Scott Conklin
New member
I was actually aiming that at Double Naught, but point made. 
The terrorists have won.
- Thread starter GoSlash27
- Start date
Esquire M Busterbury
Moderator
Frankly the terrorists have won. I'm never flying again based soley upon the pain in the hassle associated with the now-in-place security measures. If I'm visiting anywhere else in this country it's going to be in a rental car (and a big one, took a new trailblazer last time and it was AWESOME) (for a new plastic SUV anyways).
If I'm going overseas I'm finding a boat.
I've said it from the start, the terrorists don't hate us, the american people. They hate them, the american airline industry.
If I'm going overseas I'm finding a boat.
I've said it from the start, the terrorists don't hate us, the american people. They hate them, the american airline industry.
Get a pilots liscense and rent a plane. Maybe a bit more expensive on your own, but with four people in on the plane and gas, the price comes down and you have none of the TSA BS(no offense to the missus GS27
).
Just goes to show that the American Spirit is still alive in some of us.
).Just goes to show that the American Spirit is still alive in some of us.
Since (screened) liquids are readily available onboard, it doesn't make sense to get panicky over liquids onboard. If the authorities want to keep unknown liquids off of planes, they should do that in the airport. Anything that gets past airport security, well, that's just too bad. It doesn't make sense to get hysterical over liquids on a plane when there are already a variety of liquids on a plane, liquids that are available to passengers.
I have never been one to agree with the concept of mandatory military service, but I am starting to rethink my position, because I think the people of the U.S. have gone soft, unwilling to fight, not even capable of fighting, and utterly dependent on government.
Look at Israel. They teach their people to fight, not to run to someone else whose job is to fight. They involve their actual population in the defense of the country. We treat that as a menial job, that we hope there will always be others willing to do. How much can we really possible care about our own lives and our own country when we delegate our national and even local defense to others?
-azurefly
Look at Israel. They teach their people to fight, not to run to someone else whose job is to fight. They involve their actual population in the defense of the country. We treat that as a menial job, that we hope there will always be others willing to do. How much can we really possible care about our own lives and our own country when we delegate our national and even local defense to others?
-azurefly
I won't fly again - not on commercial flight. My neighbor has a Citation, last time he went to Long Beach I tagged along - about 2 1/2 hours from my house to the LB airport. It takes me longer than that to drive the 90 miles to the airport where I can catch a commerical flight, park and then have to deal with the insane security stuff. He doesn't have firearm restrictions either, at least none that he's told me about.
Esquire M Busterbury
Moderator
Azurefly, but The US has only Mehico & Canada to worry about while Israel is surrounded by Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, etc etc.
Benonymous
New member
Dont get me started
Luckily, the situation in Australia isn't impossible. I fly occasionally with my work and have to carry electronic equipment so I know the hassles.
The wider situation we have now is copybook fear management. I mean management by fear. If people are primed every day to be fearful and scared they are MUCH more easy to manipulate. The ,until recently, "War on Terror" is nothing more than scaremongering on an epic scale. You and I should fear a drive in the car much more than a terrorist bomb. Unfortunately its our governments who have "won" . They have conditioned the average citizen to fear their own shadow, all with the help of a supremely corrupt media. Nobody can supress the truth forever but when you control the "truth" you can go pretty close.
Luckily, the situation in Australia isn't impossible. I fly occasionally with my work and have to carry electronic equipment so I know the hassles.
The wider situation we have now is copybook fear management. I mean management by fear. If people are primed every day to be fearful and scared they are MUCH more easy to manipulate. The ,until recently, "War on Terror" is nothing more than scaremongering on an epic scale. You and I should fear a drive in the car much more than a terrorist bomb. Unfortunately its our governments who have "won" . They have conditioned the average citizen to fear their own shadow, all with the help of a supremely corrupt media. Nobody can supress the truth forever but when you control the "truth" you can go pretty close.
"I'm never flying again based soley upon the pain in the hassle associated with the now-in-place security measures."
