So how long until airlines just say screw it?

[WildBillyT]

And give everybody individual searches for devices?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34592031/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?GT1=43001

[maroman88]

****! and i thought it was guna be about the industry being in the crapper by the title of the thread!

[bad64chevelle]

What I think is not something to post in a public forum...And to be honest, if I can't believe that the people who "subdued" him didn't work him over thoroughly.

[Frosty]

What I think is not something to post in a public forum...And to be honest, if I can't believe that the people who "subdued" him didn't work him over thoroughly.

What he said...on both accounts. It's a slippery slope when you profile people though(I know where you're going with your first comment). Our rights and freedoms are being exploited...if we change that they win....if they blow up more people they still win...

[ryanfx]

I'm not opposed to 100% searches of every crevice of everyone attempting to fly. myself included.

if you chose to fly you consent to these kinds of searches. it doesn't violate any of our rights.

[V]

doesnt bother me if they make it more strict/more searches. i got nothing to hide

[SteveR]

I'm putting my boarding pass in my anus.

[sweetbmxrider]

Multiple law enforcement officials identified the suspect in Friday's attempted attack as Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab

http://www.ls1lt1.com/forum/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

[Brendan713]

You can search me through and through how ever many times you would like im no terrorist and i have no fear of being searched. I am surprised though, if i was that hero that subdued him he would have a couple of injuries that authorities would say did not result from the fire cracker.......

[Frosty]

The problem with the in depth searching is the second someone feels their personal privacy(ie:inappropriate touching) or when people think they're being profiled they'll call up the ACLU quick fast and you'll see major lawsuits..

[JL8Jeff]

That flight did not originate within the US so it has a much bigger effect on whose rights you would be infringing upon depending on where the search is done. But it goes to show that there are costs to freedom. You have to give up some of your freedom to maintain safe freedom. More intensive searches will also increase the costs and delays involved with traveling whether it's flying, train or bus.

[Blacdout96]

As if taking shoes wasent a pain enough, whats next,gotta go through in your underwear? lol, As most of you have said, i have nothign to hide, you may search me all you want. When my wife got here last april I waited about 20 minutes for her to get off the plane, I didnt know what was going on, but she was one of the few they pulled aside, and searched, I was a little aggitated, but nothing I could do, she has nothing to hide, she from Taiwan for christs sake, they love America!

[sweetbmxrider]

That flight did not originate within the US so it has a much bigger effect on whose rights you would be infringing upon depending on where the search is done. But it goes to show that there are costs to freedom. You have to give up some of your freedom to maintain safe freedom. More intensive searches will also increase the costs and delays involved with traveling whether it's flying, train or bus.

eh, you have to go through U.S. customs to come into the country, at least i did when i was leaving ireland and again when i landed. they have the power to search you through and through before letting you come in.

[Jersey Mike]

doesnt bother me if they make it more strict/more searches. i got nothing to hide

This.
However, would everyone being permitted their pocket knife or pepper spray be all that dangerous? I gave my ex-girlfriend both a few years ago, in case she ever was in a situation where she needed to protect herself.

Now, I understand and had no hard feelings when it was taken from her when she was going to fly down to Florida--safety first, right? But I think it's the same thing as with carrying firearms; that "the bad guys" are going to carry things they "aren't supposed to" while the rest of the population don't. One prepared bad guy vs some unarmed people? or, One prepared bad guy vs a group of prepared citizens? I think my chances are better in the latter scenario.

Individual searches would be a great idea; time consuming, but much safer, and at the end of the day, that's what we all want when we're on-board a plane.

[Blacdout96]

it's not just terrorists that would try to bring a weapon on. what about someone who's brought somethign like that just to make his name famous, or to kill for the hell of it ( before you say he would be caught, yes he would, but the there's a death that has already taken place on the plane) A fight that breaks out between two individuals that got nasty, or someone who just plain goes off the deep end. There's no need to take a weapon on the plane, if it takes a weapon to take down one person on a 100+ passenger flight, then you are in no way resourceful. If a guy can take an entire plane hostage with a knife, or pepper spray, or some small weapon, then the passengers are weak, sometimes you have to put your life on the line to save another, or a few, or a few thousand. I feel that maybe the flight attendants should be trained to handle a situation like this now, even though it's still rare, something that shouldnt be out of the question.

