And the number keeps dropping...

Discussion in 'Hangar Talk' started by EdFred, Nov 24, 2010.

  1. EdFred

    EdFred Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,956

    Display name:
    -
  2. EdFred

    EdFred Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,956

    Display name:
    -
    The comments also seem to be a lot more sane.
     
  3. Bob Bement

    Bob Bement Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,797
    Location:
    Vale, Oregon

    Display name:
    Bob Bement
    If paying customers of the airlines are starting to look for other means of traveling, then why don't the airline owners get into the act. I would think it would be in their best interest to say something.
     
  4. ScottM

    ScottM Taxi to Parking

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    42,518
    Location:
    Variable, but somewhere on earth

    Display name:
    iBazinga!
    [​IMG]

    We're doomed
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Capt.Crash'n'Burn

    Capt.Crash'n'Burn Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,070
    Location:
    Lompton,CA

    Display name:
    Capt.Crash'n'Burn
    There's a kool-aide drinker born every minute. :rolleyes2:
     
  6. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    That is weird, because a couple of days ago I read that 83% didn't care.
     
  7. Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe

    Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    8,412
    Location:
    DXO124008.6

    Display name:
    Light and Sporty Guy
    Different questions asked.
     
  8. dennyleeb

    dennyleeb Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    676

    Display name:
    dennyleeb
    I have not talked to one person who does not like the security. I love it...
     
  9. Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe

    Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    8,412
    Location:
    DXO124008.6

    Display name:
    Light and Sporty Guy
    What security?
     
  10. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    Probably right on that. Polls don't really mean a lot in the real world. I'm headed to New York City next week and the body scanners are the least of my worries.
     
  11. EppyGA

    EppyGA Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,460
    Location:
    Hoschton, GA

    Display name:
    Let's Fly
    The sheep keep lining up for slaughter
     
  12. Greg Bockelman

    Greg Bockelman Administrator Management Council Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    8,455
    Location:
    Lee's Summit, MO

    Display name:
    Greg Bockelman
    You like the "security"? Security is an illusion. Not to mention the total disregard of Constitutional rights that "they" say you waive by entering the line to get screened. I can pretty much assure you that this "security" will not deter this or the next generation of terrorist.

    Ben Franklin said, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Safety = Security in this context.

    Helen Keller once said, "Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing."

    By the way, Do NOT think the TSA is happy just settling for Airline travel. Make no mistake, they WILL come after GA. The time to fight this is NOW.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2010
  13. skidoo

    skidoo Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    985
    Location:
    Montana

    Display name:
    skidoo
    Already happening. As PIC, I am responsible for the safety of my flight. Since I have no scanners, I must perform an extensive pat down on all female passengers prior to flight, and if further suspicious, again during flight. I require all male passengers to be well know and pass my background check, so pat down is waived, or they can pat themselves down.


    Just kidding... I really hope Americans wake up and stop this nonsense!
     
  14. Bob Bement

    Bob Bement Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,797
    Location:
    Vale, Oregon

    Display name:
    Bob Bement
  15. Telemakhos

    Telemakhos Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    580

    Display name:
    Telemakhos
    C'mon now. Helen Keller didn't SAY anything.
     
  16. Obi Heed Kenobi

    Obi Heed Kenobi Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    10,918
    Location:
    8,551'

    Display name:
    iBo Deeh Ibonek
    I hate to sound like a broken record, but the Constitution - at least the 4th Amendment - just isn't a factor here, nor will it be absent a major change in how the Supreme Court interprets it.

    Just to reiterate, for starters, the 4th Amendment isn't implicated. The 4th prohibits unreasonable intrusions absent cause; this airport security stuff, as it stands now, just won't be found to be unreasonable (if it goes further, though, that might change). "Unreasonable" is kicking in your door based on the fact that you did a rolling stop 5 years ago three states away; "unreasonable" isn't subjecting every passenger, or even every 5th passenger, to a scan that can see through clothes, in the face of a known threat to a particular target that the people scanned are willingly and voluntarily using.

