| Given that millions of passengers pass through the world's airports every day would you rather: |
|
Given that millions of passengers pass through the world's airports every day would you rather:
Click to vote
|
|
||||
|
|
Asked 2 years ago
by suzannabanana1  Germany |
|
About
I don't have any particular political affiliation but will attach myself to certain issues. I don't like "jargon" to describe people or issues, like "liberal"; I think it's lazy and replaces critical thinking. I read a lot and I put polls up on issues when I want to compare my opinions against those of others. Often I'm surprised and that's what I like about Ask500. I'm back in Maine (thank god) now after having spent 8 months in Germany and 6 weeks in Krakow, Poland. I did go back to Poland, near Warsaw, for six weeks but am back. I'm home for good now.
After years of mostly ending up on the "liberal" side of things, I'm tending right a little over this illegal immigration issue and I'm becoming more jaded about our Congress. I have to fight feeling hopeless about our country.
|
8 Points
|
Behavioral profile, sure. Ethnic profile, not so much.
Just because most of the recent terrorists are young Muslim males does NOT mean that most young Muslim males are terrorists.
This comment was deleted.
[-7 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyHow about those people who study the bible... you know, like where God told Moses and Co. to kill all the men and the women who had known men, but keep the virgins for themselves? Or when Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
If those Christians and Jews study the bible, they are just waiting for the right time...
This comment was deleted.
[-5 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyI'd agree with you, but the ethnic profiling will probably happen regardless, whether it be conscious, subconscious, endorsed or condemned. Might as well be straightforward about it. Still better than holding back the millions of people that fly on a daily basis.
I disagree, ethnic profiling will allow terrorist to slip through the cracks because law enforcement focuses on the wrong signs and it creates even more hate.
Yes but if something walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and looks like a duck and ducks are blowing up planes then I would probably scan it before the horse behind it in line who's kind have never blown up an airplane.....is that crazy logic?
Yes, is is crazy logic. After Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma do you think that they should have profiled all Protestant white males? Why should millions of Muslim young men be forced to suffer stigma and indignation because of a few?
I'll bet you would have been one of the first to throw American citizens of Japanese ancestry into concentration camps in 1942, wouldn't you?
If Timothy McVeigh had blown up a plane, then yes they should scan all protestant white males, but since he did not. That really has no relevancy on airport security does it? Please give me an example of non Muslim male, who has blown up a passenger airliner in the last twenty years and I will gladly stand corrected. My point may not be politically correct, but facts are facts. Their is a certain group, (aka young muslim men), who have been responsible for these types of terrorist acts. By no means am I saying that all young muslim men are responsible but unfortunatly life is not fair and they need to stand up against these extremist teaching if they wish to see a change in how they are perceived.
Oh gosh... you're right. How could I have missed that? We only need to screen all white Protestant males entering federal buildings. Why don't we do that, bw? Surely you can see that the "relevancy" is blowing things up (whether they are airplanes or buildings).
It's not a matter of politically correct, it is a matter of holding an entire class responsible for the bad actions of a few. We live in a free country. We don't do that kind of crap. Places like Nazi Germany did that kind of crap.
"Those who would sacrifice their freedom for a little safety deserve neither freedom nor safety." -- B. Franklin
One of my favorite quotes! Very strong closing arguement. However, I do not see the same trend of young white protestant males committing terrorist acts against the U.S. that I do in the young male muslim demographic do you?
Irrelevant. We don't hold an entire class responsible for the bad actions of a few. Even if it's a class we love to hate.
Having said that, I'm guessing that white protestant males have committed far more murders in the United States than young male Muslims.
Murders you may have a point, but terrorist attacks against the U.S. not a chance. If you were a police officer and saw some white males dressed in long white robes with pointed hats outside a gay-rights rally or a black school or church would you not keep a particularly watchful eye on them? This is the same reason a security gaurd at the airport keeps a watchful eye on a group of young muslim men dressed in robes with turbins on their head. It may not be the "right" thing to do but it is def the smartest thing to do.
Take my chances. If you wanted to take over the plane, just order a little alcohol, they bring you a glass bottle. Smash it, hold the woman hostage until you get to the cockpit, stab the woman and force the pilot to land in Luxembourg! No amount of scanning would stop this from happening.
Someone once pointed out a necktie around a baby's neck would have the same effect.
I personally have worn sharp metal hairsticks and no one has ever taken those away from me - those things would easily put out an eye or worse, too.
Don't you want to offer a choice "Scan all except me"? :)
Of your options my vote is to scan all.
Despite the ridiculously inefficient method, i ahve to choose "scan all" ... i don't care about behavior or ethnic, if the objective is to give security, then the actions should always point to the best solution on this aspect.
