Airport Pat-Downs: TSA Says it Can Fine You for Backing Out

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

308shooter

Sharpshooter
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Messages
442
Reaction score
1
Location
Tulsa
The only terrorism in this world is from our own government and their is no need to treat citizens like cattle. I refuse to fly or have any association with those porno pedophiles child porn lovers ever. They only want the information about you for FUSION CENTERS google it....
 

Dale00

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
7,601
Reaction score
4,222
Location
Oklahoma
Profiling is not the answer and to think so is incredibly closed minded.

Perhaps it comes down to the definition of profiling. I'd call it any behavior or other factor that causes an individual to be in a "high threat group."

Traveling to Pakistan for an extended period does appear to be a factor - lots of terrorist training camps there, I believe.

Like it or not, being a Muslim male of a certain age makes it more likely that you are a terrorist. This is not the same thing as hating Muslims.

You may be thinking that that terrorist planners will simply use more western looking people or women or someone else outside the current profile. I could argue that either way.

..time to hit the hay if I'm going to be able the cook that turkey tomorrow. Have a good one.
 

deja

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
269
Reaction score
0
Location
Norman
It's not like its a big secret that you risk being patted down if you fly. If you aren't comfortable with being frisked, don't fly. It really is that simple.

This is both an absurd, and a very dangerous attitude.

Is this your response as well to the wiretapping fiasco? "If you don't like it, don't talk on the phone; meet in person".

Given Napolitano's discussion of the same screening at subways and bus stations, a sane person might question what they DON'T want to grope you for? Keep in mind: most people's property is ringed by publicly owned roads. Most of us can't go much of anywhere without crossing a public road.

Would it be justifiable, and understandable, for our ever-more-invasive government to say "well, you can't get on public roads without a thorough, invasive, and humiliating search of both your vehicle and your person"? After all, if you don't like it, don't use public roads.

Right? That sound logical? (hint: it's the same logic we're using to justify invading passengers at this very moment)
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
13,138
Reaction score
594
Location
Tecumseh
This is both an absurd, and a very dangerous attitude.

Is this your response as well to the wiretapping fiasco? "If you don't like it, don't talk on the phone; meet in person".

Given Napolitano's discussion of the same screening at subways and bus stations, a sane person might question what they DON'T want to grope you for? Keep in mind: most people's property is ringed by publicly owned roads. Most of us can't go much of anywhere without crossing a public road.

Would it be justifiable, and understandable, for our ever-more-invasive government to say "well, you can't get on public roads without a thorough, invasive, and humiliating search of both your vehicle and your person"? After all, if you don't like it, don't use public roads.

Right? That sound logical? (hint: it's the same logic we're using to justify invading passengers at this very moment)

I think this might be another one of those save the whale threads.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom