3 ms·

His point isn't particularly controversial, air security has gone too far. But he was looking for trouble by wearing that shirt, in his words mocking the "over

by rm999 14y ago

His point isn't particularly controversial, air security has gone too far. But he was looking for trouble by wearing that shirt, in his words mocking the "over-reactions to terrorism by the general public". He comes off as an angry person who doesn't sympathize with the genuine (and obvious) fears people may have. Ultimately he weakens his own point by acting so ridiculous; he gave the TSA and Delta a reason to mess with him.

grecy 14y ago
> he gave the TSA a reason to mess with him. So much for free speech.
- benhoyt 14y ago
  There's a time and a place for everything, including speaking freely. As another example, the time to be vocal about your disagreement with someone's policies is not by picketing their funeral.
  - swdunlop 14y ago
    Wearing a sarcastic t-shirt is equivalent to the Westboro Baptist Church protestors trying to shout down a funeral?
    - benhoyt 14y ago
      Not equivalent, but parallel -- wearing a T-shirt joking about killing and bombs on a plane is equally out of place.
mikeash 14y ago
Whenever I'm subjected to TSA, I'm an angry person and I don't sympathize at all with the fears people may have. Genuine though they may be, they are ridiculous. You are safer flying on an airliner than you are sitting in your living room, and that's not the TSA's doing. I shouldn't have to respect people's ridiculous and baseless fears in order to exercise my right to travel.
mturmon 14y ago
You can wear the shirt, but you can't be surprised when they single you out for more security checks. (Recognition and response to specific potential threats is what critics of "security theater" want, anyway.) Once you get the check, which was not unexpected, you should expect that if you are perceived as smarting off, then the situation will get worse. Since they have all the power, it can get arbitrarily bad. Given that this could have been foreseen, expressions of surprise and incredulity in the post don't make sense. There is a place for this kind of protest. But if you want to advance the cause of freedom of expression, you have to be disciplined when the process you helped start starts unfolding. Do you have a strategy in this protest, or are you acting out feelings about authority figures? If you're just acting out feelings, you're playing into their hands. The guard will be "stern daddy" (he took this job to play that role) and you will be "misunderstood child." Everyone cries in the end, but nothing changes. * I went to a how-to on public protests ran by an AIDS activist who was one of the key organizers of many ACT-UP protests in NYC in the late 80s. The particular protest that he discussed was the 1989 demonstration in St. Patrick's Cathedral in NYC, which made the national news, and has been a touchstone since (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_Coalition_to_Unleash_Power#.22Stop_the_Church.22 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_Coalition_to_Unleash_Power...). According to the activist, this was a protest in which the personal feelings/animosity of many activists there towards the church, made the entire action not as productive as it should have been, and just generally a messy affair. (Protesters breaking communion wafers, etc. -- means nothing to me, but to a believer, it's a big deal.) It's a complex topic. I came out of the workshop with a greater appreciation of how much focus and discipline it takes to really bring about change.
- mikeash 14y ago
  "You can wear the shirt, but you can't be surprised when they single you out for more security checks. (Recognition and response to specific potential threats is what critics of "security theater" want, anyway.)" What? No. No, no, no. What we want is recognition and response to actual threats, not knee-jerk responses to anything unusual or non-conformist. A shirt like this doesn't indicate a threat. Smart security would not single it out.
  - 14y ago
lazyjones 14y ago
In other words, he trolled them successfully and they displayed the unprofessional, dumb conduct he expected. I'll give him the benefit of doubt and assume he was not trying to provoke anyone, even though he could have expected the paranoid reactions of some passengers (probably a small minority that needs professional help, let's be honest).

by rm999 14y ago

grecy 14y ago

> he gave the TSA a reason to mess with him. So much for free speech.

benhoyt 14y ago
There's a time and a place for everything, including speaking freely. As another example, the time to be vocal about your disagreement with someone's policies is not by picketing their funeral.
- swdunlop 14y ago
  Wearing a sarcastic t-shirt is equivalent to the Westboro Baptist Church protestors trying to shout down a funeral?
  - benhoyt 14y ago
    Not equivalent, but parallel -- wearing a T-shirt joking about killing and bombs on a plane is equally out of place.

mikeash 14y ago

Whenever I'm subjected to TSA, I'm an angry person and I don't sympathize at all with the fears people may have. Genuine though they may be, they are ridiculous. You are safer flying on an airliner than you are sitting in your living room, and that's not the TSA's doing. I shouldn't have to respect people's ridiculous and baseless fears in order to exercise my right to travel.

mturmon 14y ago

You can wear the shirt, but you can't be surprised when they single you out for more security checks. (Recognition and response to specific potential threats is what critics of "security theater" want, anyway.) Once you get the check, which was not unexpected, you should expect that if you are perceived as smarting off, then the situation will get worse. Since they have all the power, it can get arbitrarily bad. Given that this could have been foreseen, expressions of surprise and incredulity in the post don't make sense. There is a place for this kind of protest. But if you want to advance the cause of freedom of expression, you have to be disciplined when the process you helped start starts unfolding. Do you have a strategy in this protest, or are you acting out feelings about authority figures? If you're just acting out feelings, you're playing into their hands. The guard will be "stern daddy" (he took this job to play that role) and you will be "misunderstood child." Everyone cries in the end, but nothing changes. * I went to a how-to on public protests ran by an AIDS activist who was one of the key organizers of many ACT-UP protests in NYC in the late 80s. The particular protest that he discussed was the 1989 demonstration in St. Patrick's Cathedral in NYC, which made the national news, and has been a touchstone since (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_Coalition_to_Unleash_Power#.22Stop_the_Church.22 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_Coalition_to_Unleash_Power...). According to the activist, this was a protest in which the personal feelings/animosity of many activists there towards the church, made the entire action not as productive as it should have been, and just generally a messy affair. (Protesters breaking communion wafers, etc. -- means nothing to me, but to a believer, it's a big deal.) It's a complex topic. I came out of the workshop with a greater appreciation of how much focus and discipline it takes to really bring about change.

mikeash 14y ago
"You can wear the shirt, but you can't be surprised when they single you out for more security checks. (Recognition and response to specific potential threats is what critics of "security theater" want, anyway.)" What? No. No, no, no. What we want is recognition and response to actual threats, not knee-jerk responses to anything unusual or non-conformist. A shirt like this doesn't indicate a threat. Smart security would not single it out.
- 14y ago

lazyjones 14y ago

In other words, he trolled them successfully and they displayed the unprofessional, dumb conduct he expected. I'll give him the benefit of doubt and assume he was not trying to provoke anyone, even though he could have expected the paranoid reactions of some passengers (probably a small minority that needs professional help, let's be honest).