So how long until airlines just say screw it?

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

The airlines arent the ones that are doing the security checks. The airport and the goverment are doing it.
They just cant make up rules that go against the constitution. That would be illegal.

Yup, hence me saying what I said earlier in this thread. Our freedoms can also be our weakness.

[BigAls87Z28]

I dont see it as a weakness.

In other news...Im heading to Detroit for NAIAS next month. This makes me so excited.

[Frosty]

It is in a way. I'm not saying we should change but our rights/freedoms can be and are exploited.

I'm saying it's a weakness from a national security standpoint.

[BigAls87Z28]

I know what you are trying to say, but its the people that say the weakness thing sometimes have ulterior motive, meaning that they would like to see a change in certain rights.

It sucks, no doubt.

[Frosty]

No, I'm not saying we should change, like I said if we change our way of life and trade freedom for security they ultimately win.

[BigAls87Z28]

I know what you are saying Tony, and Im not talking about you specificly. I was just saying....people that talk about weakness, etc etc tend to then start to walk towards moving a few things around alla Patriot Act.

[Frosty]

Yeah I know you weren't talking about me.

The Patriot Act is full of bs.

[ryanfx]

Originally Posted by Frosty

Yeah I know you weren't talking about me.

The Patriot Act is full of bs.

The patriot act is a great thing that is HIGHLY misunderstood. If you actually understand what goes into it and what is actually required to receive taps and information you would be surprised.

99% of the public doesn't like it simply because opposing political groups use scare tactics to make you think like it could *possibly* happen to you.. which in reality, wont. Unless you deserve it of course.

This is taken directly from justice.gov

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/pa...ing-myths.html

* FACT: The new law simply makes clear – consistent with the intent of the Congress that enacted FISA in 1978 – that our intelligence community should not have to get bogged down in a court approval process to gather foreign intelligence on targets located in foreign countries. It does not change the strong protections FISA provides to Americans in the United States – surveillance directed at people in the United States continues to require court approval as it did before.


Judging by your distaste for the patriot act, I am assuming you are not American, nor in the U.S?

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by ryanfx

Judging by your distaste for the patriot act, I am assuming you are not American, nor in the U.S?

EXCUSE ME? I understand the Patriot Act thank you very much. I'm not even going to get into it with your after that ridiculous comment....

[JL8Jeff]

The Patriot act is crap because of the way it deals with the financial industry. You have no idea of the added cost to businesses unless you work in the industry. They should have worked out different acts to deal with the different situations. It has good intentions but it was not thought out properly. And if you have a common name that happens to be on the list(like Joe Smith) then good luck getting on a flight ever. There are congressmen that with names of people on the list and they get hassled every time they try to fly. Somebody needs to spend some time to fix the act and understand the impacts on industry as well.

[ryanfx]

Originally Posted by Frosty

EXCUSE ME? I understand the Patriot Act thank you very much. I'm not even going to get into it with your after that ridiculous comment....

it ONLY affects our international affairs. Non domestic issues. I am only attempting to hold a debate, not use spiked bats...

when it only applies to foreign monitoring, what's your issue with it?

[ryanfx]

Originally Posted by JL8Jeff

The Patriot act is crap because of the way it deals with the financial industry. You have no idea of the added cost to businesses unless you work in the industry. They should have worked out different acts to deal with the different situations. It has good intentions but it was not thought out properly. And if you have a common name that happens to be on the list(like Joe Smith) then good luck getting on a flight ever. There are congressmen that with names of people on the list and they get hassled every time they try to fly. Somebody needs to spend some time to fix the act and understand the impacts on industry as well.

there is a massive added cost of business, and yes the name thing could have been implemented better, but its difficult to put a price on safety. Keep in mind the patriot acts main goal is a full picture view of increased security. Not being efficient and saving money where it can. There are some issues, but the act was highly needed

[Knipps]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

Anyone of you actually have flown in the last year or so?

Internationally too. I was pulled aside and they checked my carry on, it wasn't really all that bad.

[V]

i dont have to take my boots off ever, nor do they really care what i have... maybe its the uniform lol

[NastyEllEssWon]

Originally Posted by ryanfx

but its difficult to put a price on safety.

when you start giving up civil liberties as a price to pay for safety you're letting them win.

Originally Posted by SmokingSS

i dont have to take my boots off ever, nor do they really care what i have... maybe its the uniform lol

thats bs too. i think even military personnel should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. i mean....wasnt it only a few months ago when one of your brethen yelled ALLAHU AKBAR and shot up fort hood?

[ryanfx]

Originally Posted by NastyEllEssWon

when you start giving up civil liberties as a price to pay for safety you're letting them win.

The patriot act doesn't violate any of our civil liberties. The only thing it does domestically is affect us economically.

[NastyEllEssWon]

Originally Posted by ryanfx

I'm not opposed to 100% searches of every crevice of everyone attempting to fly. myself included.

yeah a civil liberty of mine is to not have a full cavity search.

[ryanfx]

Originally Posted by NastyEllEssWon

yeah a civil liberty of mine is to not have a full cavity search.

Would you rather be searched lightly as we do and have a 99% survival chance, or would you rather you and everyone else searched thoroughly, and have a 99.99% chance of survival?

And if we're being technical, they could give you a cavity search and they wouldn't be violating your civil liberties. No one is making you get on the plane, it's your choice to do so; you must comply by their regulations.

[NastyEllEssWon]

Originally Posted by ryanfx

Would you rather be searched lightly as we do and have a 99% survival chance, or would you rather you and everyone else searched thoroughly, and have a 99.99% chance of survival?

And if we're being technical, they could give you a cavity search and they wouldn't be violating your civil liberties. No one is making you get on the plane, it's your choice to do so; you must comply by their regulations.

thats like saying if walmart required that you let them search you before entering the store that it would be right?

[LTb1ow]

Um, yea. Idiot.

Originally Posted by NastyEllEssWon

when you start giving up civil liberties as a price to pay for safety you're letting them win.





thats bs too. i think even military personnel should be held to the same standards as the rest of us. i mean....wasnt it only a few months ago when one of your brethen yelled ALLAHU AKBAR and shot up fort hood?

you're a waste of oxygen

[BigAls87Z28]

Patriot Act can be inacted and your 5th amendment right, along with other civil rights, can be waved in the face of "national security".
So, be it domestic or foreign, we should just wave that whole constitution thing right out the window? All the men and women that have died for it? Just tell them it just for terrorists?
Again, terrorists can be anyone, You dont have to have the Koran in your hand or have a name with Muhamad in it to be a terrorist. THATS what you fail to see. The law gives power over the constitution, and it was voted in based on a fear. Its unconstitutional and should have been struck down.

[LTb1ow]

[BigAls87Z28]

Years before 9/11, there was that movie called The Siege and it goes over this very fact. Its a good movie to watch.