What hassle? I flew to Atlanta a couple of months ago and Nassau (the one in the Bahamas) two weeks ago and I've got to say the slight inconvenience of taking my shoes off was MORE THAN BALANCED out by the lack of folks with carry-on bags. Imagine that, people just walked onto the plane and sat down. No more waiting for folks to wrestle their bags down the aisle and up over their heads into the bins.
John
What hassle? I flew to Atlanta a couple of months ago and Nassau (the one in the Bahamas) two weeks ago and I've got to say the slight inconvenience of taking my shoes off was MORE THAN BALANCED out by the lack of folks with carry-on bags. Imagine that, people just walked onto the plane and sat down. No more waiting for folks to wrestle their bags down the aisle and up over their heads into the bins.
John
Esquire M Busterbury
Moderator
Atlanta's alwasy been really nice but they can delay you as long as the best of 'em. That, and there isn't ANYWHERE in that whole GD airport that's the least bit inviting to those who have to spend the night there (due to said delays, due to not getting a room when Delta goofed, due to the room issued being booked AND the shuttle to the room was no longer operating. Thanks Delta.).
But seriously, I think they design their chairs to not allow anyone to get some sleep in them.
That, and they're a main Delta hub, and "Delta" is ancient sanskrit for "airline of satan".
But seriously, I think they design their chairs to not allow anyone to get some sleep in them.
That, and they're a main Delta hub, and "Delta" is ancient sanskrit for "airline of satan".
DonR101395
New member
That's great if you don't need to take international trips. Flying commercial is a reality and necessity for many of us.
Sorry, I have to agree that the terrorists have won.
Case In Point:
When I go to the airport to fly on a PRIVIATE COMMERCIAL CARRIER, I am ILLEGALY searched by FEDERAL AGENTS.
The search is illegal because they do not have probable cause to search me ... a violation of my fourth amendment rights against unreasonable search and siezure.
Merely choosing to fly on an airplane does not constitute consent to search and siezure. had that been the case, then it would be okay for a state trooper from one of the "several states" to detain and search you JUST because you agreed to drive on the interstate defense highway system.
my proposed solution:
let the individual carriers determine the level of search they wish to employ, and let the flying public determine which airline they wish to embark.
The results of this little "experiment" will hardly be sensational. most of the flying public will fly the airline with the least restrictive security measures, and that airline will ultimately be the safest on which to fly/ride. (if they allow armed citizens to fly, terrorists, being chickens, will not choose those airlines. and I'll stake my life on this premise)
Remember that those who would sacrifice liberty for security will enjoy neither.
Case In Point:
When I go to the airport to fly on a PRIVIATE COMMERCIAL CARRIER, I am ILLEGALY searched by FEDERAL AGENTS.
The search is illegal because they do not have probable cause to search me ... a violation of my fourth amendment rights against unreasonable search and siezure.
Merely choosing to fly on an airplane does not constitute consent to search and siezure. had that been the case, then it would be okay for a state trooper from one of the "several states" to detain and search you JUST because you agreed to drive on the interstate defense highway system.
my proposed solution:
let the individual carriers determine the level of search they wish to employ, and let the flying public determine which airline they wish to embark.
The results of this little "experiment" will hardly be sensational. most of the flying public will fly the airline with the least restrictive security measures, and that airline will ultimately be the safest on which to fly/ride. (if they allow armed citizens to fly, terrorists, being chickens, will not choose those airlines. and I'll stake my life on this premise)
Remember that those who would sacrifice liberty for security will enjoy neither.
Esquire M Busterbury
Moderator
Thank you bob, you just knocked that one out the park. I've been wondering how long it will take before a company simply includes a waiver to fly with them and bypassing security entirely. With all the fine print that comes with buying a ticket these days, shouldn't be too hard.
(And now that we've mentioned it, watch it become the next million dollar idea.)
I also think we should allow ccw's onboard but I sincerely doubt I'll ever see that in my lifetime, even if the whole 'bullets on a plane' concern is a myth.
