Flight Ban for refusing X-Ray

[LordSplodge]

This to sum it up.

Why are people so scared of technological advancement?

People aren't scared of the technology they don't want to be seen naked. It's not hard to understand that people can be uncomfortable with strangers seeing their body.

Dolph has already pointed out many flaws in the idea and I've cleary posted my views on how dangerous a false feeling of safety can be.

What about having them on entering the Underground or train stations or night clubs or on busses or numerous other areas terrorists have targeted?

 

[Casdawer]

I have a right to know that when i get on a plane, it's not going to get blown up or some nutter is going to take control of the plane and fly it into a building.

If the airport needs to scan people to insure that this doesn't happen then they can scan away.

A humans right to live, outweighs someone else's right to privacy.

 

[Dolph]

Well no because aside from the smoking ban (Which has nothing to do with terrorists) I can still do everything I could do in 2001.

Ah, so because it hasn't impacted you directly, you don't think it is a problem... There is an old poem about that:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

The freedom to not be xrayed, actually, i still have the freedom to refuse and xray, but it's not beneficial to myself if I want to get on the flight.
I'm very marginally less free, but I don't miss having the freedom to not be xrayed if i'm a suspected terrorist, why should I care? Thats not complacency thats just me generally not caring if I may have to have an xray going through an airport.

I have the freedom to book flights without unnecessary and unproven security measures being in place? Oh wait, no I don't...

The argument that only terrorists need be concerned about this is often made about a whole variety of things, but well, it still doesn't make it any better.

You didn't get my point, if theres a problem, you do something about it.

And you haven't got my point, that this method is completely ineffectual.

Not really as random as you're making it out to be either, you have people working undercover to find terrorists, monitoring black markets and such. This is how many of the people plotting terrorist attacks are caught, that or stupidity.
You can't know someone is a terrorist by looking at them, but there are some telltale signs, body language and such which will allow you to pick up people with something to hide.

And having something to hide is a bad thing why? We all have things we wish to hide, do we not have the right to do this from the state in your free utopia?

You can't tell who the other 99.99% of the population are against terrorists, not for sure. If we knew who they were, there wouldn't be any problem.

So punish everyone, what a wonderful attitude.

Lets say for example in an airport, if you stop 10000 suspected people in a few months, for a search, maybe stick a few in the xray, and out of them you find 1 bloke with a bomb in his shoe then you've saved a lot of lives and a lot of money by inconviencing a few people. That to me is worth it, I'd rather be late than some poor kid be left without a dad or something.
Out of those 10000 people you're likely to find a few drug mules as well, which is always a plus.

mmm, appeal to emotion, it's such a lovely, easy and effective fallacy that can be used to justify all manner of unacceptable activities.

Where is the actual evidence of effectiveness for any of these measures?

 

[LordSplodge]

I have a right to know that when i get on a plane, it's not going to get blown up or some nutter is going to take control of the plane and fly it into a building.

If the airport needs to scan people to insure that this doesn't happen then they can scan away.

A humans right to live, outweighs someone else's right to privacy.

*sigh* All these scans do at best is stop the less dedicated terrorist from blowing a plane up and at worse force them towards more soft targets.

All you are getting is a feeling of safety just like what people got after the so called liquid bomb attempt despite explosive experts proving that mixing the chemicals in the toilet would more than likely juts poison the terrorist and at worst case just cause the airplane to lose pressure and thus descend to 10,000FT. And even those restrictions are flawed as all you need is a terrorist with prescription drugs as they are allowed in hand luggage! Case in point I took 2000 freaking grammes of liquid paraffin/white soft paraffin in a 50/50 mix to Amsterdam last year. I could have replaced that with explosives and done some real damage if I was a motivated terrorist.

But don't worry I'm not and all these extra messures will keep you safe...

 

[Amnesia]

This seems to be one of your biggest concerns, i did some googling.


Quote:
To protect privacy, the faces of those scanned are blurred, and the images cannot be stored, copied or printed, federal officials said.

Quote:
Canadians have been assured that the scanners being installed in Canadian airports will delete images after a passenger has passed through security screening, and will not have the capacity to save or send the images they capture.



These are results from over the pond, but it rings a bell form a few news reports i saw on the UK news.

yeah but a camera would....pretty much every mobile has one and all you do is point it at the screen and press the button.

not trying to patronise by explaining how a camera works but the obvious seems to have been missed.

 

[K1LLSW1TCH]

yeah but a camera would....pretty much every mobile has one and all you do is point it at the screen and press the button.

not trying to patronise by explaining how a camera works but the obvious seems to have been missed.

Because taking a picture on your mobile of the X-Ray right in front of the person you just scanned doesn't look suspicious at all right?

 

[Amnesia]

Because taking a picture on your mobile of the X-Ray right in front of the person you just scanned doesn't look suspicious at all right?

does the person who is viewing the screen not be sat in a different room ?

it's highly unlikely they are going to do it right infront of you with the screen in sight of everyone.

 

[Murf]

You're an idiot, you're letting terrorists win if you let them get on with it and blow everone up. You have to let them know they can't **** with you and the only way to do that is to catch them.

So, after catching all the terrorists at the airports with your super scanners, they switch to stadiums. We introduce your infallible scanners there too. They switch to rail stations.....

See where I'm going with this? You can't stop someone determined enough to blow something or someone up without controlling the sale of anything that could be used to make a bomb, tracking every persons movements 24/7 and having security checks between every public building.

You just can't do it.

So you want us to try anyway because it will make you feel safer. Awesome. I don't want us to try. It's ineffective, expensive, and erodes my freedoms and privacy.

And yes, there are certain things you can't do since 2001, protesting in front of parliament about this retarded government for one.

 

[RiPz]

I take it these 'airport spec' x-ray machines don't have anywhere near the same effects as 'medical spec' x-ray machines when it comes to sensitivity? i.e. when you go for an x-ray at the hospital you are asked to remove all metallic objects (though i'm unsure why).

If this is the case for these airport scanners then would someone like myself be forced to have a strip search instead ? (i have a large metal pin in my femur).

Just wondering out of interest.

 

[I get around]

So you want us to try anyway because it will make you feel safer. Awesome. I don't want us to try. It's ineffective, expensive, and erodes my freedoms and privacy.

No insults. And do not edit a moderator's edit.
By your logic, people are always going to break the law, so we should just pull all police off the streets and let everyone do whatever the hell they want? Because hey, the police are only going to inconvinience average joe.

When you buy the plane ticket you agree that you have nothing to hide, if theres a reason to suspect you do, they are well within their rights to search you.
If you suspected someone had a gun on them, would you allow them into your home?
Well if you don't you're taking away their freedom.

Are you really that embarassed that some security guard will see you "naked"
What in all honesty have you got against these machines aside from it's removing a tiny amount of freedom you didn't even think or care about before.

Do you go through the airport and refuse to have your bag xrayed?

Having a fully free society doesn't work, there has to be law and order or it's just pure anarchy, as nice as that sounds that means all the nutjobs have the right to stab you and rape children.

 

[Casdawer]

So, after catching all the terrorists at the airports with your super scanners, they switch to stadiums. We introduce your infallible scanners there too. They switch to rail stations.....

See where I'm going with this? You can't stop someone determined enough to blow something or someone up without controlling the sale of anything that could be used to make a bomb, tracking every persons movements 24/7 and having security checks between every public building.

You just can't do it.

So you want us to try anyway because it will make you feel safer. Awesome. I don't want us to try. It's ineffective, expensive, and erodes my freedoms and privacy.

And yes, there are certain things you can't do since 2001, protesting in front of parliament about this retarded government for one.

The question i have for you then is why don't they target stadiums in the first place?

Why do they go through all this hassle to try and blow up a plane with a couple of hundred people when they could easily go to a stadium filled with 60,000+ people and blow that up?

 

[LordSplodge]

So, after catching all the terrorists at the airports with your super scanners, they switch to stadiums. We introduce your infallible scanners there too. They switch to rail stations.....

You can't stop someone determined enough to blow something or someone up.

You just can't do it.

Exactly but don't worry super infallible scanners will make people safe from the bad guys!

And yes, there are certain things you can't do since 2001, protesting in front of parliament about this retarded government for one.

Just like the Americans and their "Freedom of Speech" zones.

 

[LordSplodge]

You're an idiot.

Stop calling everybody who disagrees with you and idiot as it makes you sound like an idiot. For example you can't differentiate between somebody not wanting to be seen naked and your luggage being scanned.

 

[edscdk]

The question i have for you then is why don't they target stadiums in the first place?

Why do they go through all this hassle to try and blow up a plane with a couple of hundred people when they could easily go to a stadium filled with 60,000+ people and blow that up?

HAve any planes been blown up by bomb carried on board by a passenger? (not luggage / cargo which is x-rayed anyway)

 

[Freefaller]

Exactly but don't worry super infallible scanners will make people safe from the bad guys!




Just like the Americans and their "Freedom of Speech" zones.

Indeed it's pathetic.

I flet safer flying 15+ years ago than I do now and we had less security, we could bring pen knives on board, bottles of drink, nail clippers and umbrellas. The only thing they got excited about was toy guns (saw a few kids get them confiscated).

They used to leave the flight deck open so you could have look inside the cabin whilst in the air, have a chat with the captain. It was pleasant. Now I feel grumpy, harassed and generally like I can't wait for the flight to be over. Though actually the flight part is the most pleasant, it's dealing with the airport "authorities" aka epsilon semi morons.

I don't fly as much as I used to, but the experience has become increasingly worse and I do not feel any safer at all. I also know about how the staff that are employed, a lot of the processes and routines that they go through - it's not inspiring at all!

 

[RDM]

Ah, so because it hasn't impacted you directly, you don't think it is a problem... There is an old poem about that:

I think you have just Godwin'd yourself there...

I have the freedom to book flights without unnecessary and unproven security measures being in place? Oh wait, no I don't...

Have you have had that?

 

[LordSplodge]

Indeed it's pathetic.

Don't get me started on the not using the toilet, electrical equipment or having anything hidden under a blanket for the last hour of the flight "rules" that the Americans introduced after the failed underwear bomber.

I'm going to Scotland for my holiday this year in the car with plenty of liquid and an assortment of knives!

 

[Freefaller]

Don't get me started on the not using the toilet, electrical equipment or having anything hidden under a blanket for the last hour of the flight "rules" that the Americans introduced after the failed underwear bomber.

I'm going to Scotland for my holiday this year in the car with plenty of liquid and an assortment of knives!

Don't forget the fireworks either!

 

[Dolph]

I think you have just Godwin'd yourself there...

Quite possibly, but it was more the spirit that the provenience that I was aiming to get.

Have you have had that?

Strangely, most airlines used to restrict themselves to security practices that actually had evidence backing their effectiveness...

 

[LordSplodge]

Don't forget the fireworks either!

I could also pack my compound bow!