5 ms·
Well, an arrest is not the same as being convicted of a crime. There's no way for airport security to know whether you were joking or mentally unstable and dang
by semi-extrinsic 12y ago
Well, an arrest is not the same as being convicted of a crime. There's no way for airport security to know whether you were joking or mentally unstable and dangerous, and it's reasonable that they detain you whilst they find out.
- sillygoose 12y agoAnyone could be a psychopath too, and highly dangerous. I guess they should detain everyone just in case, and grill them for hours. Of course, it's not like a psychopath could lie convincingly so that he could proceed with his evil plans, so I guess they can't actually let anyone in, ever.
- semi-extrinsic 12y agoNice strawman. Limiting your free speech by detaining you if you joke about bombs when talking to airport security is completely reasonable. It's very well defined and limited, and giving up this right causes you no harm physically or mentally. Also, there's no slippery slope involved. I dislike airport security as well, but some of the things they do are reasonable.
- sillygoose 12y agoWhat strawman? You supported the idea of detaining people on any suspicion. I suggested that there's no point in going down that road because anyone could be a threat anywhere. Sure, sometimes someone is suspicious because he's actually up to no good. But that doesn't mean detaining people on various subjective suspicions is a good idea.
- semi-extrinsic 12y agoCome now. If someone says "I have a bomb in my luggage" (as a joke), that's hardly "on any suspicion". The person has spoken what amounts to a possibly serious, realistic threat, and the security person has literally no other means of determining whether it was a joke or not.
- sillygoose 12y agoYou didn't refer to anything specific.
- nitrogen 12y agoReasonableness should really only be established by mathematically weighing the probabilities of true and false positives and negatives.