Teenage terrorist busted for sarcastic note!
- Thread starter DaveB
- Start date
- Status
rrader
member
BruceH:
I don't see whats so socialistic about preventing Al-Queda from pulling off another act of mass genocide by simply extending airport screening techniques that have been in place for nearly 40 years for international flights to domestic flights. Ever been through customs? Aren't those Federal Agents searching your luggage there at the US Customs counter?
Moving the screening to a Federal agency doesn't make it any more or less intrusive, or any more or less socalistic. All it does is prevent the airlines from hiring illegal aliens to do the screening.
How you are confusing an anti-government nut-job like Tim McVeigh with TSA screeners is a mystery. You do know he hated government and any form of government control with every atom in his body don't you?
I don't see whats so socialistic about preventing Al-Queda from pulling off another act of mass genocide by simply extending airport screening techniques that have been in place for nearly 40 years for international flights to domestic flights. Ever been through customs? Aren't those Federal Agents searching your luggage there at the US Customs counter?
Moving the screening to a Federal agency doesn't make it any more or less intrusive, or any more or less socalistic. All it does is prevent the airlines from hiring illegal aliens to do the screening.
How you are confusing an anti-government nut-job like Tim McVeigh with TSA screeners is a mystery. You do know he hated government and any form of government control with every atom in his body don't you?
Last edited:
rrader I wasn't refering to the TSA personnel. I was refering to the note writer. This country has been going downhill since 1932. The bigger a mess gets the faster in accelerates into madness. We could try El Al but looking at people instead of things wouldn't be PC. All I know is we have a whole nother bunch of govt. enployees as a knee jerk reaction to a one time hit. Let people carry their own security and fire all the needless foolishness. Never happen tho, because control is never relinquished.
Wildalaska
member
The kid was still an obnoxious little creep and deserves everything he gets...
AS for the TSA...screen me, screen you,, screen them, just make sure no bombs go off...y'all wanna dig through my underwear be me guest...I got nothing to hide..
WildwhatanonsensethreadAlaska
AS for the TSA...screen me, screen you,, screen them, just make sure no bombs go off...y'all wanna dig through my underwear be me guest...I got nothing to hide..
WildwhatanonsensethreadAlaska
M1911Owner
Member
There are several questions that you are asking here, two of which are: How does one go about mitigating the dangers posed by having large, fragile buildings that are full of fuel flying through the air, and secondly, how does one do this within a constitutional framework?
Addressing the second question first, the problem is that these warrentless searches are completely unconstitutional. The constitution is the supreme law of the land, it clearly spells out what is requried to authorize a search, and these TSA searches are way, way, way outside what is allowed by the constitution.
If it is determined that weaker protections against searches is required, then the only constitutional method to get there is the amendment process. To my knowledge, no such amendment has been made.
I am aware of the rational that, "Air travel is optional. If you don't want to submit to a search, then don't travel by air." I suspect that, if you research the writing of the Framers, that you will find that it is quite clear that among the natural, unalienable rights that are supposed to be protected by governments, is freedom of movement. The above rational is greatly at odds with that right.
Addressing the first question: I don't know that anyone has an satisfactory answer to how to prevent evil people from misusing aircraft. The TSA-style searches clearly are not a solution, as demonstrated by the 9/11 hijackers who succeeded in their efforts by using innocuous-looking box cutters. Since that time, many people have succeeded in boarding airliners with various weapons, both by intent and by accident. I don't believe that the TSA screenings will have any efficacy whatsoever in stopping another 9/11 attack.
I suspect that arming pilots would help.
I also believe that we would be safer if passengers were allowed to carry weapons. Regarding the oft-repeated concerns about a gun battle in an airliner, I have two points. Firstly, the presence of armed passengers would in itself reduce the chance of an incident occuring in the first place, because potential hijackers would be aware that an airliner is now a "hard target", with rather low likelihood of success. And secondly, I'd much rather take my chances in a gunbattle in an airliner than be at the mercy of hijackers. An airplane can take a great deal of damage and still fly, as demonstrated by the number of bullet holes in some of the WWII bombers and fighters that successfully returned home.
I think that reversing the trend towards larger and larger aircraft would help. A plane that's twice the size of a 747 is a much more attractive and devastating target than, say, a 707. (The government could, I believe, properly mandate this change through the authority granted by the Commerce Clause.)
