|
On November 19 2010 05:49 kaisen wrote: As long as it's gonna reduce the chance of the plane from crashing into buildings? Then I have absolutely no problem with it.
You could ban all airplanes, that would reduce the chance to pretty much zero.
|
On November 19 2010 05:49 kaisen wrote: As long as it's gonna reduce the chance of the plane from crashing into buildings? Then I have absolutely no problem with it.
No one has to crash any planes anywhere anymore. I believe they have accomplished what they set out to do. They made the lives of a whole bunch of Americans that much more unpleasant. If this trend continues how long will it be before people are giving up their neighbours because they spoke out against the government? How many terror attacks using the US airways have succeeded in the US since 9/11? I don't remember any actually. All I remember is a bunch that were foiled.
|
On November 19 2010 05:04 teekesselchen wrote: A text of Volker Pispers about the topic: "The question is - what are you afraid of? That's the deciding question in terms of terrorism to me. It's not about playing down crimes! Sure, these people are murderers - ordinary, bad murderers! But not more! Don't glorify them to "terrorists"! Terror it is, because we are afraid of it. The terror is here in our heads. They're murderers, like there are many murderers in this world. What are you afraid of, that's the deciding question! Of Al Quaida? 150,000 Germans die from smoking every year. 5000 Germans die from the consequences of boozing. 6000 Germans die in road traffic. What are you afraid of? 6000 Germans die from flu, every year, totally ordinary flu, not SARS or bird flu or something dangerous like that, totally ordinary flu. And 15.000 deaths we have from doctors' mistakes. German doctors bring down 15,000 patients every year. That's 44 deads a day. Quite a lot, don't you think? An old Al-Quaida fighter had to work quite some time for that, the Marburg Union (German medical doctors' union) does that during lunch break on good days!"
terrorist threat, i do think its being blown out of proportion. if they can't do it with planes, they'll use something else. al qaeda is probably laughing their ass off for causing "chaos" within USA, as they said they would.
|
On November 19 2010 05:49 kaisen wrote: As long as it's gonna reduce the chance of the plane from crashing into buildings? Then I have absolutely no problem with it.
I'm not trying to pick on you, but it's this sort of reasoning that allows governments to blatantly invade our privacy and rights. It disgusting the things they get away with nowadays, between this, the patriot act, and many other things claiming to "heighten security and reduce the risk of terrorism."
Honestly, at first I was happy about the increasing of security. Before 9-11, even as an eleven-year-old and younger, I flew frequently and could tell that airport security was a joke. Sure it sucks to have to go through slower lines, metal detectors and sometimes get scanned, but shit like this is going way to far. People can easily obtain these photos and abuse the hell out of them, and I can totally see nerds getting these pictures and enhancing them or modifying them via programs like photoshop, and spreading them around the internet. How would you like it if you were interviewing for a potential job, and your potential employer got a hold of a picture like this modified with photoshop, but thought it was real and judged you for it. What if you are a person in politics or some other well-known public position, and people abused these to try and ruin your reputation.
I know it's far-fetched, and most likely won't happen to me, and it's even worse that people would judge another person like that for having nude pictures out there, but the fact is that it happens, and it's very real.
Finally, we're paying for this technology, not the airlines or TSA. Whether it's via taxes or increased airfare, there is a price and we as the fliers are going to be expected to pay for it, which sucks big time. I enjoy flying, I don't enjoy paying obscene amounts of money to be crammed into a hot-tube filled with other people, many of which have questionable hygiene, like a sardine or a pig going to be slaughtered. Unfortunately, the way air travel is currently set up in our society, I pretty much don't have a choice unless I pay triple for first class, which is not a big improvement, or pay $30,000 to fly private, or if I use another means of transportation, which will be much slower and less practical.
IMO, terrorism is like hacking. I can pay literally millions of dollars to be protected up to my eyeballs, but if a skilled enough hacker wants in, he will get in regardless of if I have free Norton anti-spyware, or the best protection money can buy. The question I have to ask myself is; "Is what I am trying to protect worth it, given the knowledge that it can be taken no matter what I do?"
|
Not particularly offended by the idea of a professional seeing me naked (had a physical in the last dozen years?), but it is pretty big waste of money on what is essentially a formality. I think the main reason they do this is because some people are scared to take planes without all of this nonsense, so it is profitable to invest in it.