    Even assuming the 4th Amdmt is implicated, it's a well established part of constitutional law that you can waive those rights. For instance, it's a routine occurrence for a police officer, even though he doesn't have anything other than the slightest of hunches because you look "funny," to walk up to you, engage you in conversation, and then ask if you don't mind if he pats you down for, say, weapons (or drugs, or whatever). It's entirely voluntary, and unless he's coerced you in some impermissible way (and this is where there *might* be a little wiggle room in what I'm saying - it can be argued that "you're not getting on this plane unless you waive your rights" is coercion, but I highly doubt that this would be a successful argument for a variety of reasons), it's entirely valid. Same if you want to go into, say, a prison or any other area that's at a known, proven, and consistent threat of criminal activity - if you want in, you're going to have to waive whatever 4th Amdmt. rights you have (again, assuming they exist).

    So, I'm sorry I'm tell y'all things that you probably don't want to hear. But this is how and what the law is, and I'm not going to blow smoke up your respective derrieres.

    With all of that being said, however, I agree with everything else in your post.
     
  17. Greg Bockelman

    Greg Bockelman Administrator Management Council Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    8,455
    Location:
    Lee's Summit, MO

    Display name:
    Greg Bockelman
  18. Telemakhos

    Telemakhos Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    580

    Display name:
    Telemakhos
    This marks the first time in my life I've had a Helen Keller joke fail.
     
  19. Everskyward

    Everskyward Administrator Management Council Member PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    29,262

    Display name:
    Everskyward
    Actually she learned how to talk.

    Oops, Greg beat me to it.
     
  20. sba55

    sba55 En-Route

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,558
    Location:
    Marin County, CA

    Display name:
    sba55
    :thumbsup::thumbsup: Great post Greg!

    This makes me sick. Indoctrination has begun.....Why does it seem this isn't the girls' own handwriting

    [​IMG]
     
  21. mantakos

    mantakos Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    9,948
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD

    Display name:
    hm
    Um, no. Security is never perfect. If something gives you the appearance of perfect security, then that's certainly an illusion. But the lack of perfect security does not equate to the lack of _any_ security. It is possible to be "more secure", that's no illusion.
    The track record suggests that as means of attack are eliminated through screening, attackers seek out new attacks. You can declare this to be evidence of the futility of screening, asserting that there are thus always new attacks available to be tried, or you can declare this to be evidence of the utility of screening, as attackers are continually forced to employ less practical, less effective, and more complicated attacks. Since I think it's pretty clear that terrorism would be a lot easier if a crew of guys could board with automatic weapons and suitcases full of dynamite, I think the "utility" argument is supported.

    Similarly, when a man gets on board a plane with a home-made underpants bomb that he fails to properly detonate, we can declare that to be evidence of the futility of security, as the guy got on board with a dangerous substance any way, or we can declare that to be evidence of the utility of screening as he had to resort to an extremely unreliable means of attack, a home-made kludge for detonation because a mechanism would be found in screening, etc.
    Okay, but you can't prove something via "somebody once said something in a wholly different context that I'll now interpret in the current context in such a way as to support my argument". I think HK's line is more about taking risks in life and less about a recommendation on the topic of aviation security.
    -harry
     
  22. Greg Bockelman

    Greg Bockelman Administrator Management Council Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    8,455
    Location:
    Lee's Summit, MO

    Display name:
    Greg Bockelman
    So how much is TOO much? When do we cry "Uncle"?
     
  23. mantakos

    mantakos Final Approach

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    9,948
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD

    Display name:
    hm
    Whether you're securing a computer, a network, a home, a car, an airline flight, a country, etc, you're always looking for the right compromise between security and cost. In this context, cost consists of, well, actual dollar cost, but it also has components of convenience and the aesthetics of the experience, which is negatively impacted by intrusions into privacy.

    So there are no absolutes, it's a big mushy ball of compromise. We'll never have a solution that thrills everybody, because some people go through life terrified of highly improbable risks while others think "we all gotta go some time, might as well enjoy the ride". Some people think "there's a man in that room who can see the outline of my boy parts, and that makes me very uncomfortable" while others think "whatever, checkout my junk, knock yourself out, I wish my prostate exam was this easy". So we're always seeking out compromises that have to be applied universally though everybody weighs these factors differently.
    -harry
     
  24. Everskyward

    Everskyward Administrator Management Council Member PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    29,262

    Display name:
    Everskyward
    That's the stumbling block right there. We hired a furloughed airline pilot once who was uncomfortable with the fact that we have no cockpit doors. :confused:

    That person didn't stay very long.
     
  25. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    Give it a break big guy. Sheep lining up for the slaughter? What slaughter? Maybe I am just not the world traveler that some of you people are, but I do get around a little. I have never found airport security to be that big of a deal. I don't think the body scanner is that big of a deal either. I am headed to New York City next week, and if along the way I'm asked to step into a body scanning machine, I'm just going to step into it. In fact, I think it is kind of neat. I wish that they would make a screen shot of me in the scanner and give it to me. I also don't care about a pat down. My tailor sticks his tape up my crotch every time I get a new suit. My doctor sticks his finger up my butt every time I get a physical. I'm guessing that it will probably be more uncomfortable for the TSA agent than it will be for me. I think that some people just get all agitated over nothing.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2010
  26. Bob Noel

    Bob Noel Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    13,134

    Display name:
    Bob Noel
    I don't think it's up to you to decide whether other people should be ok with being groped or be forced to go through the nude-o-scans.

    You can certainly decide for yourself. You sure as blazes don't get to decide for me.
     
  27. woodstock

    woodstock Final Approach

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    9,353
    Location:
    Out of a suitcase

    Display name:
    iTravel
    The collective "we" get to decide for you... if you want to fly that is.
     
  28. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    You are absolutely right Bob. I want to publicly apologize for speaking for you. You certainly have the right to be uptight with it. Sorry.
     
  29. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    Wait, what am I apologizing for? All I said was that I think some people get agitated over nothing. I have nothing to apologize for. I have the right to think anything I want about people. I didn't say that Bob needs to lighten up a little. I take it back, I don't apologize.:D
     
  30. Everskyward

    Everskyward Administrator Management Council Member PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    29,262

    Display name:
    Everskyward
    I don't think he said he was deciding for you. We all get to make our own decision about this but it seems that people who make the decision that they are not overly bothered by it are chastised on this board as being "sheep".
     
  31. Bob Noel

    Bob Noel Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    13,134

    Display name:
    Bob Noel
    If he doesn't like being characterized as "sheep" then maybe he might want to consider whether or not he should characterize others as "uptight".

    sauce, goose, etc etc etc

    and perhaps he should consider if there might be any valid reason why someone would not like to be groped or have the nude-o-scan images taken. Can anyone think of a reason? Is it so difficult for people to think of a reason instead of so quickly resorting to calling people "uptight" or dramaqueens?
     
  32. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    Bob, are you trying to pick a fight with me?:D
     
  33. Everskyward

    Everskyward Administrator Management Council Member PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    29,262

    Display name:
    Everskyward
    I think you brought up "sheep" before he brought up "uptight". And you are not the only person who uses the sheep analogy.
     
  34. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
  35. sba55

    sba55 En-Route

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,558
    Location:
    Marin County, CA

    Display name:
    sba55
    Well, Mari, that's because it's usually a correct categorization. Like I said before, I wouldn't categorize people who've actually though this through as sheep if they decide that this sort of screening is ok with them. I would think that their lack of interests in civil liberties is very regrettable and short-sighted, but at least they're thinking for themselves.

    However, the vast majority of people haven't though this through. They're also not informed and are shocked when they learn of some of the details (I was talking to a friend of mine the other day and told her that in fact the TSA clerk looking at her naked would most likely be male and not - as she had assumed - female). They're just doing what everybody else is doing. Kind of like sheep.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2010
  36. Maxmosbey

    Maxmosbey Final Approach

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    San Juan, PR/Ames, IA

    Display name:
    I need to get serious.
    Cattle are that way too.
     
  37. Bob Noel

    Bob Noel Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    13,134

    Display name:
    Bob Noel
    I don't believe I've ever used "sheep" to characterize those that accept TSA's "security" procedures. And for sure and for certain, I didn't use "sheep" in this thread until post 31 (and this post).
     
  38. Bob Noel

    Bob Noel Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Messages:
    13,134

    Display name:
    Bob Noel
    Nope.

    I don't have an issue with you. I have an issue with the viewpoint I think you expressed. That is, I get the impression that you (and others) don't recognize that there are legitimate reasons for some people to be opposed to the nude-o-scans or being groped (beyond the fact that they aren't necessary).
     
  39. magicj

    magicj Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    Messages:
    39
    Location:
    Philadelphia

    Display name:
    Dave
  40. Everskyward

    Everskyward Administrator Management Council Member PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    29,262

    Display name:
    Everskyward
    You're right. It was someone else in post 11, which is the post that Max quoted.