People will complain, but that only proves the inefficience of the body scan method =\
This more or less assumes a body scan is 100% safe. I am not sure of that. If everybody will always be scanned, terrorists will know this and seek methods to fool the scanner. On the other hand if profiling was to be used they will find some unlikely candidate to plant a bomb for them next time.
I did all my flying before there was Anything more than a cursory scan. Perhaps we should quit doing things that make people want to blow up our planes?
No matter what we do they will hate us. Until we stop capitalism, supporting Isreal, making western films, offering freedom of religion, voicing a global view other than what is in the koran, and bring down our standard of living the extremists will hate us. Are you ready to give that all up so that everyone likes us or do you kind of enjoy all the things you take for granted everyday that are provided for you and that people have died for solely because you live in the United States of America?
Don't know about you, son, but MY people had genocide committed against them so that YOUR people could steal their land. And they were accused of much the same things as you are now accusing those who have the oil our government wants to control.
I must have misunderstood I did not understand that when you said "perhaps 'WE' should quit doing things that make people want to blow up 'OUR' planes? You were refering to all the native american planes that are being blown up and the actions that the native americans are committing that are causing them to do this....So i am sorry my last statement does not apply to you just my fellow American Citizens since you are choosing to differentiate yourself from the group. You are either part of "MY" nation and people as you put it or your not. Honestly, I am not judging either way because you are right some atrocities were committed. But you do not get to pick and choose at will. So I am being honest. What do you suggest we do that will change the belief, that westerners are infidels and need to be killed, held by Islamic extremist, instead of just suggesting very vaugly that we should quit doing things that make people want to blow up our planes. Please let me know I would love to hear your solution.
Yeah, I know you misunderstood. I have read your comments.
Really that is your reply? You have no backing for your argument? No explanation? No intelligent argument? So you were talking about all the native american planes being blown up?
What is your solution? What do we just stop doing that will majically make muslim extremist stop hating "My" country (according to You)and stop wanting to blow up our planes and our citizen?
Dauguy do you have no response or are these questions to direct to answer vaguely? Why do you not show some backbone and back up your statements when questioned? I am very interested to debate you. I would like to see if you are a worthy advisary and will debate a point logically like many of the others who have differing points of view on this site or are you merely programmed to repeat the ideas others give you with no factual backing or conviction?
Try looking at my 30,000 posts here, and get back to me on that. I really don't need to repeat myself for every JonMarc multiple personality you create.
I do not have the time or desire to read your 30,000 posts but I am not asking you to repeat yourself. I am asking all very direct questions that have to do with posts you are making. If you can not defend your own posts, how do you expect to change others way of thinking? And if you do not plan on changing others way of thinking, then why bother to stay here in America if so much we do as a country and stand for as a people you find fault with? So either you just want to bitch about this country and plan to make no changes or support your arguments, or you do plan to enlighten others with your point of view but are unable to do so because you can not support the argument yourself, either out of fear of looking ignorant or the fear of uncloaking your true ignorance.
This comment was deleted.
[-6 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyWell I guess I just have a nack for pissing those kind of people off haha hold on here we go
Being new to this site who is JonMarc? I have been called this by dauguy and I am not sure what this means haha will you inform me please.
This comment was deleted.
[-5 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyYou are right some attrocities did take place and I am not defending these acts against humanity. However, Did YOUR people kill inocent women and children? Did your people send their own children to their death strapped down with explosives and shrap medal, high on drugs? Did your people beat their women, suppres their education and barter them like livestock? Did YOUR people punish the womn who was raped for her "adultary" instead of the man who raped her? If so, then maby those accusations werent so wrong. If not, then this is a differnt scenerio than YOUR people's "genocide".
That's a very simplistic answer, dauguy. The fact is that for a certain number of Muslim extremists, our existence alone is adequate motivation for them to want to blow up our planes. Nothing short of the conversion of the population to Islam and the imposition of Sharia Law would satisfy them. I don't thin that's going to happen any time soon.
Most ethical questions are, at base, pretty simple.
But ethics works both ways. If "their" ethics say kill those who will not convert and "our" ethics say that people should be free to choose any (or no) religion, then we have a irresolvable ethical dilemma.
Much as I support their right to exist... and even their right to hate me... I don't support their right to kill me because I make different choices than theirs.
Maybe yours do. Mine are pretty clear about right and wrong.
So what if someone else's "ethics" call something right that your "ethics" call wrong. Something like, say, honor killings. You don't see an ethical dilemma there?
'Right' and 'wrong' ALWAYS depend upon the structure of the society. Honor killings are a symptom of a herding culture, and it serves very good purposes in that particular structure of society. Once you are not herding, that is not so useful a more.
Definitely scan all. I would accept the extra attention if I fit the profile. The safety of the passengers is much more important than the inconvenience of the extra security screening.
As far as I'm concerned the terrorists (with the TSA's help) have won. The stupid and ineffective security rules and procedures that they make us go through, just to *feel* safe, are too much.
