"Virtual Strip-Search" The new airport security device?
Mar 20th, 2002, 11:43 AM
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
Those of you with no understanding of what the ACLU works for are idiots. At least do a little research on the group before you start throwing stones like a bunch of medieval peasants. They fight for rights that you take for granted, rights that are being eroded each day with the blessing of people like Naive Nina.
Hey Nina, how safe do you feel driving the freeways?? Why not take possession of the automobiles of bad and dangerous drivers? They kill much more than 3000 people a year. But no, people get hysterical and start throwing caution to the wind in their inane efforts to "protect" themselves. Bush and his cronies are using this horrific event to further their secret agenda. That's sick and disgraceful. Read a newspaper once in awhile and maybe you'll learn something.
Or maybe you like your opinions fed to you by your brilliant governement. Either way, you lose, and you and your ilk will destroy the Constitution with every right you strip away; until there's nothing left.
Hey Nina, how safe do you feel driving the freeways?? Why not take possession of the automobiles of bad and dangerous drivers? They kill much more than 3000 people a year. But no, people get hysterical and start throwing caution to the wind in their inane efforts to "protect" themselves. Bush and his cronies are using this horrific event to further their secret agenda. That's sick and disgraceful. Read a newspaper once in awhile and maybe you'll learn something.
Or maybe you like your opinions fed to you by your brilliant governement. Either way, you lose, and you and your ilk will destroy the Constitution with every right you strip away; until there's nothing left.
Mar 20th, 2002, 11:59 AM
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Again Bigbro, rather than hurling insults, please explain how anyone's rights are being violated by x-ray screening at airports? I'm still waiting. I hardly think not minding security screening qualifies me as "becoming hysterical". A bit of a stretch, don't you think?
Oh and just for the record, it probably is a good idea to not allow habitually dangerous drivers to get behind the wheel. Sure, go ahead take their cars away from them.
And now there is a "Secret Agenda". This just gets more and more fascinating...
You really ought to calm down Bigbro, it sounds as though you are about to burst a blood vessel. Relax and take a deep breath, you'll see how silly this is.
Oh and just for the record, it probably is a good idea to not allow habitually dangerous drivers to get behind the wheel. Sure, go ahead take their cars away from them.
And now there is a "Secret Agenda". This just gets more and more fascinating...
You really ought to calm down Bigbro, it sounds as though you are about to burst a blood vessel. Relax and take a deep breath, you'll see how silly this is.
Mar 20th, 2002, 12:09 PM
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Big Brother-Yes, more people die in car accidents. BUT, how many car accidents do you know of that cause two skyscrapers to collapse, the deaths of countless rescue workers and such devastating economic losses as did 9-11. Cantor-Fitzgerald alone lost almost all of its' workforce!!!! Not to mention the loss in tourist dollars, loss of jobs and prime real estate in NY.
As to the screening, I saw it on CNN last night. It was hardly erotic! And from what I understand they are only going to use it on passengers who fit a certain profile. Better to be x-rayed IMO than have a terrorist grab another jet and fly it into a nuclear reactor, Hoover dam or some other place where it can cause massive destruction...
As to the screening, I saw it on CNN last night. It was hardly erotic! And from what I understand they are only going to use it on passengers who fit a certain profile. Better to be x-rayed IMO than have a terrorist grab another jet and fly it into a nuclear reactor, Hoover dam or some other place where it can cause massive destruction...
Mar 20th, 2002, 12:18 PM
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
For all you perverts out there waiting with baited breath for this thing:
http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/2...rveynat3p3.asp
http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/2...rveynat3p3.asp
Mar 21st, 2002, 01:16 AM
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bigbro:
You have a very big significant point about rights being taken away. Has anyone read 1984? Now that the gov't has everyone's blind support, they now want to pull a fast one on us by requiring some complete stranger(s) to see our T&A and private parts (I've seen the pictures). Maybe the gov't should have been better at security before 9/11 instead of going overboard and violating personal freedoms so someone can go on an airplane. Again, I am with you, blindly trusting the gov't is really scary and I thank God for the ACLU. No matter what the issue, they have the time and energy to question it. To everyone who is a sheep, get off your Prozac and think for a change.
You have a very big significant point about rights being taken away. Has anyone read 1984? Now that the gov't has everyone's blind support, they now want to pull a fast one on us by requiring some complete stranger(s) to see our T&A and private parts (I've seen the pictures). Maybe the gov't should have been better at security before 9/11 instead of going overboard and violating personal freedoms so someone can go on an airplane. Again, I am with you, blindly trusting the gov't is really scary and I thank God for the ACLU. No matter what the issue, they have the time and energy to question it. To everyone who is a sheep, get off your Prozac and think for a change.
Mar 21st, 2002, 04:55 AM
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
The argument of...."if you have nothing to hide, you should't mind", misses the point.
By that logic the police should be able to enter your home and search with having a probable cause warrant, After all, "if you have nothing to hide...."
At birth some people think the government should tak a sample of everyone's DNA. How would you like it if you couldn't get insurance because an insurance company found out that your DNA sample said you were predisposed to cancer...or couldn't get hired for the same reason.
No takes your rights away all at once..it just happens over time.
The ACLU offers another side to what some extemists want. In the end the courts decide, not the ACLU.
Isn't the BIll of Rights part of what makes this country so great?
By that logic the police should be able to enter your home and search with having a probable cause warrant, After all, "if you have nothing to hide...."
At birth some people think the government should tak a sample of everyone's DNA. How would you like it if you couldn't get insurance because an insurance company found out that your DNA sample said you were predisposed to cancer...or couldn't get hired for the same reason.
No takes your rights away all at once..it just happens over time.
The ACLU offers another side to what some extemists want. In the end the courts decide, not the ACLU.
Isn't the BIll of Rights part of what makes this country so great?
Mar 21st, 2002, 05:24 AM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Bill of Rights is ONE of the things that make this country great. .
Huge difference between police showing up at my front door and my showing up to fly on a plane with hundreds of others. Does the constitution say I have a "right" to fly on a plane . . with whatever I choose to carry on with me . . of course not . .
The "incremental erosion of rights" argument is nonsensical when applied to gun control legislation as it is here as well . . the basic right guaranteed in the Constitution are just those . . basic . . and any erosion is to the imaginative interpretation of those rights by conservative legislators and judges
IMHO
Mar 21st, 2002, 05:50 AM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bravo Rich, finally someone with enough intelligence to discern between the violation of personal freedoms and constitutional rights.
I'll say it again, to those who don't wish to undergo security screening prior to using public transportation, you may choose to hire private transportation. That's your right.
No one is forcing you to fly commercially, or at all for that matter.
I'll say it again, to those who don't wish to undergo security screening prior to using public transportation, you may choose to hire private transportation. That's your right.
No one is forcing you to fly commercially, or at all for that matter.
Mar 21st, 2002, 05:50 AM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Bill of Rights is ONE of the things that make this country great. .
Huge difference between police showing up at my front door and my showing up to fly on a plane with hundreds of others. Does the constitution say I have a "right" to fly on a plane . . with whatever I choose to carry on with me . . of course not . .
The "incremental erosion of rights" argument is nonsensical when applied to gun safety legislation as it is here. . the basic rights guaranteed in the Constitution are just that . . basic . . and any erosion is to the imaginative interpretation of those rights by conservative legislators and judges
Mar 21st, 2002, 06:34 AM
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Of course you don't have the right to carry anything you want on a plane,,,just like free speech doesn't allow you to yell "fire" in a crowded theater.
The question for the courts might be.. is a virtual strip search an unreasonable search and is there an alternative.
You don't have right to drive a car...but the police are not supposed to stop and search your car without probable cause. Let's face it, some cops would stop any black person driving a BMW...if there were no restrictions.
Let's not forget that security before 9/11 was lax and erratic. For the most part, it's the same people doing security now.
For the record, I would be in favor of only using US citizens to do the security work (people whose background we are able to check out).
I don't want John Ashcroft deciding which rights can be eroded.
The question for the courts might be.. is a virtual strip search an unreasonable search and is there an alternative.
You don't have right to drive a car...but the police are not supposed to stop and search your car without probable cause. Let's face it, some cops would stop any black person driving a BMW...if there were no restrictions.
Let's not forget that security before 9/11 was lax and erratic. For the most part, it's the same people doing security now.
For the record, I would be in favor of only using US citizens to do the security work (people whose background we are able to check out).
I don't want John Ashcroft deciding which rights can be eroded.
Mar 21st, 2002, 06:45 AM
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is supposed to be voluntary. Voluntary means you don't have to do it. So to me, the Big Brother argument is a moot point.
I'd bet that if it becomes a choice at the airport many, if not most, would use it, rather than wait in a long line. I know I would.
I'd bet that if it becomes a choice at the airport many, if not most, would use it, rather than wait in a long line. I know I would.
Mar 21st, 2002, 07:14 AM
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
You are right, if it's voluntary, those with nothing to hide will be the ONLY ones that use it.
Those with contraband will just wait in line and take their chances.
If you goal is shorter lines,,,,,just adding more of the current machines & more security might do just as good a job.
I wish Rudy Giulanni was in charge of homeland security.....he'd probably repalce the current security firms with the National Guard.
Those with contraband will just wait in line and take their chances.
If you goal is shorter lines,,,,,just adding more of the current machines & more security might do just as good a job.
I wish Rudy Giulanni was in charge of homeland security.....he'd probably repalce the current security firms with the National Guard.