There are so many things we put up with which are much more invasive for the sake of our health (colonoscopy: look forward to it), that to call this a breach of our dignity is a little childish.
It's kind of funny what we consider private and what we don't. We all want to draw the line somewhere, so as to leave something special for a lover, but if you think that seeing a body is that line, I wonder what you think of beaches where everyone dresses in what is essentially underwear. More often than not, I think people are revealing more critical things about their personality to strangers of social-networking sites than can be found in a scan of the body.
|
lol the pictures look unrealistic anyways so no problem
|
This might be the lightest infringement on human rights imaginable. It's probably stupid and unnecessary, but it's so drastically less significant than every single other social problem and legal abuse that no one should give a fuck.
Government can jail you for years for putting plants in your mouth. Learn some damn priorities.
|
On November 19 2010 06:25 SKTDH wrote: lol the pictures look unrealistic anyways so no problem
Yeah and as we speak theres probably some guys developing a better version of the scanner. Probably some day there'll be a request for scanners with a better quality so you could see objects more clearly. One day you'll end up with "x-ray goggles" from the movies.
|
If you refuse the scan, they molest you thoroughly.
|
On November 19 2010 07:09 ev8 wrote: If you refuse the scan, they molest you thoroughly. Yea, but you can say you'll have them arrested if they touch your junk.
|
Or you could just not show up for your flight. Same result.
|
On November 19 2010 07:15 TOloseGT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2010 07:09 ev8 wrote: If you refuse the scan, they molest you thoroughly. Yea, but you can say you'll have them arrested if they touch your junk.
apparently not. however TSA is getting sued for exposing a woman's jugs in public.
|
I just went on a trip a week ago and I always find getting through security annoying. No, I don't really want to be scanned or have my carry-on luggage scanned but it's just something you have to go through.
I rather that they do this and try to prevent something from happening. Because if something did happen and they didn't have these security measures, then people will complain about how the TSA doesn't do its job. People will complain about everything...
|
The TSA's job now includes searching your privates for weapons. It's not something you have to go through.
|
if these "pictures" were secure then why are so many people already out there on the web with these "secure" pictures? well if you want to have near naked pics taken of you and possibly released to public view you can use these new machines or just have some guy named bob pat ya down and be done with it... and if your selected to use the machine refuse it... there is no law that states you have to cooperate with that test.. you can always opt for a different method although this may lead to abusive behavior from the Airport security and possibly cost you thousands of dollars in court fees but its the point... I am an American and i shouldn't have to use the security machine that rapes my rights as an American citizen, I like my cloths thank you and no one but my wife needs to see my "business" when a simple full body pat down can do the same thing this machine does.
|
Osaka27172 Posts
By keeping the American public fearful like this, the terrorists win without launching another attack. It is also the reason I won't fly out of the US again. It is an unacceptable level of intrusion just to take an airplane.
|
Pics dont really reveal any form of nudity... Its just an x-ray with your skin on top.
|
Compare: how many people die on airplanes due to terrorists smuggling things on board
...with just about anything else, death due to bee-stings, car accidents, unnecessary foreign wars, etc.
This is stupid and we are giving up liberty for a VERY little security. What are they gonna find that 1. won't be found in a regular metal detector, and 2. That can get past the pilots armored door and the gun he has behind it?
|
That shit's hella ridiculous, I'm gonna wear tight fitting pants and put a banana in my tighty whiteys and look the x-ray operator straight in the eye with a serious face.
-_-
|
lol this seems like an act of the illuminati.
Btw i heard people got cancer after this because you get exposed to high radiation afterwards
i have never gotten into one of these scans i just get the usual routine also i have a bullet inside my body which doctors cannot take out so its just there and it takes 15min to explain it to airlines.
|
|
|
|
|
|