Good for you, Wildalaska. But perhaps you will think about changing your opinions down the road when you DO have something to hide. The objections to these laws are not solely about how they are being applied now; they are about how they can be applied in the future. When the TSA starts setting up roadblocks and searching cars, will you still have nothing to hide? How about when they combine that with a ban on the possession of 'assault weapons?' Or any guns at all? Will you simply toss them out and applaud the government's efforts to combat violent crime?
The income tax started out with a maximum rate of 7%. Drug prohibition began with a $1 tax required to get a license to sell narcotics. Who would have imagined in 1934 that you could eventually be jailed for over a decade for a shotgun 1/2 inch to short? These things always start small and grow - and the more they grow, the more permanent they beome. We need to stamp them out now, while we can do so.
If i was tasked with searching bags and found this id sure as hell give som major scrutiny towards the owner of such bag. And id probably be all officious and put the fear of god in him. But, in the end cut him loose without any marks on his record etc. Of course considering the qualifications for TSA work i doubt anyone even considered this course of action.
Orthonym
Member
Did THEY not formerly have a sign at airport checkpoints saying something like "You are not required to submit to search, but persons refusing to submit to search will not be admitted"? It's changed, now, though. The securitoids are Feds now and I (no lawyer) think that toggles the Fourth Amendment. (Y'know, where it says "...unreasonable searches and seizures...") Oh yeah, don't forget the Fifth:"...without due process of law;"
Maybe Dave Kopel had a better idea. In something he wrote whose currently readable location escapes me right now, he pointed out that some airlines used to offer a choice of smoking or non-smoking flights. His modest proposal was for offering armed or unarmed flights. That way, people who trusted other people more than themselves could have what they wanted, and we prudent (aka paranoid) folks could suit ourselves as well. Betcha the "armed" tickets would be cheaper!
Maybe Dave Kopel had a better idea. In something he wrote whose currently readable location escapes me right now, he pointed out that some airlines used to offer a choice of smoking or non-smoking flights. His modest proposal was for offering armed or unarmed flights. That way, people who trusted other people more than themselves could have what they wanted, and we prudent (aka paranoid) folks could suit ourselves as well. Betcha the "armed" tickets would be cheaper!
JohnBT
Member
I still say the kid decided to play with fire and he got burned. Actions frequently have consequences, don't they? He was yanked out of line for acting or actually being mentally unbalanced - or just for being plain stupid enough to taunt the screeners with rabid invective. Who knows what stunt he might have pulled on the plane? I don't and the screeners are paid to look into it and make a decision. I'm glad they did their job.
Anybody remember the signs at the airports reminding everyone not to make jokes or even mention bombs and such? These warnings were around for years before TSA.
Regarding the so-called freedom to travel...go ahead, the original settlers walked or rode everywhere and you can too without showing your papers. The government and the airlines have no obligation to provide free travel anymore than the freedom of speech requires anyone to give you free tv/radio time. You have to pay for it. You have to follow the rules of flying or risk the consequences (there's that word again) - wear seatbelts when asked, no smoking, no pinching the flight attendants, no unguided tours of the cockpit, etc.
To those who yell "YOU AIN'T SEARCHING MY STUFF" I can only say "Have a nice walk, bus ride or drive." Air travel is voluntary and boo hoo, life ain't just about what you like.
And if you drive, don't speed or run red lights. There are rules about that, too. Also, don't drink. Roadblocks for the detection of drunks are legal.
John
Anybody remember the signs at the airports reminding everyone not to make jokes or even mention bombs and such? These warnings were around for years before TSA.
Regarding the so-called freedom to travel...go ahead, the original settlers walked or rode everywhere and you can too without showing your papers. The government and the airlines have no obligation to provide free travel anymore than the freedom of speech requires anyone to give you free tv/radio time. You have to pay for it. You have to follow the rules of flying or risk the consequences (there's that word again) - wear seatbelts when asked, no smoking, no pinching the flight attendants, no unguided tours of the cockpit, etc.
To those who yell "YOU AIN'T SEARCHING MY STUFF" I can only say "Have a nice walk, bus ride or drive." Air travel is voluntary and boo hoo, life ain't just about what you like.
And if you drive, don't speed or run red lights. There are rules about that, too. Also, don't drink. Roadblocks for the detection of drunks are legal.
John
HankB
Member
Well, yes. Probably upset about the low pay, and now they have AUTHORITY and get to exert it on someone. ("Re-Spect My Au-Thor-I- Tay" like the pottymouthed kid on South Park.)