I'm done flying commercial and will seek alternate transportation methods.
I agree. I very rarely fly commercial anymore. I would rather spend the extra money and not go through the three ring circus. Everyone needs to remember the rights we give up as citizens to "feel" safe, we will never get back. At what point does this scanning, searching, listening, snooping, this infringement on our constitutional rights become to much?
Good luck with that... unless of course, you never leave the United States. Oh wait... I forgot. There are no countries other than the United States. ;o)
I actually travel all over the world and have done so from a very young age. It was very important in my family to experience many different cultures in the world. And yes you can travel outside the U.S. the same way you travel inside the U.S. without flying commercial. It is just more expensive, but I believe well worth it. It saves time and does not limit your travel options like an airline ticket as long as you give your pilots a few hours of advanced notice.
Oh sorry... I didn't realize that you and dr1024 were the same person.
"It is just more expensive" is the understatement of the year. Private jets are well beyond the reach of 99.9% of the world's population.
I don't often travel outside the US. But I can still consider alternatives to commercial flight. (Boat, car [i.e. Canada, Mexico...], and chartering a flight [which doesn't require you to be a millionaire].)
I can also decide that a trip to <fill in the bank> may not be worth the hassle of giving up my rights, my privacy, and being treated like a terrorist, especially when it can be strongly argued they what they are doing doesn't make commercial fight safer.
Signed, not bw45. ;)
I'm sorry... could you quantify that for me, please? Obviously I'm not talking about adjacent countries. Let's say you wanted to go to ANY country in Europe, Asia, Africa or Oceania. Please compare the cost of a commercial flight with the cost of chartering a plane to the destination of your choice.
Here's one I did to get you started. Chicago (ORD) to London (LHR) leaveFeb 10 return Feb. 20, 2010. Cost: $98,934. The plane holds 9 passengers, so IF you had 9 people it would be $10,993 per person. The commercial cost for the same itinerary? $739 per person.
Just because dr1024 and I share the same opinion, I assure you that we are not one in the same. And to me it is as simple as that, it is just more expensive. I was just responding to your comment that I could never leave or dont leave America, which was incorrect. I was simply stating that I would rather travel on a private vechile even though it is more expensive than flying commercial for a multitude of reasons, one of which being, the hassel of going through security. I am not saying everyone should or can make that choice, but it is a choice I choose to make the majority of the time.
But I wasn't commenting that YOU don't leave America, I was commenting that dr1024 doesn't leave America.
If you are not the same person, why do you keep responding to questions I asked him as though I had asked you? And my point remains uncontested that your recommended choice is beyond the means of 99.9% of the world's population, hence not a practical alternative for the rest of us.
I did interject for him because we held the same point of view and I was defending the point of view not the person and I can admit when I am wrong. I did not realize that first question was to him until you just now pointed it out so I do stand corrected on that plawler. However, I still stand behind my reasoning, and I agree there are alot of people who do not have that option, but it is a great solution for me personally and it sounds like dr1024 also chooses to travel in the same manner. So the point I was answering was not the question for the rest of the world but a response to your comment "Good luck with that... unless of course, you never leave the United States. Oh wait... I forgot. There are no countries other than the United States. ;o)" which now I realize was not directly to me but indirectly that is an assumption about people on this ie dr1024 and I who said we would perfer and choose not to fly commercial
No actually... it was directed specifically at people like dr1024, whose myopic world view ends at the borders of the United States. As he affirmed, he "doesn't often" travel outside the U.S.
This comment was deleted.
[-6 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyWho is this JonMarc Trublu?
No argument that commercial is cheeper. Never said it wasn't. I simply said I've had enough "security theater" and giving up to the demands of TSA's questionable practices. I will there for chose not to fly commercial where ever and when ever I can.
(I'll also wear a t-shirt that says, "not a terrorist" when ever I do have to fly commercial from now on.)
http://www.cafepress.com/+not_a_terrorist_wear_white_tshirt,27025978
We're not just talking "cheaper." We're talking 15 times cheaper. Most of the world's population can't even afford the $739, let alone the $10,993. So you and bw45 proposing this as the "reasonable" alternative are being disingenuous. This is not a "reasonable" alternative except for the very wealthy. Please tell me... just how many times have you chosen to charter a private plane and pay 15x the going fare to avoid the "hassle?" Enquiring minds want to know.
I'm sure your "Not a Terrorist" shirt puts TSA agent's minds at ease. You're lucky you don't get called in for extra questioning and strip searches, since jokes and off-hand comments about illegal activities can result in arrest.
I did not propose this as an alternative for the world. Again I simply said, "*I've* had enough".
It is also a perfectly reasonably alternative for me. I rarely go outside the US. I can easily drive in a day to 90% of the places I would fly to.
If things keep going like this eventually more and more people are going to stop flying unless absolutely necessary.