TSA will soon be "psycho-bullying" people into body scanners

[Siatdiat]

Wow write a bigger post sucking saths dick next time... So you don't like my opinion and I'm suddenly a "mattress stain". Who the fuck are you? Did I ever personally attack you. Freaking haters on my nuts. Damn.

You're eloquence is astounding, maybe I should sit back and let you make my point for me.

There certainly is no requirement to this forum that people know how to argue points properly, I'm sure even the best debaters even end up using weak arguments as well on here. But when its clarified very early in the thread that not caring on an individual level is basically of no value to this argument in the first 4 pages and you come in spouting off, showing you didn't read any prior pages of the article or if you did so you didn't consider them, shows you are a dousche that came in here in the first place to rile people up and have them jump to respond to you.

I guess agreeing with someone is riding their nuts btw. Is that why you storm in here trying to disagree with everyone?

[Day]

Dude I didn't storm into anything. I came in and stated that I disagreed and that it was hilarious watching people get up in arms over this like they are getting molested or raped at the gate, when 95% of the whiners haven't even been through the damn thing. I'm sorry that upset you but I didn't feel the need to personally attack anyone over this. If you think "not caring" has no value then you're dumber than you perceive me to be. Of course it matters what people consider to be "crossing the line", many of us that have been through this don't think it's a huge deal. If this catches even one person trying to bring a weapon or bomb onto a plane then it's worth it in my eyes. No ones getting raped at the security gate like some of you would like others to believe. Taking my shoes off is more of a hassle than a pat down/nut scan.

[ZarakiKujata]

Probably funnier to others but surprisingly relevant to the topic in theory since the revelations that came out when the fbi released it's columbine report to the public pretty much showed that all the security(intelligence wise where they picked the people to watch over) against school shootings that happened was completely wasted as they should have focused on the Riley from Boondocks trying to cut people up with a lightsaber doing something instead of Jasmine playing with dolls or whatever.

gonna reiterate Sath's lol? what the fuck does the Boondocks have to do w/ Columbine? And while were on the topic of Boondocks....

We can't know the unknown

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence amirite.

http://platenuts.com/wp-content/uplo...uncler-iii.JPG

[aduidarnenye]

The scanners bother me. I don't plan on going through any of them for various reasons. I would like to have children one day soon and want to keep my ovaries in tact. Also, I know enough about them wild computer thingies to know that these things probably have a Save button and a moment of stupidity could mean my jiggly bits up on the internet. I'll happily, on the other hand, get the pat-down. That completely doesn't bother me for some reason. It's just one person and there is no technology yet to put memory on the internet.

I do find it odd how many people are so uncomfortable with touching and being touched by another human being, even a stranger in a rather intimate way. I don't think this was always the way with people, in fact I think it's a fairly recent development for people to recoil in horror at the idea of being touched in any way at all. The pat-down isn't sex and I doubt the agents doing them think of them as sex.

The other day another customer at A&W picked up my pop cup by accident and then put it back down again. She didn't touch the top nor put her straw into the cup but I was completely disgusted and horrified by this. Then I checked myself and realised how irrational that was.

[Kuya]

You think that not wanting to be touched by a stranger in a specific manner and under certain circumstances is a recent development in human history?

[Day]

Tell us when it all started Kuya

[aduidarnenye]

You think that not wanting to be touched by a stranger in a specific manner and under certain circumstances is a recent development in human history?

When I was 5-6 kindergarten teachers could hug and be hugged by their students. That sort of thing is not allowed today.

[Kuya]

When I was 5-6 kindergarten teachers could hug and be hugged by their students. That sort of thing is not allowed today.

Oh ya, i can see how this proves that not wanting to be touched by strangers is a recent phenomenon.

[Olo401]

Putting people on ignore doesn't work, it just means more clicks to read the thread

Maybe for you it does.. People on my ignore list are there for a reason - so I don't have to read their garbage posts.

Edit: No, Day isn't on my ignore list. But he is ↓

[Chun Liroy]

Why don't you just skip their posts? Just because they post doesn't mean that it necessary to fucking read them. Grow a brain.

[aduidarnenye]

Oh ya, i can see how this proves that not wanting to be touched by strangers is a recent phenomenon.

