Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics political discourse

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-16-2010, 03:15 PM   #201
TomVeil
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomVeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nowhere, Man
Posts: 19,374
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins View Post
But the terrrurorists will just try to board a plane, if they get screened, refuse and go home. If not, DEATH TO AMERICA!!!!
Exactly. It's so they don't come, "gain information" and then leave. Luckily for us, when they actually go through security and get on a flight, they forget all the information they just gained about security.

Quote:
According to Aguilar, Tyner is under investigation for leaving the security area without permission. That’s prohibited, among other reasons, to prevent potential terrorists from entering security, gaining information, and leaving.
TomVeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:17 PM   #202
Gin 'n Tonic
Pooh-Bah
 
Gin 'n Tonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Reclining my seat
Posts: 5,782
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustASpectator View Post
Can someone explain the claim that when I buy an airline ticket and show up at an airport I am waiving my rights to not be molested and/or blasted with radiation?

I mean, the part I don't understand is how it is remotely possible that I would be fined for leaving the premises instead of allowing myself to be subjected to these ridiculous screening techniques.

Where in writing am I agreeing to this situation?
You realise that you're getting about half a chest x-ray every time you fly cross-country right? Citation

I mean, yeah, less is better, but if you're that concerned at being blasted (!!!) with radiation you probably shouldn't be flying at all.
Gin 'n Tonic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:21 PM   #203
qdmcg
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,867
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

lol, im way too lazy to upload the picture, but drudge has janetN with the sub-caption "TSA Now Putting Hands Down Pants"

link to article

http://www.prisonplanet.com/tsa-now-...ers-pants.html
qdmcg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:21 PM   #204
[Phill]
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
[Phill]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 52,513
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins View Post
But the terrrurorists will just try to board a plane, if they get screened, refuse and go home. If not, DEATH TO AMERICA!!!!
I know you are being sarcastic, but people randomly chosen who then refuse should be followed up on.

Doing otherwise just means attackers can shop around and wait until they can stroll through without being scanned.

The fine is wrong, but a followup investigation is actually logical and doing otherwise makes the window dressing even less effective.

It is the same logic to why screening only "terrorist looking people" is less effective when you have a limit to what percent you can or will screen.
[Phill] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:30 PM   #205
pvn
King Emeritus
 
pvn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: De-Green BruceZ for Great Justice
Posts: 65,702
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian J View Post
left and right coming together! Can i get an amen!
Nope. Dvault gonna frown all over the fight against this because he doesn't like some of the people opposing it.
pvn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:33 PM   #206
Adebisi
veteran
 
Adebisi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,781
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill] View Post
I know you are being sarcastic, but people randomly chosen who then refuse should be followed up on.

Doing otherwise just means attackers can shop around and wait until they can stroll through without being scanned.

The fine is wrong, but a followup investigation is actually logical and doing otherwise makes the window dressing even less effective.

It is the same logic to why screening only "terrorist looking people" is less effective when you have a limit to what percent you can or will screen.
A big part of the problem here, IMO, is people pretending that terrorists at American airports are a legitimate threat. If Al Qaeda wants to bomb/hijack a plane over the U.S., they're not going to get on in the U.S. where there are a dozen layers of security. They are going to get on in some 3rd world ********, and just wait until they are over the U.S. to do their thing.
Adebisi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:36 PM   #207
NameOnTheCake
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
NameOnTheCake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: we're not enemies, we just disagree
Posts: 19,601
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill] View Post
I know you are being sarcastic, but people randomly chosen who then refuse should be followed up on.

Doing otherwise just means attackers can shop around and wait until they can stroll through without being scanned.

The fine is wrong, but a followup investigation is actually logical and doing otherwise makes the window dressing even less effective.

It is the same logic to why screening only "terrorist looking people" is less effective when you have a limit to what percent you can or will screen.
I disagree with all of this
NameOnTheCake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:42 PM   #208
Slowroll The Nuts
banned
 
Slowroll The Nuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Constantly 3-Bet Folding
Posts: 159
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Would this help? Ok lets say u get the patdown when u opt out of the scanner. Before they pat your junk down you get a huge boner, this way the TSA people will be all like damn this isnt fun anymore because i have to patdown mens boners. Then they take the scanners out and we win
Slowroll The Nuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:45 PM   #209
qdmcg
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,867
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowroll The Nuts View Post
Would this help? Ok lets say u get the patdown when u opt out of the scanner. Before they pat your junk down you get a huge boner, this way the TSA people will be all like damn this isnt fun anymore because i have to patdown mens boners. Then they take the scanners out and we win
i was thinking about this. i suspect the TSA gets in your face at some point while you're attempting to get a boner. though maybe just indicating to them that you are really going to enjoy the pat down might bother them enough
qdmcg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:45 PM   #210
[Phill]
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
[Phill]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 52,513
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adebisi View Post
A big part of the problem here, IMO, is people pretending that terrorists at American airports are a legitimate threat. If Al Qaeda wants to bomb/hijack a plane over the U.S., they're not going to get on in the U.S. where there are a dozen layers of security. They are going to get on in some 3rd world ********, and just wait until they are over the U.S. to do their thing.
Yeah, this is probably a better argument to those who want extra security but get pissed when this guy is getting investigated.

There are ways to provide security without being intrusive and having no actual benefit im sure. Bomb sniffers seems to be one way, i also read about a new comp program that monitors CCTV for psychological behaviour that is a couple years out.

Whilst i disagree with the porno scanners and the Thai massage frisking; investigating people who act suspiciously, such as refusing to go through security measures, seems to be a logical move.
[Phill] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:52 PM   #211
tomdemaine
Just tries harder
 
tomdemaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Social Justice Rogue
Posts: 17,045
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowroll The Nuts View Post
Would this help? Ok lets say u get the patdown when u opt out of the scanner. Before they pat your junk down you get a huge boner, this way the TSA people will be all like damn this isnt fun anymore because i have to patdown mens boners. Then they take the scanners out and we win
You can produce erections on demand?
tomdemaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:53 PM   #212
ErikTheDread
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ErikTheDread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: just outside your peripheral vision
Posts: 9,124
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomdemaine View Post
You can produce erections on demand?
You can't?
ErikTheDread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:55 PM   #213
tomdemaine
Just tries harder
 
tomdemaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Social Justice Rogue
Posts: 17,045
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill] View Post
Yeah, this is probably a better argument to those who want extra security but get pissed when this guy is getting investigated.

There are ways to provide security without being intrusive and having no actual benefit im sure. Bomb sniffers seems to be one way, i also read about a new comp program that monitors CCTV for psychological behaviour that is a couple years out.

Whilst i disagree with the porno scanners and the Thai massage frisking; investigating people who act suspiciously, such as refusing to go through security measures, seems to be a logical move.
Why not just put an armed guard or two on each plane and x-ray peoples bags for bomb stuff. Problem solved right?
tomdemaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:57 PM   #214
JayTeeMe
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JayTeeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The night shift
Posts: 24,844
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

What if the bomb is in their underwear?
JayTeeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:59 PM   #215
JustASpectator
veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,051
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill] View Post
Yeah, this is probably a better argument to those who want extra security but get pissed when this guy is getting investigated.

There are ways to provide security without being intrusive and having no actual benefit im sure. Bomb sniffers seems to be one way, i also read about a new comp program that monitors CCTV for psychological behaviour that is a couple years out.