And I don't know who you've been talking to at TSA, but virtually ALL of the ones I've encountered are nowhere near retirement age, or even early retirement age, from law enforcement or anywhere else. They look like refugees from the challenging world of food service. (It took too much practice to get "Can I Biggie Size that for you?" right . . . at least in English.)
seeker_two
Member
Before TSA, you could make the arguement about "if you want to fly on MY airline, you have to submit to the screening." Security was privately-owned & managed. And you COULD choose something else.
Now, with TSA being a Federal agency in every airport, it is MANDATED by the Constitution to recognize & abide by the Constitutional limits set on ANY Fed LEO.
When the Federalization happened, I said that either TSA would be bound by the Constitutional limits set or it would have to actively violate those limits--to the delight of any civil-rights attorney. And you can see what happened...
I DO, and I WILL! I enjoy the drives where I can actually SEE this great country instead of missing its beauty at 10,000 ft. Besides, being crammed into those flying cattle cars after enduring the Federally-mandated rectal exam doesn't sound like my idea of a fun vacation. If it's your idea--different strokes..
Now, with TSA being a Federal agency in every airport, it is MANDATED by the Constitution to recognize & abide by the Constitutional limits set on ANY Fed LEO.
When the Federalization happened, I said that either TSA would be bound by the Constitutional limits set or it would have to actively violate those limits--to the delight of any civil-rights attorney. And you can see what happened...
I DO, and I WILL! I enjoy the drives where I can actually SEE this great country instead of missing its beauty at 10,000 ft. Besides, being crammed into those flying cattle cars after enduring the Federally-mandated rectal exam doesn't sound like my idea of a fun vacation. If it's your idea--different strokes..
"I got nothing to hide" is the roadsign pointing the way to hell. I've got nothing to hide when I fly either. I also have nothing to hide at my home. That doesn't mean that I want government representatives strolling in and out of my home 24 hours a day for "the security of the nation." Today it's your luggage, tomorrow it's your bedroom.
brownie0486
Member
Having read the entire thread, I can make the determination that there are those who could care less if the bags were checked and those who a vehemently against the luggage searches.
My take is this:
I have to fly to Idaho in October from New England for the Riddle or drive to that location. I will bring about 2500.00 in knives with me for this event.
If I fly, I will likely arrive sans knives after the TSA screeners open the bags and see what goodies are in them. Or, I could get pulled out of line, off the plane, etc after they find them and have to explain why I am transporting them.
I'll obviously be driving to Idaho. Picking up another Riddler in Ohio on the way and then sharing the drive and room expenses until returning in a week back to his house where I'll drive home to NE.
All this will take 12 days. If I flew it would be 6 days. That means I am spending an extra 6 days of the vacation driving so that I am armed during this time and know that the knives won't come up missing when I arrive in Idaho.
I don't have to worry about being hijacked, being questioned by idiots, being searched by the same people, having my personals gone through and then probably stolen when they see what I am transporting in the luggage.
I get to enjoy the ride with a good friend, see some of my country, travel armed and able to defend myself should the need arise, and listen to the radio/cd/tapes, etc.
Though I tend to agree that the TSA'ers won't stop a terrorist if they want to use a plane again, I am not displeased with their rummaging through luggage looking for bombs,etc. possibly being stowed away in a piece of luggage either. They may never catch something evil this way, but they certainly won't catch evil if they don't search.
As to the wife's undies being searched if we fly, well, let them handle them all they want. You would have to expect some of them will be pervs by nature and get off on that sort of thing anyway whether they were TSA fed employees or private security, I don't think you can get away from that fact any way you slice it. Now she may not like it but then if you fly, thats what you can expect or you can do like I'm about to, and drive/walk/etc in lieu of the convenience [ in time ] of flying.
The kid was being a kid. Most don't know enough about life yet to realize that action would bring the possible consequences it has in this instance. I don't think they'll do much to him except make him an example so others will see the news and not copycat this into a major problem nationwide.
It's not a question of whether you have anything to hide or not. It comes down to whether you should be subjected to searches and tighter controls relative your immediate area.
Do I like being searched? No, but like others who feel that way, I know I'm not a threat to the US citizenry. The problem arises because the TSA's/cops/etc DO NOT know who you are or what your intents may be unlike yourself. It's fear of the unknown, and as we know from our ancestry, that fear manifest itself on many ways.
