5 ms·

I think most people agree here that the TSA should be ended altogether and we should return to metal detectors if anything. How do the american people make thi

I think most people agree here that the TSA should be ended altogether and we should return to metal detectors if anything. How do the american people make this a reality? What steps can be taken to motivate our political leaders to support such a change? As of right now, it seems like political suicide for anyone to politically support such a thing, as they would surely be painted as a terrorist sympathizer or some such.

joesmo 10y ago
This is about as possible as ending the war on drugs was in the 80's. Just because something is reasonable and makes sense doesn't mean it is possible to implement politically. In fact, I'd say an inverse relationship exists between common sense and what's implementable politically in the US. You simply face too much fear and stupidity.
- rayiner 10y ago
  I think "fear and stupidity" is overly simplistic. People overestimate how worthwhile it is to address low-probability, high-consequence threats. Everyone. I know plenty of rational people that rail about terrorism being a low-probability event who would freak out if they saw a pregnant woman have a glass of wine. Or saw a kid playing unattended at a playground. Or someone feeding a kid formula. Or GMOs. Or whatever--almost all of the highly educated people I know have one or more things that they believe to be risky that is not supportable based on hard evidence. It's universal. Right now the wife and I are in the market for a new toddler-hauler. I want to buy two-years used, and ideally American, but I cannot get over the fact that only a handful of recent models, none American, get a "good" rating in the new IIHS small-offset crash tests. I know that a Ford made in 2015 is perfectly safe, but I'm going to spend a bunch more money on a new 2016 Honda because I'm irrational.
  - joesmo 10y ago
    If you didn't have irrational fear, the TSA would not have its current powers. If you didn't have so much stupidity, the TSA might manage more than a 5% success rate. Yes, there are other elements like hate which also come into play here, but there certainly is no element of rational thought that goes into these types of laws. Yes, people have their biases and individual quirks, but it's certainly possibly to come up with and implement a system that doesn't simply pander to people's fears and plays on their stupidity. There's just no interest in such a system from either the people who are in control or the scared masses who are afraid of terrorism or other scaremongering tactics practiced by the former set of people.
mikestew 10y ago
How do the american people make this a reality? They don't want to make it a reality. You want to make it a reality, I want to make it a reality, but the majority of your friends, neighbors, and fellow citizens don't. As of right now, it seems like political suicide for anyone to politically support such a thing See? Answered your own question. If the majority of Americans felt as you do, it wouldn't be political suicide.
Smushman 10y ago
The only thing that ends anything the government does, is slow, steady, continuous pressure. Eventually someone who wants to be elected will grab on to the idea and make it a tenet of their platform. This is how anything ends in government that can't be proven (by proven I mean with loss of lives or some other very serious consequence, not simply proven ineffective) to be more harm than good.

joesmo 10y ago

This is about as possible as ending the war on drugs was in the 80's. Just because something is reasonable and makes sense doesn't mean it is possible to implement politically. In fact, I'd say an inverse relationship exists between common sense and what's implementable politically in the US. You simply face too much fear and stupidity.

rayiner 10y ago
I think "fear and stupidity" is overly simplistic. People overestimate how worthwhile it is to address low-probability, high-consequence threats. Everyone. I know plenty of rational people that rail about terrorism being a low-probability event who would freak out if they saw a pregnant woman have a glass of wine. Or saw a kid playing unattended at a playground. Or someone feeding a kid formula. Or GMOs. Or whatever--almost all of the highly educated people I know have one or more things that they believe to be risky that is not supportable based on hard evidence. It's universal. Right now the wife and I are in the market for a new toddler-hauler. I want to buy two-years used, and ideally American, but I cannot get over the fact that only a handful of recent models, none American, get a "good" rating in the new IIHS small-offset crash tests. I know that a Ford made in 2015 is perfectly safe, but I'm going to spend a bunch more money on a new 2016 Honda because I'm irrational.
- joesmo 10y ago
  If you didn't have irrational fear, the TSA would not have its current powers. If you didn't have so much stupidity, the TSA might manage more than a 5% success rate. Yes, there are other elements like hate which also come into play here, but there certainly is no element of rational thought that goes into these types of laws. Yes, people have their biases and individual quirks, but it's certainly possibly to come up with and implement a system that doesn't simply pander to people's fears and plays on their stupidity. There's just no interest in such a system from either the people who are in control or the scared masses who are afraid of terrorism or other scaremongering tactics practiced by the former set of people.

mikestew 10y ago

How do the american people make this a reality? They don't want to make it a reality. You want to make it a reality, I want to make it a reality, but the majority of your friends, neighbors, and fellow citizens don't. As of right now, it seems like political suicide for anyone to politically support such a thing See? Answered your own question. If the majority of Americans felt as you do, it wouldn't be political suicide.

Smushman 10y ago

The only thing that ends anything the government does, is slow, steady, continuous pressure. Eventually someone who wants to be elected will grab on to the idea and make it a tenet of their platform. This is how anything ends in government that can't be proven (by proven I mean with loss of lives or some other very serious consequence, not simply proven ineffective) to be more harm than good.