Whilst i disagree with the porno scanners and the Thai massage frisking; investigating people who act suspiciously, such as refusing to go through security measures, seems to be a logical move.
It's not logical when the only two security measures you have a choice of are the radioactive strip search and the "milk-milk-lemonade, round the corner fudge is made" routine on you by a stranger.
JustASpectator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 03:59 PM   #216
[Phill]
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
[Phill]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 52,513
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomdemaine View Post
Why not just put an armed guard or two on each plane and x-ray peoples bags for bomb stuff. Problem solved right?
notsureifserious.jpg

It feels like a trap, but i have no problem with air marshals and x raying bags.
[Phill] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:02 PM   #217
ErikTheDread
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ErikTheDread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: just outside your peripheral vision
Posts: 9,124
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

We need to make huge investments in designing groping robots that can examine people in a completely impersonal way.

And there would be a variety of ways to sell it: It's a jobs program! It's an investment in our future! If you object to it, the terrorists win!
ErikTheDread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:04 PM   #218
tomdemaine
Just tries harder
 
tomdemaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Social Justice Rogue
Posts: 17,045
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill] View Post
notsureifserious.jpg

It feels like a trap, but i have no problem with air marshals and x raying bags.
I was being fully serious. I don't see why that isn't the answer. Saves everyone time and money and actually makes people safe.
tomdemaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:06 PM   #219
JayTeeMe
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JayTeeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The night shift
Posts: 24,844
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

did you see my post?
JayTeeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:15 PM   #220
[Phill]
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
[Phill]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 52,513
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Tbh there is little reason to have more security than on the subway at rush hour. As ive said before, if you want to cause some mayhem a few pipe bombs taped under seats on public transport timed to pop during rush hour would cause way more terror than a suicide plane flight given you can cause huge mayhem with a really small cell.

X-rays (walk through and bag x-rays, air marshals, explosive sniffing machines and other similar none intrusive measures should offset the obvious dangers that you arent getting rescued if it goes wrong and give people the sense of extra safety. Basically what happened pre 9/11.
[Phill] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:15 PM   #221
tomdemaine
Just tries harder
 
tomdemaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Social Justice Rogue
Posts: 17,045
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

I guess that's a fair point. Sniffer dogs around the airport maybe? Also why are we so concerned about planes if it's just a matter of deaths and not a hijacking? Couldn't a terrorist do a lot more damage with a lot less risk of being caught in the average mall or stadium?
tomdemaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:21 PM   #222
Dids
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Dids's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Social Justice War Room
Posts: 60,881
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Could somebody spell out the meaningful negatives to the body scan?

Obviously the way the guy linked in the OP was treated wasn't right. However, he handled himself like an *******, and that's part of why things went down the way they did.

That said- the health concerns, the "omg somebody's going to look at my junk" concerns. all strike me as really silly.
Dids is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:25 PM   #223
ErikTheDread
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ErikTheDread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: just outside your peripheral vision
Posts: 9,124
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomdemaine View Post
Also why are we so concerned about planes..
AFAICT, only because the 9/11 attacks happened to involve planes. As usual, we're looking backwards. Bin Laden's a smart guy so I'd have to guess that the next large-death-toll attack he launches won't involve planes. If it does involve X, we'll then look backwards again and freak out about X.
ErikTheDread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:26 PM   #224
MrWookie
Don't Call Me Shirley
 
MrWookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Treating my drinking problem.
Posts: 83,829
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

What's silly about being concerned about someone forcing you to be seen naked when it doesn't actually make people any safer than other available methods?
MrWookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2010, 04:26 PM   #225
Fedorfan
veteran
 
Fedorfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,931
Re: The TSA - Fondling your junk, for safety

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=126833083
Quote:
"Ionizing radiation such as the X-rays used in these scanners have the potential to induce chromosome damage, and that can lead to cancer," Agard says.

The San Francisco group thinks both the machine's manufacturer, Rapiscan, and government officials have miscalculated the dose that the X-ray scanners deliver to the skin — where nearly all the radiation is concentrated.

The stated dose — about .02 microsieverts, a medical unit of radiation — is averaged over the whole body, members of the UCSF group said in interviews. But they maintain that if the dose is calculated as what gets deposited in the skin, the number would be higher, though how much higher is unclear.
Fedorfan is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ę 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online