Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since I did not read all of the posts, this may have already been asked. What law did the woman break by not agreeing to the pat down. I understand that if she did not agree to the pat down, she could not fly. However, she was arrested, correct? To be arrested, there must be cause and a law she has broken. To simply detain her is not legal if she were not arrested for cause and given Miranda. Does anyone know? I am quite curious.
An ABIA spokesman says it is TSA policy that anyone activating a security alarm has two options. One is to opt out and not fly, and the other option is to subject themselves to an enhanced pat down. Hirschkind refused both and was arrested.
federal agency has violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the Privacy Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Fourth Amendment.
Further more a woman who meant no harm to any one was arrested and....
Quote:
"It's unfortunate that that happened and she didn't get to fly home, but it makes me feel a little safer," said Emily Protine.
many people feel safer because of it.
Mean while people like Abdulmutallab who had a valid visa because despite earlier warnings to U.S. Intelligence from his own father...become celebrity, "The Christmas Day Bomber" and board the airplanes!
To expand on what I said in an earlier post, the giving up our security (rights) from the government and that is what makes people feel safer...? That, baffles the hell out of my mind.
this nation is full of whiners who have nothing better to do that cry like babies over someone doing a pat down. The mask the most idiotic issues with their liberal freedom crap. Your freedom is gonna be awesome when those planes are blowing away in pieces and it's gonna be very holy when your virgin breasts join the 72 virgins in heaven.
You're making the French look tough right now. What pathetic cowardice.
I am free to move anywhere about the country I choose. I demonstrate that personally at least twice a month.
You've just been lucky that you have not had just cause to try and exercise you're rights according to the U.S. Constitution. If the need ever arises, you may find out first hand, you haven't any, real security, against government harassment.
Hint: Think back to when SAT scores were recentered... Why do you think that happened?
Actually, the recentered SAT scores were performed through a linear transformation of the smooth curve of averages from the raw scores. The recentering really dealt with the computation of the raw scores to the reported scores. I can see where you are going with the IQ test, but mayhap, the verbage is of issue in this. If you were to take a group with an average IQ score of 80 and then administer the exact same test with the same scoring criteria, you would still end up with an average score of 80, with some set standard deviation. I do not know the standard deviation of IQ tests, thus cannot speak on this.
However, if you change either the score computation criteria or the test itself, you can easily show a change in that same group of people. The key, on these standardized tests, is how the raw score is computed into the reported score.
Actually, the recentered SAT scores were performed through a linear transformation of the smooth curve of averages from the raw scores. The recentering really dealt with the computation of the raw scores to the reported scores. I can see where you are going with the IQ test, but mayhap, the verbage is of issue in this. If you were to take a group with an average IQ score of 80 and then administer the exact same test with the same scoring criteria, you would still end up with an average score of 80, with some set standard deviation. I do not know the standard deviation of IQ tests, thus cannot speak on this.
However, if you change either the score computation criteria or the test itself, you can easily show a change in that same group of people. The key, on these standardized tests, is how the raw score is computed into the reported score.
Actually, the recentered SAT scores were performed through a linear transformation of the smooth curve of averages from the raw scores. The recentering really dealt with the computation of the raw scores to the reported scores. I can see where you are going with the IQ test, but mayhap, the verbage is of issue in this. If you were to take a group with an average IQ score of 80 and then administer the exact same test with the same scoring criteria, you would still end up with an average score of 80
...until the score values are recentered, as happened with the SAT.
You are free to travel. You are the one making choices. And do you not see the irony? You are pooh-poohing the people who are choosing to comply with the pat-downs and body scans, because they feel the security measures are proportional to the threat of terrorism, and yet you are afraid to try to find someone to share a ride with, because that person may turn out to be a psycho. So you are choosing not to travel because of your fear, and want others to share your misgivings, in toto, about the TSA, about hotels, about Craigslist, in order to make your argument? You are basically saying that your fears about a psycho or more rational than the TSA implementing security measures to prevent terrorism on planes. But are they? How many people share rides with people to travel all over the country, and how many of them end up being the victims of psychos? Frankly, I'd rather be in a car with a psycho and a working door handle, than on a plane with a psycho eight rows and three seats away from me.
I'm saying that people need to open their eyes and wake up. We are beign lulled every so quickly into living in a police state where its okay to violate personal rights on the tiny chance they untrained screner will find someone. Life is fraught with risk and you cannot avoid it. You just have to go by the odds. The basic fact is the tsa does NOT prevent anything except misterable travel conditions. They have let two foot long blades by, loaded glocks (both passangers were unaware the items had not been removed but showed them to security on arrival), and fuss over bottles of shampoo and lotion.