We get upset at the inconvenience and even more so at the perceived intrusion into our private lives. If you are flying you are no longer in a private environ but mutually sharing space with others going the same way. I'm not sure you should expect any privacy while traveling publicly after 9-11. It just doesn't seem realistic to think you can keep any resemblance of privacy with the serious potential for another attempt to take one out of the sky by who knows what means.
Will we catch all the potentials? Of course not. Will be catch some of the potentials? Probably. Will we deter others from easily sneaking a det device into checked luggage? Maybe. One thing is clear however--if we do nothing about checking/tightening the belt being discussed here we are doomed to a repeat of 9-11. Perhaps not just like that days events but something just as nasty I'm sure.
Don't whine about your freedoms being diminished. Your rights being violated. Circumstances dictate more prudence than we had before 9-11.
We'll learn to live with those intrusions into our lives or we will eventually die from our own non-feasance addressing the issues.
We live in changing times. Thats no different than my dad lived through, ort his dad live through before him. Times change, society changes with it or gets left by the wayside.
I'm not happy about the way things are on this issue or by what caused all this to change our lives. The fact remains it's a new world after 9-11, and certainly a different USA since then. We adapt or we cease to exist. Thats the nature of natural selection since the first microbe pulled itself up and out of the oceans and started to adapt to it's new world.
Don't whine, suck it up and move forward folks. Whether I or any here like it or not, we'll be living with this a long time, better get used to it and adapt.
My adaptation is to drive myself and take the extra days necessary to get where I'm going. It's only an incovenience if you make it one, otherwise it's an adventure.
Brownie
My take is this:
I have to fly to Idaho in October from New England for the Riddle or drive to that location. I will bring about 2500.00 in knives with me for this event.
If I fly, I will likely arrive sans knives after the TSA screeners open the bags and see what goodies are in them. Or, I could get pulled out of line, off the plane, etc after they find them and have to explain why I am transporting them.
I'll obviously be driving to Idaho. Picking up another Riddler in Ohio on the way and then sharing the drive and room expenses until returning in a week back to his house where I'll drive home to NE.
All this will take 12 days. If I flew it would be 6 days. That means I am spending an extra 6 days of the vacation driving so that I am armed during this time and know that the knives won't come up missing when I arrive in Idaho.
I don't have to worry about being hijacked, being questioned by idiots, being searched by the same people, having my personals gone through and then probably stolen when they see what I am transporting in the luggage.
I get to enjoy the ride with a good friend, see some of my country, travel armed and able to defend myself should the need arise, and listen to the radio/cd/tapes, etc.
Though I tend to agree that the TSA'ers won't stop a terrorist if they want to use a plane again, I am not displeased with their rummaging through luggage looking for bombs,etc. possibly being stowed away in a piece of luggage either. They may never catch something evil this way, but they certainly won't catch evil if they don't search.
As to the wife's undies being searched if we fly, well, let them handle them all they want. You would have to expect some of them will be pervs by nature and get off on that sort of thing anyway whether they were TSA fed employees or private security, I don't think you can get away from that fact any way you slice it. Now she may not like it but then if you fly, thats what you can expect or you can do like I'm about to, and drive/walk/etc in lieu of the convenience [ in time ] of flying.
The kid was being a kid. Most don't know enough about life yet to realize that action would bring the possible consequences it has in this instance. I don't think they'll do much to him except make him an example so others will see the news and not copycat this into a major problem nationwide.
It's not a question of whether you have anything to hide or not. It comes down to whether you should be subjected to searches and tighter controls relative your immediate area.
Do I like being searched? No, but like others who feel that way, I know I'm not a threat to the US citizenry. The problem arises because the TSA's/cops/etc DO NOT know who you are or what your intents may be unlike yourself. It's fear of the unknown, and as we know from our ancestry, that fear manifest itself on many ways.
We get upset at the inconvenience and even more so at the perceived intrusion into our private lives. If you are flying you are no longer in a private environ but mutually sharing space with others going the same way. I'm not sure you should expect any privacy while traveling publicly after 9-11. It just doesn't seem realistic to think you can keep any resemblance of privacy with the serious potential for another attempt to take one out of the sky by who knows what means.
Will we catch all the potentials? Of course not. Will be catch some of the potentials? Probably. Will we deter others from easily sneaking a det device into checked luggage? Maybe. One thing is clear however--if we do nothing about checking/tightening the belt being discussed here we are doomed to a repeat of 9-11. Perhaps not just like that days events but something just as nasty I'm sure.
Don't whine about your freedoms being diminished. Your rights being violated. Circumstances dictate more prudence than we had before 9-11.
We'll learn to live with those intrusions into our lives or we will eventually die from our own non-feasance addressing the issues.
We live in changing times. Thats no different than my dad lived through, ort his dad live through before him. Times change, society changes with it or gets left by the wayside.
I'm not happy about the way things are on this issue or by what caused all this to change our lives. The fact remains it's a new world after 9-11, and certainly a different USA since then. We adapt or we cease to exist. Thats the nature of natural selection since the first microbe pulled itself up and out of the oceans and started to adapt to it's new world.
Don't whine, suck it up and move forward folks. Whether I or any here like it or not, we'll be living with this a long time, better get used to it and adapt.
My adaptation is to drive myself and take the extra days necessary to get where I'm going. It's only an incovenience if you make it one, otherwise it's an adventure.
Brownie
seeker_two
Member
We're on the same wavelength here...
THIS is where you start to worry me. Hitler, Mao, and Stalin used similar "justifications" to institute their policies. And we know what those results were. And I DON'T want to see it here...
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller
db
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me. - Pastor Martin Niemöller
db
brownie0486
Member
My grandfather had more freedom than my dad.
My dad had more freedom than I.
I'll have more freedom than the next generation.
It's a fact of life, the US can not live in the 1800's or 1900's as some of us would like to see. We have been shoved into the 21st century by our enemies abroad and from within.
If we didn't have to be PC, we might still enjoy the days when we had no cares. Technology has advanced the world immensely, but it has also made it smaller. We are no longer isolated by two great bodies of water as in the olden days.
We learn to adapt or we cease to exist. The way of nature. I don't like it, but I will learn to adapt and live with it.
I don;t thionk the feears of searching your home will materialize anytime soon, if ever, but one never knows. More states are issuing CCW's than are taking the right away. Some thing s will be worse, but some will be better.
It's a compromise we must be willing to accept at least partially for the sake of the general public [ sheeple ] who do not have the means to protect themselves or even care to try.
No matter what happens, I'll survive on instinct and training as in days gone by. My father used to say " I never thought I'd see the day when ----[ fill in the blank ] "
Well, now I say the same thing about paying for water, etc.
Should have bought that natural spring I used to fish 40 years ago.
Brownie
My dad had more freedom than I.
I'll have more freedom than the next generation.
It's a fact of life, the US can not live in the 1800's or 1900's as some of us would like to see. We have been shoved into the 21st century by our enemies abroad and from within.
If we didn't have to be PC, we might still enjoy the days when we had no cares. Technology has advanced the world immensely, but it has also made it smaller. We are no longer isolated by two great bodies of water as in the olden days.
We learn to adapt or we cease to exist. The way of nature. I don't like it, but I will learn to adapt and live with it.
I don;t thionk the feears of searching your home will materialize anytime soon, if ever, but one never knows. More states are issuing CCW's than are taking the right away. Some thing s will be worse, but some will be better.
It's a compromise we must be willing to accept at least partially for the sake of the general public [ sheeple ] who do not have the means to protect themselves or even care to try.
No matter what happens, I'll survive on instinct and training as in days gone by. My father used to say " I never thought I'd see the day when ----[ fill in the blank ] "
Well, now I say the same thing about paying for water, etc.
Should have bought that natural spring I used to fish 40 years ago.
Brownie
Cosmoline
Member
The average TSA screener makes around $22K. You really think folks go into these jobs for some kind of power trip?"
No, I think they get them to line their pockets with valuables they take from our luggage. They are worthless drones, all of them. And yes, the skies would be MUCH safer if they fired the entire mass of them and tore down the x-ray stations and metal detectors, then let us ride with CCW's.
Another point: If any one of the Founding Fathers were asked to partially disrobe or take off his shoes and be patted down, he would not only object, he would probably demand satisfaction the old fashioned way. What TSA does IS a violation of our rights in the most fundamental way. Government is not to lay hand on us, and we are allowed to be secure in our persons and possessions.
No, I think they get them to line their pockets with valuables they take from our luggage. They are worthless drones, all of them. And yes, the skies would be MUCH safer if they fired the entire mass of them and tore down the x-ray stations and metal detectors, then let us ride with CCW's.
Another point: If any one of the Founding Fathers were asked to partially disrobe or take off his shoes and be patted down, he would not only object, he would probably demand satisfaction the old fashioned way. What TSA does IS a violation of our rights in the most fundamental way. Government is not to lay hand on us, and we are allowed to be secure in our persons and possessions.
Orthonym
Member
Ah, yes, the overloaded lifeboat analogy....
You know the one I mean: Think Bounty, Bligh and 3 inches of freeboard. The boat officer saying, " YOU! SIT DOWN RIGHT NOW! Sorry, ma'am, but if you stand up and stretch again without leave I WILL shoot you!" Yes, necessary in that situation, I just hope and believe things aren't quite that bad yet.
Oh, wait, I remember that people have already been forbidden to stand and stretch in airliners a few times.
You know the one I mean: Think Bounty, Bligh and 3 inches of freeboard. The boat officer saying, " YOU! SIT DOWN RIGHT NOW! Sorry, ma'am, but if you stand up and stretch again without leave I WILL shoot you!" Yes, necessary in that situation, I just hope and believe things aren't quite that bad yet.
Oh, wait, I remember that people have already been forbidden to stand and stretch in airliners a few times.
seeker_two
Member
NOW we're deep into "shivers-down-the-spine" territory...
brownie: I understand what you're trying to say---but I have the fear that your next post on this topic will incorporate the phrase "...for the children"...
rrader
member
Cosmoline:
No they are not all "worthless drones" or theives as you suggest.
Your worthless comment is one of great snobbery and ignorance.
The skies would be safer without them? No, we'd just have more 9/11 style attacks..
No they are not all "worthless drones" or theives as you suggest.
Your worthless comment is one of great snobbery and ignorance.
The skies would be safer without them? No, we'd just have more 9/11 style attacks..
Riiiiiight ... because TSA pseudo-police digging through checked undies and personal effects would have stopped a few guys with tiny knives from taking over a few airplanes.
Not a chance, buddy. Terrorists are better at adapting than societies. They want to blow something up, and they'll find a way to do it. They might even play by the rules right up until they start killing people (see: 9/11). TSA would have been, and currently is impotent and unable to stop a dedicated group of attackers willing to die.
brownie0486
Member
seeker_two :
I don't have any, don't want any, and can't stand most others kids as well. Even my nephews and nieces are only tolerated mildly until they become adults.
With me, it's never for the children.
Brownie
I don't have any, don't want any, and can't stand most others kids as well. Even my nephews and nieces are only tolerated mildly until they become adults.
With me, it's never for the children.
Brownie
Aside from the principles involved, I've been very pleasantly surprised at the conduct of the TSA folks. As far as courtesy and professionalism, they've been a big improvement in many airports. (I fly a lot.) I suspect MOST of them are great people. I am sure that SOME of them are pilfering luggage. (That's just based on a knowledge of human nature.) I just haven't had a problem with them so far.
Having said that...
That's probably true. Among those who love freedom will be a few who fail to balance that with a love of justice and respect for human life.
From a subset of TSA screeners, and those who think this kid got what he deserved, will come the Brown Shirts of New Amerika. Alas, it's not IF anymore, it's WHEN, because too many either refuse, or (I guess) are just too stupid to learn from history.
This isn't about a snot nosed kid. (Yes, he's a snot nosed kid. If he were mine, he'd get his butt warmed.)
It's about abuse of power. If some screener can't see that note for what it is, and can't tell that a note like that represents NO threat, he (or she) has no business at all being in such a position of power. And anyone who thinks otherwise is not qualified to vote.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin.
And I might add, eventually they will have NEITHER.
Having said that...
That's probably true. Among those who love freedom will be a few who fail to balance that with a love of justice and respect for human life.
From a subset of TSA screeners, and those who think this kid got what he deserved, will come the Brown Shirts of New Amerika. Alas, it's not IF anymore, it's WHEN, because too many either refuse, or (I guess) are just too stupid to learn from history.
This isn't about a snot nosed kid. (Yes, he's a snot nosed kid. If he were mine, he'd get his butt warmed.)
It's about abuse of power. If some screener can't see that note for what it is, and can't tell that a note like that represents NO threat, he (or she) has no business at all being in such a position of power. And anyone who thinks otherwise is not qualified to vote.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin.
And I might add, eventually they will have NEITHER.
seeker_two
Member
!!!TOLD YOU SO!!!
j/k
- Status