Yes, I recognise that one or two examples does not make an argument. I also recognise that I am speaking from my own experience and viewpoint. My opinion is that people are much more leary about touching one another today than they were even when I was a young child, about 25-30 years ago. I provided a few examples to support my opinion. I would be more than happy to read any examples you have that disagrees with this and possibly change my viewpoint based on the argument you present.

[Kuya]

Yes, I recognise that one or two examples does not make an argument. I also recognise that I am speaking from my own experience and viewpoint. My opinion is that people are much more leary about touching one another today than they were even when I was a young child, about 25-30 years ago. I provided a few examples to support my opinion. I would be more than happy to read any examples you have that disagrees with this and possibly change my viewpoint based on the argument you present.

If you realize that what you said does not make an argument, then why do you think an argument can be had at all? You might as well tell me that you think green flying pigs exists and that you saw one once and that i should present an argument against that. To which i would reply: What

edit: So my rebuttal is What

[Day]

Yes, I recognise that one or two examples does not make an argument. I also recognise that I am speaking from my own experience and viewpoint. My opinion is that people are much more leary about touching one another today than they were even when I was a young child, about 25-30 years ago. I provided a few examples to support my opinion. I would be more than happy to read any examples you have that disagrees with this and possibly change my viewpoint based on the argument you present.

Fucking owned. Eat that Kuya!

[aduidarnenye]

If you realize that what you said does not make an argument, then why do you think an argument can be had at all? You might as well tell me that you think green flying pigs exists and that you saw one once and that i should present an argument against that. To which i would reply: What

edit: So my rebuttal is What

If you do not wish to share your opinion on the subject then so be it. You could have simply stated from the beginning that while you disagree you do not feel it necessary to back this up and we could have finished there.

[Max™]

I dislike repeating myself, but here goes.



No, see, that's just it, we're already safe from some 'dirka dirka jihad' flying our plane into the pentagon without these measures. You physically cannot access the cockpit anymore without the pilot allowing you to do so, and if the pilot's compromised then there's no reason to take a bomb through security in the first place.

Second, if you want to claim to protect the lives of the people on the plane itself while it's in the air, then why aren't we more stringent about screening checked baggage for foreign material? Blowing the plane up would be so much easier from the cargo hold, it's less protected and has better proximity to fuel for enhancing the explosion. Bigger bomb, too.

2a: If the individual lives of the passengers is the concern, then why the fuck do we corral everyone through these tiny little chokepoints where it would be stupid easy to take out a hundred people with a single high-yield grenade?

3: Even if 1 and 2 were wrong, security experts have already said that there are a LOT of ways to get foreign objects through these new methods, and there are even witness accounts of people getting crazy shit through on an almost daily basis; if the new methods aren't catching twelve inch razor blades, let alone molded plastiques or powdered/liquid explosives then what's the fucking point?


The whole process is a logical fallacy that demonstrates no actual increase in personal or public safety. It inconveniences and humiliates the public in unnecessary ways.

Pretty sure it's a 4th amendment violation, due to it being unwarranted searches.

If anyone tried to take over a plane full of scared passengers who are aware of what happened on 9/11, they'd get their shit stomped, knife or not.

Nevermind the difficulty of accessing the cockpit, so we're left with what, bombs?

How big of a bomb can you fit up your ass? How big can you get into the cargo hold?

Couldn't you fit a canister of some infectious disease or poisonous gas up your ass?

Couldn't you, as Norellicus pointed out, blow up the security checkpoint for several planes worth of victims?

[aurik]

Couldn't you, as Norellicus pointed out, blow up the security checkpoint for several planes worth of victims?

Plus infrastructure damage.

[Day]

Nova 6 gas on a football stadium would generate a high number of kills too, but that's neither here nor there.

[aurik]

That is, actually, the point. These searches at the gate are invasive, pointless, and costly. Even if they did secure the plane (which you have yet to argue) they don't do jack shit against someone blowing up a van full of explosives at the airport or at any other venue.

At which point, we're better off spending the money doing something useful.

[Max™]

Well, I happened to view a day post that wasn't ignorant.

Yes, a football game is a better target, and the 9/11 attacks are unlikely to ever be replicated again... which means it IS here and there when considering whether there is justification for invasive searches.

[Kyo]

Day, why the haters always on your nuts mang? They just cant get enough?