4 ms·

>If an airline can't differentiate between a teenager goofing around and a credible threat, then that's the airline's fault. I don't really want the airline ma

>If an airline can't differentiate between a teenager goofing around and a credible threat, then that's the airline's fault. I don't really want the airline making that assessment because they don't have the people/experience/knowledge/training/ability to accurately assess that threat. I would rather them make the time-wasting call to the FBI and have the FBI on record and clear it. The situation is dumb, but sometimes you have to follow procedure for dumb situations. It's easier to cover your ass than change our litigious and terrorism-fearing society, so while I agree that it shouldn't be necessary, it unfortunately is. That said, AA's twitter response was dumb and they'd be dumber if 'respond publicly to any threats' was the status-quo.

baddox 13y ago
> I don't really want the airline making that assessment because they don't have the people/experience/knowledge/training/ability to accurately assess that threat. Is it really that hard of an assessment to make? Is the threat from a Twitter account? Yes? Okay, is there any reason to think the Twitter account is controlled by someone with the intention or ability to carry out an attack? No? Okay then.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- jebblue 13y ago
  >> is there any reason to think the Twitter account is controlled by someone with the intention or ability to carry out an attack? You can't know that, that's why it's not OK and it's not legal. A threat is a threat. OK then.
- gagaga 13y ago
  >Okay, is there any reason to think the Twitter account is controlled by someone with the intention or ability to carry out an attack? How does the person who controls their Twitter account decide that?
- PakG1 13y ago
  It's far easier to miss than hit, and it gets really grey. Look at any of the mass shooters in recent history. Some of them look a bit dysfunctional, but harmless. Others, not so. Would you REALLY have been able to differentiate shooters from harmless, outcast, social misfits? It's easy to criticize, that's all I'm saying. Let's accept that this is a difficult situation to be put in, and I think notifying the FBI was the right thing. Whether or not the FBI has what it takes to make the right call, who knows. But AA does not.

baddox 13y ago

> I don't really want the airline making that assessment because they don't have the people/experience/knowledge/training/ability to accurately assess that threat. Is it really that hard of an assessment to make? Is the threat from a Twitter account? Yes? Okay, is there any reason to think the Twitter account is controlled by someone with the intention or ability to carry out an attack? No? Okay then.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jebblue 13y ago
>> is there any reason to think the Twitter account is controlled by someone with the intention or ability to carry out an attack? You can't know that, that's why it's not OK and it's not legal. A threat is a threat. OK then.
gagaga 13y ago
>Okay, is there any reason to think the Twitter account is controlled by someone with the intention or ability to carry out an attack? How does the person who controls their Twitter account decide that?
PakG1 13y ago
It's far easier to miss than hit, and it gets really grey. Look at any of the mass shooters in recent history. Some of them look a bit dysfunctional, but harmless. Others, not so. Would you REALLY have been able to differentiate shooters from harmless, outcast, social misfits? It's easy to criticize, that's all I'm saying. Let's accept that this is a difficult situation to be put in, and I think notifying the FBI was the right thing. Whether or not the FBI has what it takes to make the right call, who knows. But AA does not.