Re: 6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 12:04 am
I think I'd use a different word there...Oldgringo wrote:03Lightningrocks wrote:Dave2 wrote:And less molested.
You never went to the Drive-In movies ?
The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
I think I'd use a different word there...Oldgringo wrote:03Lightningrocks wrote:Dave2 wrote:And less molested.
You never went to the Drive-In movies ?
The best way to sneak a nuclear bomb into the US....atticus wrote:As has been said before, we can follow an effective model, such as the Israeli airport security model, or we can invent stuff on the fly, such as what the TSA and Homeland Security do. The Israeli system works. They conduct an effective interview with travelers, they profile likely problem flyers, and they take the time to do effective screening. On the other hand, TSA gropes little kids. As for myself, I have chosen to drive as much as possible, instead of flying. I did experience the X-ray booth (or whatever it is), and I found it to be humiliating. So I have chosen not to play their game any more. The same mindset that gropes little kids is the one that has promoted an open border. I live about 200 miles from the mexican border. The law enforcement folks out here have been running into Chinese and middle eastern illegals for YEARS. Neither George Bush nor King Hussein give a darn. There's no telling what kind of nasty bombs and nasty foreign agents are here among us. Our federal government is too busy groping little kids to worry about our real threats.
jmra wrote:First of all I haven't excused anything. I don't agree with pat downs. Show me one time where I have defended pat downs. I have stated that I do not believe this girl was groped but I have never stated that I agreed with the policies of TSA. But because it suits your purpose you will take what I say out of context and put words in my mouth in order to make your illogical arguments sound credible.VMI77 wrote:jmra wrote:We could just go back to the way things were on 9/10. Nay, to hard to get all that sand out of the ear holes.
Funny you say that, since the search regime you're excusing wouldn't have prevented 9/11. None of the hijackers were six year old American girls. None of the hijackers used big bottles of hand lotion or shampoo to take over the plane. None were old men in wheelchairs, grandmas, or Americans traveling with their children. All of them were young adult men, most of them from Saudi Arabia. When the passengers overwhelmed the last set of hijackers, that was the last 9/11. The tactic used on 9/11 can only work once, since now everyone knows what's going to happen if they don't take the plane back.
TSA passenger screening cannot possibly prevent another attack on an aircraft. And using limited resources to screen American grandmas and little girls make the odds of a terrorists getting through security greater, not less. Even if we assume the best, that they are 100% effective in screening passengers, they cannot prevent someone blowing up a bunch of passengers in the airport, or even from planting a bomb on a plane, since they're not screening ground crews or limiting access to planes except by card swipe.
It strikes me as a little odd that a guy who carries a gun seems to believe the TSA can make the world a safe place. Do you worry about little girls attacking you in the parking lot too or do you focus your attention on the more likely threats? After all, bad guys might hide a weapon on a little girl or lull you into a false sense of security by getting one to pretend she's in trouble. Do you worry that those little girls selling cookies are just trying to get you to open your door in advance of a home invasion? I think you don't because you don't consider those to be realistic threats, but they're just about as realistic as an America couple planting a bomb on their six year old daughter to bring down an airplane.
And if there was perfect security at airports and for airplanes, which there will never and can never be, terrorists will merely shift targets to buses, trains, subways, malls, etc. Then the same excuses will be used to justify frisking six year old girls on the subway and at the mall and we'll be told to just walk if we don't like it, or stay home.
My post that you replied to was simply a way of showing that although I don't agree with the current policies I also don't believe that we can pretend that 9/11 never happened. Some changes had to be made. Obviously what we have now is not the answer but what was in place prior to 9/11 is not either.
It's getting more like Parliament in Britain. Those Whigs and Tories are brutal to each other.Charles L. Cotton wrote:This thread is getting heated folks. Let's take a step back and keep it statesmanlike.
Thanks,
Chas.
Not since 1850 or so, but Labour are always about getting a shot in at Tory PM Cameron. Back in Lady Thatcher's PM days, she could tear 'em up.Jasonw560 wrote:It's getting more like Parliament in Britain. Those Whigs and Tories are brutal to each other.Charles L. Cotton wrote:This thread is getting heated folks. Let's take a step back and keep it statesmanlike.
Thanks,
Chas.
Well, I'd use Dallas City Council procedures, but I can't figure out how to throw things at people through a discussion board.Charles L. Cotton wrote:This thread is getting heated folks. Let's take a step back and keep it statesmanlike.
G26ster wrote:There are 75,000 TSA agents, but only 20,000 Border Patrol agents. Kind of like standing guard at your front door and frisking everyone that comes to your door, while leaving you back door wide open and only checking occasionally.
KD5NRH wrote:Well, I'd use Dallas City Council procedures, but I can't figure out how to throw things at people through a discussion board.Charles L. Cotton wrote:This thread is getting heated folks. Let's take a step back and keep it statesmanlike.