We cannot diminish the harm done by the use of force in patdowns. And it is force when someone chooses to submit to something they don't like. Its the concequences for the future and others who do not feel it is right which matter. If you feel safer then its entirely an illusion because there are airport workers who come and go, who work on the plane, who transport uninspected luggage to it who could by your psycho and the gestapo tactics done to passangers won't do a thing.
As for rides and psychos, I have LEARNED to take more care. I paid someone who makes money doing it that I found on Craigslist to get me to the train station and pick me up. I checked references. I talked to him. He showed on time and the ride out was great.
Then I'm on the train heading back and before we lost cell reception get a text thats wandering and makes no sense. Then four more and he said he was drinking. I didn't care for him???? Who said anything about that. Even if he had sobered up and decided no way I want him and me in a car together. I called friends and managed to get home but will NEVER take that chance again.
Personally I'd rather have the psycho on the plane with a lot of other people who collectively would take him down rather than alone in a car with mystery man.
I don't think its enough to just not fly. I think the related $$$ producing ties to airline travel need to be addressed and if won't fly then you still say something with your funds. Funds will speak.
There is a lawsuit already filed to stop both the enhansed pat downs and the radiation producing machines and I will support those who are filing it. Maybe that is what it takes to FORCE the government off the dark path its on.
If this makes you feel so good, maybe there should be a scanner flight. Everyone gets a patdown and scanned, maybe more. But you still have the mail and the baggage handlers and the other airport employees who could be up to something so in the end your no more safe from "them" then you would be without it. The good thing would be the rest of us would be safe from the tsa and their goons. My guess is they wouldn't fill too many of those planes.
You do know, I hope that by definition an IQ of 100 is normal? Right?
Yes.
normal = average
So I guess the next question should be, how stupid
is the average American
or as George Carlin would say: Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that
Which country dropped the nuclear bomb? Only 49% know it is their own country.
Only 34% know that it is the Congress that declares war.
75% of Americans can name at least two of the seven dwarfs, while not quite 25% can name two members of the Supreme Court.
Three in four can correctly identify Larry, Curly, and Moe as the Three Stooges. Only two out of five respondents, however, can correctly identify the executive, legislative, and judicial branches as the three wings of government.
Yes, I believe we have a lot of Larry, Curly, & Moe's working for TSA
I guess what it boils down to is, just like in many other situations, the good people have to suffer because of the few bad ones.
I will have to want to go somewhere very badly if I have to fly to get there. The whole idea of being treated like a potential terrorist is very insulting. The idea of needing to behave like a herd of mindless sheep is insulting. If someone wants to pat me down or touch this or that, I could not care less..it's the process that I find repulsive.
We do something similar every day when we enter a store which has theft detectors inside of its doorways. The message they send is that they think you are a potential thief. I don't tend to shop in these stores if I can help it.
Do I think people should stand up an rebel against this type of treatment? Yes. Do I think it will do any good? No.
I don't see it as quite the same thing. The detectors only beep if one of the anti-theft tags wasn't fixed. Unless they make a mistake or their machine isn't working its not going to. Actually I think they are aimed more at employees, since more theft goes on from employees than customers. They have less chance to fix the tags and will leave a trace if they do. These devices are also unobtursive and they aren't xraying your or the like, which is another whole subject.
I don't really have a problem with metal detectors at airports either. Some security has to be there. It just doesn't need to be invasive and potentially dangerous. And it needs to emply intelligence over brute force. The Isralie model, in the heart of a place where terrorists would blow up planes if they could, employs questions and *trained* behaviorist. Only those who show some sign of being a problem do more than answer some questions. Its both effective and non-invasive and does not create massive snarles in time.
Security needs to be real and effective or we are just making everyone far more vulnerable because of a false sense of safety. And we need to realize that risk is never eliminated. Stores will have shoplifters and employees steal from them no matter what, and the question is just how far is it *reasonable* to go to put a dent in it. And airports will attract those who might want to blow up something. But we have to weight the reality that the massive percentage just want to get on their plane and get home. We have to decide what is *reasonable* in making it to a degree safe. It will always be to a degree. First, it has to be effecive and what is happening now is not. And in being effective, kids, grandmothers, people with disabilites, trauma victums, and hot girls can walk in and thrugh without having to pay for being easy targets.
The terrorist wanted to change our way of life and they have. The current fiasco is nothing short of a great victory for them and the way to deny it is for people to stand up for their feelings and rights and say no, and demand something better. For that is what we're supposed to be made of.
Will we ever have security so good nothing ever happens? No. But then you could fall off the curb, get hit by a car, be struck by lightening and a whole lot of other things too each day and all of them are far more probable than the above.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
