Especially at international airports outside of your own country. | ||
| ||