(And now that we've mentioned it, watch it become the next million dollar idea.)
I also think we should allow ccw's onboard but I sincerely doubt I'll ever see that in my lifetime, even if the whole 'bullets on a plane' concern is a myth.
Posts #31 and #35 -- excellent
Good job, Benonymous and BobG. Couldn'ta said it better.
One point about having an airline that offers waivers and then allows people to fly armed:
Although we understand that this would be the airline that would most likely not be targeted by terrorists, the media and others who are anti-defense would go running around with a story about how weapons allowed to be carried by citizens on aircraft are a huge danger waiting to happen -- and they will point out that the threat does not end with what may happen to the passengers and crew on the planes, but what may happen to people on the ground should a terrorist do something with a weapon on such a plane and bring it crashing down.
Although I am fully for allowing passengers to have weapons (hell, I'm fully for allowing citizens to have weapons anywhere!)...
Let's remember that allowing weapons on a plane would not necessarily mean that every flight had people actually doing it, much less doing it with the will and skill to fight a hijacker. It could potentially come to be that a terrorist, or a number of them, boarded such a flight while at the same time a dearth of armed and ready citizens were on that flight. Of course it would be a gamble on the part of the terrorists, but hey, we know they are prepared to die.
I think what we need is to work, as I was saying before, on Americans' (and the world's) fighting spirit. Right now it seems to be at an all-time low, with people clamoring for the government to keep them safe, and the government lying that they're actually accomplishing that task, and the people actually being so *#^(@! stupid that they let themselves believe it.
We need to reignite a spirit of toughness and self-sufficiency in people.
-azurefly
Good job, Benonymous and BobG. Couldn'ta said it better.
One point about having an airline that offers waivers and then allows people to fly armed:
Although we understand that this would be the airline that would most likely not be targeted by terrorists, the media and others who are anti-defense would go running around with a story about how weapons allowed to be carried by citizens on aircraft are a huge danger waiting to happen -- and they will point out that the threat does not end with what may happen to the passengers and crew on the planes, but what may happen to people on the ground should a terrorist do something with a weapon on such a plane and bring it crashing down.
Although I am fully for allowing passengers to have weapons (hell, I'm fully for allowing citizens to have weapons anywhere!)...
Let's remember that allowing weapons on a plane would not necessarily mean that every flight had people actually doing it, much less doing it with the will and skill to fight a hijacker. It could potentially come to be that a terrorist, or a number of them, boarded such a flight while at the same time a dearth of armed and ready citizens were on that flight. Of course it would be a gamble on the part of the terrorists, but hey, we know they are prepared to die.
I think what we need is to work, as I was saying before, on Americans' (and the world's) fighting spirit. Right now it seems to be at an all-time low, with people clamoring for the government to keep them safe, and the government lying that they're actually accomplishing that task, and the people actually being so *#^(@! stupid that they let themselves believe it.
We need to reignite a spirit of toughness and self-sufficiency in people.
-azurefly
I don't view the airport - and other public carrier - security as doing anything meaninful beyond conditioning the public to being used to what are clearly unreasonable searches when they wish to travel. It's the same as what Pavlov did with his dogs, classic conditioning. Get used to it, I expect this conditioning to really take off when the Real ID Act begins implementation in 2008. Remember, the same pinheads who brought us airline security will be leading the real ID effort. Only ID cards approved by Homeland Security can be accepted "for any official purpose" by the feds.
"Let's remember that allowing weapons on a plane would not necessarily mean that every flight had people actually doing it, much less doing it with the will and skill to fight a hijacker."
Okay, let's say we dispense with all pre-flight searches. How do you fight a suicide bomber with a handgun or other weapon?
John
Okay, let's say we dispense with all pre-flight searches. How do you fight a suicide bomber with a handgun or other weapon?
John
Esquire M Busterbury
Moderator
How do you stop a terrorist with a gun or other weapon? With 2 air marshals and 3 responsible, carrying citizens.
Last edited: