Recommended Posts
mnealtx 0
Cool! You found some "experts" on the internet that say body scanners are dangerous.
I found "experts" on the internet that say its safe as long as all is working properly...
That would be the guy that says he won't go through one, yes?
"'I opt not to go through [the scanner], because I don't know what the probability of failure is,' Rez said."
It hits some of the points I've been trying, but failing to hit.
The only point you've tried to make is "if you don't go through the scanner, you're paranoid". Try harder.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I completely agree with you Dan. We can't resist complicating EVERYTHING![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
Life expands or contracts in proportion to one's courage. ~Anais Nin
"'I opt not to go through [the scanner], because I don't know what the probability of failure is,' Rez said."
Oh you're so easy. I figured you'd jump all over that bait. The scientist that by his science says its safe, but by his fear of the machine going hay-wire and zapping him into the Hulk says he won't go through one. Who's paranoid?
Okay, what I'm not getting from you kelp and DSE is if not body scanners and not aggressive pat downs, then what? I'm sure y'all don't want another 9/11, so what would you propose instead?
How do you think any of that will actually prevent a 9/11 type situation, huh?
9/11 was conducted through a pretty brilliant use of social engineering, and a couple box cutters. So all these billions spent, and civil, human, social, and Constitutional rights violations later, we have no box cutters on airplanes.
Yeah, right.
It's a smoke and mirrors show. It isn't stopping shit.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.
The soldiers that are fighting in the Middle East are stunned at what we're becoming, what the hell are they fighting for if not for our personal liberties and safety?
Our soldiers have always fought abroad so we as civilians don't have to worry about domestic terrorism.
And if we're going to roll back the restrictions on liberty in this country, then lets not stop with the body scanners.
... don't hear much outrage beyond that though. Funny. Not enough seem to give a shit about the socialist direction this country is going in, something that effects about half the folks in this country and benifits the rest, but the fewer that travel via airline at any given time during a year are bent over body scanners and frisking at airports
Okay, what I'm not getting from you kelp and DSE is if not body scanners and not aggressive pat downs, then what? I'm sure y'all don't want another 9/11, so what would you propose instead?
How do you think any of that will actually prevent a 9/11 type situation, huh?
9/11 was conducted through a pretty brilliant use of social engineering, and a couple box cutters. So all these billions spent, and civil, human, social, and Constitutional rights violations later, we have no box cutters on airplanes.
Yeah, right.
It's a smoke and mirrors show. It isn't stopping shit.
And again, another non-answer of what to do if not this.
Awesome.
billvon 3,085
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>What I hear is "that the potential for the damage done by one or a few
>acting nefariously is reason to demigod the new technology and other
>new measures/procedures the TSA is putting in place?"
Sounds like you are using exactly the same justification for putting the new technology in place to begin with.
>Again, why not get outraged when individuals are caught abusing the
>technology and procedures rather then the technology or procedures?
I'll let you do the outrage thing.
This is technology that's easy to abuse. It's like video cameras in high school women's locker rooms. Sure, they might prevent crime - but the potential for abuse makes them, in general, a bad idea.
>acting nefariously is reason to demigod the new technology and other
>new measures/procedures the TSA is putting in place?"
Sounds like you are using exactly the same justification for putting the new technology in place to begin with.
>Again, why not get outraged when individuals are caught abusing the
>technology and procedures rather then the technology or procedures?
I'll let you do the outrage thing.
This is technology that's easy to abuse. It's like video cameras in high school women's locker rooms. Sure, they might prevent crime - but the potential for abuse makes them, in general, a bad idea.
mnealtx 0
"'I opt not to go through [the scanner], because I don't know what the probability of failure is,' Rez said."
Oh you're so easy. I figured you'd jump all over that bait. The scientist that by his science says its safe, but by his fear of the machine going hay-wire and zapping him into the Hulk says he won't go through one. Who's paranoid?
Thanks for proving, again, the second part of my post:
The only point you've tried to make is "if you don't go through the scanner, you're paranoid".
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
Well... as best I can figure, you are!
Why and how? That's the root problem.
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites