6 ms·

The situation with TSA is becoming more farcical by the week. I keep waiting for some grownup to stand up and put some limits on what's acceptable for them to

The situation with TSA is becoming more farcical by the week. I keep waiting for some grownup to stand up and put some limits on what's acceptable for them to do, but then I realize that there basically is no limit. Nobody wants to be the person that stops this runaway train. It's enough to make me seriously consider whether I want to use commercial air travel again.

StavrosK 16y ago
Yeah, but what are you going to do if you're going overseas? Take a ship? :/
psadauskas 16y ago
I would love to stand up to it, but I'd really just rather get to my vacation place. If it didn't cost several hundred dollars for a plane ticket to get to that point, I would just drive down to the airport and do it. I guess we could all print fake boarding passes, though.
- mixmax 16y ago
  They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up. Martin Niemöller
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    That's a quote about discrimination. I don't see how it applies; we are all being discriminated against equally in this case.
    - mixmax 16y ago
      It's a quote about standing up to tyranny, and the fact that if you don't speak up when someone else is discriminated against you may be next in line. I think it applies very well in this case.
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
      - sliverstorm 16y ago
        Yes, but it all hinges on when they 'discriminate against someone else'. They are discriminating against EVERYONE, is my point. But oh well.
        Dove 16y ago
        The 'someone else' is air travellers. When a major terrorist plot succeeds using a car, cell phone, or computer, a different group will suffer. The question at hand is, "What is acceptable in the name of defending ourselves against terrorism?" And "How effective do these measures have to be to be worth the tradeoff?" and "Who is accountable for measuring and deciding that?" It makes sense to make a principled case even if the problem currently limited to air travellers. If "oversight is unnecessary, just do whatever you think will keep people safe" gets enshrined in popular opinion, it's going to be ugly when they get to the internet.
        gizmomagico 16y ago
        "How effective do these measures have to be to be worth the tradeoff?" More effective than "security theater".
        Dove 16y ago
        If only someone were accountable for measuring that . . .
      - hurfadurf 16y ago
        It's a quote about slippery slopes that uses discrimination as an example. As is popular with that quote, we could adapt it into something a bit more applicable: They first made us run our shoes through the X-Ray machine, and I complied because it wasn't that big a deal. Then, they installed the full-body scanners, and I complied because I just wanted to get home for Christmas. Then, they started requiring social security numbers when buying plane tickets. Then, they began keeping all air travellers' fingerprints and retina scans on file... The question is not against whom they're discriminating (clearly, that's not applicable in this case), it's to what length they (and, by extension, we) are willing to go.
- sprout 16y ago
  >I guess we could all print fake boarding passes, though. That would actually be really effective. What's a good upcoming holiday to pull that as an act of civil disobedience? Thanksgiving? Thanksgiving might be an ideal day to reassert our belief in freedom as a people. Not flag-waving, not heavily political, just stopping by the airport to wish our loved ones off with a fake boarding pass. And refusing the scanner.
tomjen3 16y ago
You know, you are an adult know - you are the person who should stand up to them (I won't, I don't care to fly)
anigbrowl 16y ago
British Airways chief exec Martin Broughton seems to qualify: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5j8a4CSYFbrbwaZQDHCCfPtBOL3_A?docId=N0000121288142455286A http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5j8a4C...
- gaius 16y ago
  The guys at BA have been kicking ass recently. Remember that ash cloud that grounded every plane in Europe? Willie Walsh personally went up in a 747 to prove it was actually safe to fly in. That's like the CEO of BP pulling on his gloves and sorting the leaky rig out personally.
mortenjorck 16y ago
I would love to make an informed decision at the ballot box next Tuesday based on candidates' positions on this issue, but alas it seems they've been a bit too busy talking about each others' sex lives to get to it.

StavrosK 16y ago

Yeah, but what are you going to do if you're going overseas? Take a ship? :/

psadauskas 16y ago

I would love to stand up to it, but I'd really just rather get to my vacation place. If it didn't cost several hundred dollars for a plane ticket to get to that point, I would just drive down to the airport and do it. I guess we could all print fake boarding passes, though.

mixmax 16y ago
They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up. Martin Niemöller
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  That's a quote about discrimination. I don't see how it applies; we are all being discriminated against equally in this case.
  - mixmax 16y ago
    It's a quote about standing up to tyranny, and the fact that if you don't speak up when someone else is discriminated against you may be next in line. I think it applies very well in this case.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - sliverstorm 16y ago
      Yes, but it all hinges on when they 'discriminate against someone else'. They are discriminating against EVERYONE, is my point. But oh well.
      - Dove 16y ago
        The 'someone else' is air travellers. When a major terrorist plot succeeds using a car, cell phone, or computer, a different group will suffer. The question at hand is, "What is acceptable in the name of defending ourselves against terrorism?" And "How effective do these measures have to be to be worth the tradeoff?" and "Who is accountable for measuring and deciding that?" It makes sense to make a principled case even if the problem currently limited to air travellers. If "oversight is unnecessary, just do whatever you think will keep people safe" gets enshrined in popular opinion, it's going to be ugly when they get to the internet.
        gizmomagico 16y ago
        "How effective do these measures have to be to be worth the tradeoff?" More effective than "security theater".
        Dove 16y ago
        If only someone were accountable for measuring that . . .
    - hurfadurf 16y ago
      It's a quote about slippery slopes that uses discrimination as an example. As is popular with that quote, we could adapt it into something a bit more applicable: They first made us run our shoes through the X-Ray machine, and I complied because it wasn't that big a deal. Then, they installed the full-body scanners, and I complied because I just wanted to get home for Christmas. Then, they started requiring social security numbers when buying plane tickets. Then, they began keeping all air travellers' fingerprints and retina scans on file... The question is not against whom they're discriminating (clearly, that's not applicable in this case), it's to what length they (and, by extension, we) are willing to go.
sprout 16y ago
>I guess we could all print fake boarding passes, though. That would actually be really effective. What's a good upcoming holiday to pull that as an act of civil disobedience? Thanksgiving? Thanksgiving might be an ideal day to reassert our belief in freedom as a people. Not flag-waving, not heavily political, just stopping by the airport to wish our loved ones off with a fake boarding pass. And refusing the scanner.

tomjen3 16y ago

You know, you are an adult know - you are the person who should stand up to them (I won't, I don't care to fly)

anigbrowl 16y ago

British Airways chief exec Martin Broughton seems to qualify: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5j8a4CSYFbrbwaZQDHCCfPtBOL3_A?docId=N0000121288142455286A http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5j8a4C...

gaius 16y ago
The guys at BA have been kicking ass recently. Remember that ash cloud that grounded every plane in Europe? Willie Walsh personally went up in a 747 to prove it was actually safe to fly in. That's like the CEO of BP pulling on his gloves and sorting the leaky rig out personally.

mortenjorck 16y ago

I would love to make an informed decision at the ballot box next Tuesday based on candidates' positions on this issue, but alas it seems they've been a bit too busy talking about each others' sex lives to get to it.