[NastyEllEssWon]

the point is if they allow her to take it on the plane, and she dropped it, or lost it, tried to use it only to have it taken away giving the perp another weapon at his disposal.





i dont think you should be able to carry anything on the plane. no briefcases, no purses...nothing. you wanna fly.....bring your person...ship your bags :lol:

[WildBillyT]

ship your bags

I can forsee that day coming soon. No carry ons, full search, one checked bag.

[BurninrubberGT]

I wish they searched everyone

who cares if it's an inconvinience, I'd rather wait longer and be garunteed the flight is safe than having that chance that some has a weapon

[BigAls87Z28]

So let me make sure I understand this...

You guys all want huge security improvements in American air ports, but this guy didnt fly from one American air port to another...he came in from Amsterdam.
So....we step up our security for what reason? Anyone of you actually have flown in the last year or so?

You cannot seperate due to name or what they look like.
Who can pick out the terrorist?

http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/kareem-abdul-jabbar-pirates-of-the-caribbean-dead-mans-chest-world-premiere-arrivals-cz7GAc.jpg

http://www.womanthouartgod.com/images/mcveigh2.jpg

http://images.askmen.com/galleries/men/muhammad-ali/pictures/muhammad-ali-picture-1.jpg

http://www.rock-rendezvous.net/Bands/cat_stevens.jpg




Im not willing to have my rights "adjusted" so that some goverment worker can strip me down and make sure that Im not carrying explosives. We have advanced systems that can figure this out.

[NastyEllEssWon]

timothy mcveigh....duh

[LTb1ow]

Yea... dumb Al... thats easy.

[BigAls87Z28]

I guess you missed the other point. Silly ********.

[LTb1ow]

Yes, lets trust everyone and give them hugs while we are at it.

[JL8Jeff]

Im not willing to have my rights "adjusted" so that some goverment worker can strip me down and make sure that Im not carrying explosives. We have advanced systems that can figure this out.

You wouldn't actually be having any rights adjusted, but if an airline requires you to "agree" to certain conditions before they will allow you to use their service then you don't have much of a choice. It's not about your rights but about your privilege to use their service. It's kind of like the privilege to a driver's license and the ability to drive a car.

[BigAls87Z28]

The airlines arent the ones that are doing the security checks. The airport and the goverment are doing it.
They just cant make up rules that go against the constitution. That would be illegal.

[Frosty]

The airlines arent the ones that are doing the security checks. The airport and the goverment are doing it.
They just cant make up rules that go against the constitution. That would be illegal.

Yup, hence me saying what I said earlier in this thread. Our freedoms can also be our weakness.

[BigAls87Z28]

I dont see it as a weakness.

In other news...Im heading to Detroit for NAIAS next month. This makes me so excited.

[Frosty]

It is in a way. I'm not saying we should change but our rights/freedoms can be and are exploited.

I'm saying it's a weakness from a national security standpoint.

[BigAls87Z28]

I know what you are trying to say, but its the people that say the weakness thing sometimes have ulterior motive, meaning that they would like to see a change in certain rights.

It sucks, no doubt.

[Frosty]

No, I'm not saying we should change, like I said if we change our way of life and trade freedom for security they ultimately win.

[BigAls87Z28]

I know what you are saying Tony, and Im not talking about you specificly. I was just saying....people that talk about weakness, etc etc tend to then start to walk towards moving a few things around alla Patriot Act.

[Frosty]

Yeah I know you weren't talking about me.

The Patriot Act is full of bs.

[ryanfx]

Yeah I know you weren't talking about me.

The Patriot Act is full of bs.

The patriot act is a great thing that is HIGHLY misunderstood. If you actually understand what goes into it and what is actually required to receive taps and information you would be surprised.

99% of the public doesn't like it simply because opposing political groups use scare tactics to make you think like it could *possibly* happen to you.. which in reality, wont. Unless you deserve it of course.

This is taken directly from justice.gov

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/paa-dispelling-myths.html

* FACT: The new law simply makes clear – consistent with the intent of the Congress that enacted FISA in 1978 – that our intelligence community should not have to get bogged down in a court approval process to gather foreign intelligence on targets located in foreign countries. It does not change the strong protections FISA provides to Americans in the United States – surveillance directed at people in the United States continues to require court approval as it did before.


Judging by your distaste for the patriot act, I am assuming you are not American, nor in the U.S?

[Frosty]

Judging by your distaste for the patriot act, I am assuming you are not American, nor in the U.S?

EXCUSE ME? I understand the Patriot Act thank you very much. I'm not even going to get into it with your after that ridiculous comment....

[JL8Jeff]

The Patriot act is crap because of the way it deals with the financial industry. You have no idea of the added cost to businesses unless you work in the industry. They should have worked out different acts to deal with the different situations. It has good intentions but it was not thought out properly. And if you have a common name that happens to be on the list(like Joe Smith) then good luck getting on a flight ever. There are congressmen that with names of people on the list and they get hassled every time they try to fly. Somebody needs to spend some time to fix the act and understand the impacts on industry as well.

[ryanfx]

EXCUSE ME? I understand the Patriot Act thank you very much. I'm not even going to get into it with your after that ridiculous comment....

it ONLY affects our international affairs. Non domestic issues. I am only attempting to hold a debate, not use spiked bats...

when it only applies to foreign monitoring, what's your issue with it?

[ryanfx]

The Patriot act is crap because of the way it deals with the financial industry. You have no idea of the added cost to businesses unless you work in the industry. They should have worked out different acts to deal with the different situations. It has good intentions but it was not thought out properly. And if you have a common name that happens to be on the list(like Joe Smith) then good luck getting on a flight ever. There are congressmen that with names of people on the list and they get hassled every time they try to fly. Somebody needs to spend some time to fix the act and understand the impacts on industry as well.

there is a massive added cost of business, and yes the name thing could have been implemented better, but its difficult to put a price on safety. Keep in mind the patriot acts main goal is a full picture view of increased security. Not being efficient and saving money where it can. There are some issues, but the act was highly needed

[Knipps]

Anyone of you actually have flown in the last year or so?


:wavey: Internationally too. I was pulled aside and they checked my carry on, it wasn't really all that bad.

[V]

i dont have to take my boots off ever, nor do they really care what i have... maybe its the uniform lol

[NastyEllEssWon]

but its difficult to put a price on safety.



when you start giving up civil liberties as a price to pay for safety you're letting them win.

i dont have to take my boots off ever, nor do they really care what i have... maybe its the uniform lol



thats bs too. i think even military personnel should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. i mean....wasnt it only a few months ago when one of your brethen yelled ALLAHU AKBAR and shot up fort hood?

[ryanfx]

when you start giving up civil liberties as a price to pay for safety you're letting them win.


The patriot act doesn't violate any of our civil liberties. The only thing it does domestically is affect us economically.

[NastyEllEssWon]

I'm not opposed to 100% searches of every crevice of everyone attempting to fly. myself included.









yeah a civil liberty of mine is to not have a full cavity search. :lol:

[ryanfx]

yeah a civil liberty of mine is to not have a full cavity search. :lol:

Would you rather be searched lightly as we do and have a 99% survival chance, or would you rather you and everyone else searched thoroughly, and have a 99.99% chance of survival?

And if we're being technical, they could give you a cavity search and they wouldn't be violating your civil liberties. No one is making you get on the plane, it's your choice to do so; you must comply by their regulations.

[NastyEllEssWon]

Would you rather be searched lightly as we do and have a 99% survival chance, or would you rather you and everyone else searched thoroughly, and have a 99.99% chance of survival?

And if we're being technical, they could give you a cavity search and they wouldn't be violating your civil liberties. No one is making you get on the plane, it's your choice to do so; you must comply by their regulations.







thats like saying if walmart required that you let them search you before entering the store that it would be right?

[LTb1ow]

Um, yea. Idiot.

[JerzLT1]

when you start giving up civil liberties as a price to pay for safety you're letting them win.





thats bs too. i think even military personnel should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. i mean....wasnt it only a few months ago when one of your brethen yelled ALLAHU AKBAR and shot up fort hood?

you're a waste of oxygen

[BigAls87Z28]

Patriot Act can be inacted and your 5th amendment right, along with other civil rights, can be waved in the face of "national security".
So, be it domestic or foreign, we should just wave that whole constitution thing right out the window? All the men and women that have died for it? Just tell them it just for terrorists?
Again, terrorists can be anyone, You dont have to have the Koran in your hand or have a name with Muhamad in it to be a terrorist. THATS what you fail to see. The law gives power over the constitution, and it was voted in based on a fear. Its unconstitutional and should have been struck down.

[LTb1ow]

http://marketmynovel.com/images/Dont-Feed-the-Trolls.png

[BigAls87Z28]

Years before 9/11, there was that movie called The Siege and it goes over this very fact. Its a good movie to watch.