Feds green light naked scanners

[petros]

If we all drop trou' and moon the greedy airlines and security companies making HUGE money then they won't need screens.

Is this really about saving lives or is it really about saving $30 Million aircraft and it's earning potential?

A couple hundred passenger will NEVER earn as much as that aircraft will during it's lifetime.

 

[Kakato]

Still off topic, but had to say... you sure have had an interesting life, Kakato. Those tunnels you found really intrigued me. :smile:

The town I'm in has a very rich and colorfull history.Just google emperor Picariello or Florence Lassandro(last woman to be hanged in Canada) to get a glimpse of the wild west as it was here.
We had rum running,shootouts,train robberys,Canadas worst mine disaster,the frank slide and much more in this area.

 

[JLM]

The town I'm in has a very rich and colorfull history.Just google emperor Picariello or Florence Lassandro(last woman to be hanged in Canada) to get a glimpse of the wild west as it was here.
We had rum running,shootouts,train robberys,Canadas worst mine disaster,the frank slide and much more in this area.

Yes Kakato (I'm a little familiar with the Crowsnest Pass) We need a thread on it- much more interesting than terrorists and bombs and also a chance to learn about our own country.

 

[Kakato]

Yes Kakato (I'm a little familiar with the Crowsnest Pass) We need a thread on it- much more interesting than terrorists and bombs and also a chance to learn about our own country.

I was thinking the same thing.
My old social studys teacher helped create a book on the Pass called Crowsnest and it's people and it's about 3 inches thick and pretty well covers the history of the area since it was first settled.

 

[darkbeaver]

Really? At one of our nearby airports they took out an old x-ray scanner for luggage and installed some newfangled gadget that scans much better and it is faster.

Make up your mind, please.

Anyway, I don't care if they keep adding scanners. If it keeps 1 terrorist from taking out a couple or 3 hundred passengers plus people on the ground, I'm happy. The alternative would not be enough. I can stand in a line for a half hour waiting for a 10 minute scan, no problem. I like chatting with people; even the security people. I don't fret about delays. What would I do, grow wings and fly out to push the plane faster? Nah. I sit and read or chat.
Perhaps one day the people in charge will make airports nicer places to be, as well.

One nifty gadget I think airports could use is something like a GPS but only for airport mapping.

It's usually the very friendly chatty types that fit the profile by not fitting the other profile. A normal person would exhibit some bother at delay and invasion of privacy but the determined terrorist would try to remain cool and engaged. I would pull you out for special consideration in the fluffy pink room. The feather duster applied very lightly and expertly to the smooth bare skin by a practiced hand will illicit the most informing and delightful moanings and writhings. It's exquisitely revealing. Most terrorists faint after only a few hours.:smile:

 

[AnnaG]

I never said I thought trains wouldn't be any good, I just don't think they will solve any problems, and I do drive, whenever possible



Dig deeper, same rationale for a similar problem, the only difference is the numbers. Our reactions are the same, punish the many for the actions of a few. Tyranny gets its foothold one way or another.



I give up, you've outed me, I've been in the aviation business for four decades and flown for more of three of them, and I ain't giving it up, lord knows I've tried. People experience 5 or 6 days of headache at airports a year, I experience it 15 days a month. You're jones'n for a spat, I can see that. But I'll tell you right now, the security you want, you will certainly pay for. If you want to fly cheap as well, you can take your chances. I've been around long enough, I know far more people die from cutbacks than they do from terrorists when it comes to airplanes. The piper is going to be paid one way or another.

*shrugs* It's simple. If people want to fly, they will want to fly safely. If scanners give them some sense of safety, whether its false or not, they'll fly. The alternative is not flying, the way I see it.
And it is about numbers.
What your solution?

 

[AnnaG]

If we all drop trou' and moon the greedy airlines and security companies making HUGE money then they won't need screens.

Is this really about saving lives or is it really about saving $30 Million aircraft and it's earning potential?

A couple hundred passenger will NEVER earn as much as that aircraft will during it's lifetime.

lol There's that, too.

 

[AnnaG]

It's usually the very friendly chatty types that fit the profile by not fitting the other profile. A normal person would exhibit some bother at delay and invasion of privacy but the determined terrorist would try to remain cool and engaged. I would pull you out for special consideration in the fluffy pink room. The feather duster applied very lightly and expertly to the smooth bare skin by a practiced hand will illicit the most informing and delightful moanings and writhings. It's exquisitely revealing. Most terrorists faint after only a few hours.:smile:

Have you switched from pot to ecstacy?

 

[#juan]

Cowards?

They are many things but getting on a plane and blowing yourself up dosen't sound like the work of a coward.

They would be cowards if they weren't insane. Not one of these suicide bombers would blow themselves up if they didn't think they were directly entering heaven to be at the feet of Allah.....

 

[AnnaG]

They would be cowards if they weren't insane. Not one of these suicide bombers would blow themselves up if they didn't think they were directly entering heaven to be at the feet of Allah.....

Yup.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

*shrugs* It's simple. If people want to fly, they will want to fly safely. If scanners give them some sense of safety, whether its false or not, they'll fly. The alternative is not flying, the way I see it.
And it is about numbers.
What your solution?

A false sense of security is no escurity at all, and may even be worse. I can't understand how average folks can put up with random invasions of privacy for it. More effective means of screening go against the grain of our "liberal" society. Secondary screening needs to be selective and discriminatory and performed by properly trained personnel, discriminating is what thinking people do, but it is not politically correct.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

And it is about numbers.

Not sure what you mean. But I will say this, the flaw that gave the 9/11 hijackers their ease of access was well known at the time. Anyone and everyone could access the departure gates at US airports, and everyone and anyone did. The shopping centres at US airports were inside security. You couldn't bring a knife through security, but you could buy something just as effective at a gift shop. :tongue3: How dumb was that? Theft at the screening checkpoints was the big issue at the time. As I said in a previous post, on average, there are on average 5 well-wishers or companions for every traveller, (I would include airport groupies and thieves in that number)they all went through security. The security personnel had the law of large numbers working against them for a long time. Tests were done on them frequently, if testers made it through with weapons, the screener was fired. The turnover for screeners was, on average, 90 days. Most of them never had a chance to gain experience. You get what you pay for, and the US got it in spades. They had many other issues, but this was the one that bit them in the arse.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

If we all drop trou' and moon the greedy airlines and security companies making HUGE money then they won't need screens.

Problem is, you're not mooning the airlines or the security companies, you're mooning their employees. By and large they are dedicated and do the best with what they're given, to the companies everyone is just seems to be a number regardless of which side of the balance sheet you are on.

 

[Kakato]

Problem is, you're not mooning the airlines or the security companies, you're mooning their employees. By and large they are dedicated and do the best with what they're given, to the companies everyone is just seems to be a number regardless of which side of the balance sheet you are on.

Guess you've never flown with "Calm Air" through Nunavut.8O

 

[ironsides]

A false sense of security is no escurity at all, and may even be worse. I can't understand how average folks can put up with random invasions of privacy for it. More effective means of screening go against the grain of our "liberal" society. Secondary screening needs to be selective and discriminatory and performed by properly trained personnel, discriminating is what thinking people do, but it is not politically correct.

Screening is the least evasive, patting someone down is much more evasive. You want to fly, play by the rules. Don't like the rules, simply don't fly. Better a false alarm than a jock bomb. We lost political correctness when the terrorist began random blowing up of aircraft.

 

[JLM]

A false sense of security is no escurity at all, and may even be worse. I can't understand how average folks can put up with random invasions of privacy for it. More effective means of screening go against the grain of our "liberal" society. Secondary screening needs to be selective and discriminatory and performed by properly trained personnel, discriminating is what thinking people do, but it is not politically correct.

I think with or without the sceening a plane is probably about as safe of a place as anywhere to be. You could just as easily get blown up in a church, a shopping mall, a casino, a school or in your own house.

 

[Cliffy]

I think with or without the sceening a plane is probably about as safe of a place as anywhere to be. You could just as easily get blown up in a church, a shopping mall, a casino, a school or in your own house.

Yup, but paranoia pays. There's big buck in them thar screening machines and added boarding costs as more and more people need to take care of your "security".
Like I heard on the radio one day by some guy who sounded like an evangelist, "How wonderful it is that Canadians are so willing to give up freedom for a little security!" Made me want to shoot my radio. It is why I don't have a radio or a TV anymore. I tell ya, I have never felt so secure as I do now, since I stopped listening to all that fear mongering.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Guess you've never flown with "Calm Air" through Nunavut.8O

Not through Nunavut, but I've flown an them a lot, I had no complaints, other than it was a SAAB. The HS748 would have been worse, been on those too but with a different company.

 

[countryboy]

If we all drop trou' and moon the greedy airlines and security companies making HUGE money then they won't need screens.

Is this really about saving lives or is it really about saving $30 Million aircraft and it's earning potential?

A couple hundred passenger will NEVER earn as much as that aircraft will during it's lifetime.

Airlines making HUGE money? Since when?

Saving lives and saving $30 million aircraft are related - you need people in the aircraft for it to produce revenue.

 

[Colpy]

Have you switched from pot to ecstacy?

Funniest thing I've read on here in a long time....I'd give you greenies, but the system won't let me....

ROTFLMAO