3 ms·

Here's an idea: why don't they pick on people who have actually done something wrong, and then use that wrongdoing to put legal pressure on them? Justice is b

by dkarl 16y ago

Here's an idea: why don't they pick on people who have actually done something wrong, and then use that wrongdoing to put legal pressure on them? Justice is built into the system: do something wrong, and you'll have an unpleasant experience. Don't do anything wrong, and you won't be yelled at and intimidated and possibly made to miss your flight. In addition, instead of using empty threats and just hoping that a criminal or trained terrorist will be so unnerved by your bullying that they voluntarily incriminate themselves, you will have a credible threat of consequences and therefore a real incentive for them to cooperate.

pbhjpbhj 16y ago
>you will have a credible threat of consequences and therefore a real incentive for them to cooperate This will definitely work against anyone who is expecting to die in the process of carrying terrorist activities. Don't ban guns from schools, just tell them to play nice or they'll get detention.
- pyre 16y ago
  Most of the people willing to die in the process of a terrorist attack, aren't looking towards consequences (i.e. they won't deal with any after they are dead), but they will have to deal with consequences if they are imprisoned before they can carry out their attack.
- dkarl 16y ago
  This will definitely work against anyone who is expecting to die in the process of carrying terrorist activities. Ah, I see, so we should break them by sweating them over a water bottle that's slightly too big. Really, if the terrorists are too smart and too hardened to be scared by real consequences, can we shake them with groundless harassment? If not, then what's the point of being a jerk to people who merely have "suspicious" cultural allegiances (e.g., having a book about Islam and having some funny souvenirs) and who break minor rules in ways that clearly don't pose a threat? It isn't some clever attempt to smoke out terrorists. They're policing our respect for their paranoia and profiling-based hot buttons. Showing a flagrant interest in Islam (even one that doesn't show any seriousness, as in this case) is, to them, the same as singing "Ba ba ba, ba Barbara Ann" in the security line -- it's a really rude abuse of their poor nerves! -- except that for some weird reason it isn't against the law. The main thing is for travelers to go out of their way to avoid making them nervous, and to be apologetic if you actually do make them nervous. Then they know your heart is in the right place. This guy could have put his "Muslim paraphernalia" in his checked baggage, or just left it at home. The fact that he didn't showed disrespect for their prejudices and their blood pressure. That's why they yelled at him; to restore his respect for their authority. The bottom line is that the bullet is the only thing he was carrying that was actually an infringement of the rules, but they mostly yelled at him for his interest in Islam and a few Islamic countries. And they actually asked him if he found Pakistanis friendly. Rudeness and prejudice -- our greatest tools in the fight against terrorism!

by dkarl 16y ago

pbhjpbhj 16y ago

>you will have a credible threat of consequences and therefore a real incentive for them to cooperate This will definitely work against anyone who is expecting to die in the process of carrying terrorist activities. Don't ban guns from schools, just tell them to play nice or they'll get detention.

pyre 16y ago
Most of the people willing to die in the process of a terrorist attack, aren't looking towards consequences (i.e. they won't deal with any after they are dead), but they will have to deal with consequences if they are imprisoned before they can carry out their attack.
dkarl 16y ago
This will definitely work against anyone who is expecting to die in the process of carrying terrorist activities. Ah, I see, so we should break them by sweating them over a water bottle that's slightly too big. Really, if the terrorists are too smart and too hardened to be scared by real consequences, can we shake them with groundless harassment? If not, then what's the point of being a jerk to people who merely have "suspicious" cultural allegiances (e.g., having a book about Islam and having some funny souvenirs) and who break minor rules in ways that clearly don't pose a threat? It isn't some clever attempt to smoke out terrorists. They're policing our respect for their paranoia and profiling-based hot buttons. Showing a flagrant interest in Islam (even one that doesn't show any seriousness, as in this case) is, to them, the same as singing "Ba ba ba, ba Barbara Ann" in the security line -- it's a really rude abuse of their poor nerves! -- except that for some weird reason it isn't against the law. The main thing is for travelers to go out of their way to avoid making them nervous, and to be apologetic if you actually do make them nervous. Then they know your heart is in the right place. This guy could have put his "Muslim paraphernalia" in his checked baggage, or just left it at home. The fact that he didn't showed disrespect for their prejudices and their blood pressure. That's why they yelled at him; to restore his respect for their authority. The bottom line is that the bullet is the only thing he was carrying that was actually an infringement of the rules, but they mostly yelled at him for his interest in Islam and a few Islamic countries. And they actually asked him if he found Pakistanis friendly. Rudeness and prejudice -- our greatest tools in the fight against terrorism!