Author Topic: NY being sued because of subway bag searches (Read 1691 times)

Thrawn · « **Reply #75 on:** August 06, 2005, 03:03:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
And how is that different than airplanes?

Re-read my post above where I explain it. It's a question of being able to protect yourself from the collateral damage caused by the explosion of the vehicles.

People can choose whether or not they go on the vehicles, people can't know if airplanes will fly over/into thier houses and so can't decide if and how to defend against it.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #76 on:** August 06, 2005, 03:28:50 PM »

Thats really really streching logic. I look forward to Toads view on your "explanaition."

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #77 on:** August 06, 2005, 03:31:02 PM »

Anyway would you think flying on airliners would be better if all the securitty searches, all of them, the visible ones and the behind the screens x-rays and bomb tests were removed tommorow?

Would you feel better about flying? More confident?

Sandman · « **Reply #78 on:** August 06, 2005, 03:59:12 PM »

I'd still fly without all the security crap.

Shamus · « **Reply #79 on:** August 06, 2005, 04:18:11 PM »

What do metal detectors in airports have to do with random subway searches?

Its like saying that a speed limit of 70 rather than 80 on I-75 saves lives so it therefore follows that we should change it to 10 to save more lives.

shamus

Thrawn · « **Reply #80 on:** August 06, 2005, 05:49:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Anyway would you think flying on airliners would be better if all the securitty searches, all of them, the visible ones and the behind the screens x-rays and bomb tests were removed tommorow?

Would you feel better about flying? More confident?

As applicable only to the question of actually being on a commerical aircrart, I would probably feel less safer, but I could take that into account when I made a decision whether or not to fly. I would feel even more safe if everyone was strip searched. But is that security worth the loss of freedom? I don't think so.

Remember it's not only agents of the government that can search, but also the airlines themselves. Once again only as applicable to the actual passengers.

Maverick · « **Reply #81 on:** August 06, 2005, 07:25:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Simply, by exercising your free choice and not being on a subway car.

What's worse than losing freedom?

First point, What are you going to do when the first IED on the roadside comes by? Stop driving entirely?

While you may not like the searches they are actually assistinmg you in keeping some freedom. The freedom to travel as you will. If you let them drive you off of the planes, trains you should be able to see what freedoms you have already lost. They have already directed your life and achieved part of their goal.

Thrawn · « **Reply #82 on:** August 07, 2005, 03:14:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
First point, What are you going to do when the first IED on the roadside comes by? Stop driving entirely?

While you may not like the searches they are actually assistinmg you in keeping some freedom. The freedom to travel as you will. If you let them drive you off of the planes, trains you should be able to see what freedoms you have already lost. They have already directed your life and achieved part of their goal.

In the last few years including 9/11 exactly how many people died from terrorist attacks in the US, 3,000? How many years to you want to carry it forward or backward?

.001 percent in one year alone?

Yeah, thanks. Thank god that the department of Homeland Security is on the watch.

I'll tell you what Maverick, I will run the same odds through a kino machine and give you 1000 to 1 on any given bet you want to make. Care to take me up on it?

How many freedoms would you be willing to give up on those odds?

Raider179 · « **Reply #83 on:** August 07, 2005, 03:45:10 AM »

This is the exact kind of **** that the ACLU does that makes it look retarded.

Carlos Mencina said it right the other night.

He said put a wall of pictures of the 9/11 hijackers on the wall in all airports/ports, etc and then when you are profiling someone and they complain, "why me, you just are after me because I am an arab..." You just point to the wall and say see why *****! lol Sounds good to me.

Thrawn · « **Reply #84 on:** August 07, 2005, 04:03:04 AM »

I can understand your rage Raider, Antlanta being such hot bed of terrorist activity, you just have to screw over the Constitutional rights of New Yorkers in order to protect yourselves.

Funny that the New Yorkers voted for the other guy though.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #85 on:** August 07, 2005, 04:11:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Funny that the New Yorkers voted for the other guy though.

No, most voted for Bloomberg.

Raider179 · « **Reply #86 on:** August 07, 2005, 04:20:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
I can understand your rage Raider, Antlanta being such hot bed of terrorist activity, you just have to screw over the Constitutional rights of New Yorkers in order to protect yourselves.

Funny that the New Yorkers voted for the other guy though.

I have lived in apartments with nothing but arabs around me. I could care less. If I go to get on MARTA and a cop asks to look in my backpack, I say go right ahead. I dont feel my rights are infringed upon unless it occurs on my own property.

Oh and just so for your own personal info, Atlanta, has a lot of arabic immigration. But hell what would you know about that. Probably think all mexicans live in california and texas too.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #87 on:** August 07, 2005, 04:35:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Raider179
Probably think all mexicans live in california and texas too.

I would think quite a few live in Mexico.

Rolex · « **Reply #88 on:** August 07, 2005, 05:35:24 AM »

We had metal detectors, X-rays and searches at airports long before the WTC incident, or did everyone suddenly forget that?

It didn't work that day.

Does anyone believe that a similar plot using commercial airliners would be on the minds of a terrorist group now? Bad and ingenious people can find a way around todays precautions also, or simply find a softer, different target. We're spending a fortune and making everyone's lives miserable by searching the shoes of 80 year-old grandmothers.

Osama bin Laden and his cronies must still be laughing their butts off at how stupid and gullible we are.

If I had to choose between two evils (random searches or profiling) I'd take profiling. Leave the grandmothers, familes on the way to visit grandma, Boy Scout and softball teams, haggard business people with families and mortgages alone, and focus on the common elements of the UK and WTC participants.

They are single or living away from their wives, they are recent immigrants or non-native visitors with no visible means of support or long-term jobs, of Arab descent and muslim. Those are the common characteristics and to deny that is lunacy and not very good security or police work.

Victim: "Help! I've been beaten and robbed!"

Police Officer: "Can you describe the assailant?"

Victim: "I can, but it is not politically correct and a violation of his human rights and constutionally guaranteed liberties."

Maverick · « **Reply #89 on:** August 07, 2005, 09:05:40 PM »

Thrawn,

I haven't given up any freedoms because I still travel as I desire. I won't allow the threat of terror activity stop me from traveling. You on the other hand are willing to let them chase you off of a plane because you don't want your bag searched. Now who has given up what here?