Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects, Or Nipple Rings Allowed Aboard This Flight. (Trees And Things)

Shy Elf: Re: Cost / Reward Analysis

Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:55:22 EST

Yes, I meant that no security precautions would be preferable to the current system. No, I didn't mean that that would be ideal. Ideally you would have a smoke alarm which didn't cause pain to your ears every day.

Metal detectors can be set

skeptic: More security sitcom

Mon, 7 Apr 2008 12:31:17 EST

I am going to give you two replies to your comment, because my previous reply would have been longer, but I was interrupted in composing it.

My original comment on this topic was in no way intended to be a comprehensive assessment of the state and quali

skeptic: Re: security sitcom

Mon, 7 Apr 2008 09:30:33 EST

This is a somewhat strange accusation for you to make, since I have already clarified that point very carefully in a previous comment. I have stated that I am not in any way in favor of any kind of humiliation or abuse of people with body decorations

JimmyHavok: security sitcom

Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:52:09 EST

Others have covered the issue of security theater quite well in this discussion. Your replies to them and to me indicate that you are perfectly happy with security theater, believing that humiliating people with body jewelry somehow makes you safer,

skeptic: Re: body modification

Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:20:44 EST

I'm sorry to have offended you. My characterization of your position was deliberately simplified for metaphorical purposes, I don't expect everything I say to be taken literally. Nonetheless, I don't think that I have been unfair. When I

JimmyHavok: Re: body modification

Sat, 5 Apr 2008 15:06:43 EST

(civil rights which include, presumably, the right to wear nipple rings - the very inference that you found to be so objectionable that it harms your respect for me).

What I found offensive was your gross mischaracterization of my points. F

skeptic: Re: Cost / Reward Analysis

Sat, 5 Apr 2008 09:23:50 EST

It's an interesting argument. But I don't think that we can quantify the harm done by terrorist attacks against (or using) airplanes, such as the very famous 9/11 attack, solely on the basis of the number of deaths per mile traveled. I could, f

skeptic: Re: body modification

Sat, 5 Apr 2008 09:03:14 EST

You have adopted a somewhat extreme position, by claiming that all security precautions taken at airports are not intended in any way to improve actual security (perhaps security is not even possible) but are all merely a sinister plot to deceive the publi

Shy Elf: Cost / Reward Analysis

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 14:18:01 EST

Exactly.

For an alarm system to give mostly false alarms is perfectly acceptable, because the costs of a missed real alarm are much greater than the costs of a false alarm. But there is still a level of false alarms over which the best response is

JimmyHavok: Re: on security threats and set theory

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:40:45 EST

We have a bunch of smoke detectors at the place where I work...we had a brand that was going off at random, and so people would pull the battery out, and we'd notice during inspections.

In the end we threw them away and bought a different brand.

JimmyHavok: Re: body modification

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:36:08 EST

You seem to be concerned that the government, rather than trying to improve security on airplanes, is actually plotting t prevent people from getting body piercings, which is a bit far-fetched.

Please. That in no way resembles my position,

skeptic: Re: on security threats and set theory

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:29:00 EST

No, not a thousand times a day. But it is nonetheless true that I have seen tremendously more false alarms than correct alarms coming from smoke detectors.

JimmyHavok: Re: on security threats and set theory

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:23:10 EST

Your smoke alarm goes off a thousand times a day? Maybe I need to check the batteries on mine, the last time it went off the house was full of smoke.

skeptic: Re: on security threats and set theory

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 09:55:53 EST

It's very interesting that you give the example of an arson alarm system that goes off thousands of times a day, and in the majority of cases there is no arsonist and no fire, asking if such a system is useful. But we have such devices, they are call

skeptic: Re: body modification

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 09:41:09 EST

Of course, you could choose to announce your opinions, and if you do, someone might object to them, and of course, legally you have the right to your opinions and the right to express your opinions, none of which is actually relevant to the issue which we

wetkarma: Re: on security threats and set theory

Fri, 4 Apr 2008 05:43:26 EST

There is a serious disconnect here between what you perceive as threat and valid threat mitigation.

You say:

As you say, there are lots of metallic objects that aren't weapons, and lots of weapons that aren't metallic, so the usefulness of a

JimmyHavok: Re: body modification

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 18:53:44 EST
there is no way to exclude people from airplanes on the basis of those opinions
Perhaps you remember this case of the guy from Jamaica who got caught trying to bring flammable items onto the plane in his carry-on.
Some obviously mental

wetkarma: on security threats and set theory

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:32:16 EST

However, there is still SOME reason to use metal detectors. Metal weapons such as guns and knives are much more abundant and easily obtained than those sneaky glass and ceramic knives that you theoretically can smuggle past the metal detector

skeptic: Re: body modification

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:13:24 EST
Domestic security arrangement may well be less useful than the gathering of foreign intelligence, but there is no reason why we can't have both. No one ever promised that metal detectors would give us perfect safety, they are merely one precaution th

skeptic: Re: body modification

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:09:31 EST
Not only that, even if you do not smuggle your non-metallic, glass and ceramic knife onto the plane, your expertise in kung fu is still enough to enable you to overpower the other passengers and to take over the plane for your nefarious purposes. So

skeptic: Re: body modification

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 08:59:10 EST
That is a somewhat strange comment. Even though it is true that some people would like to be able to control other people's musical and political opinions, there is no way to exclude people from airplanes on the basis of those opinions, neither of wh

MayorBob: BREAST GRENADES!

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 08:28:08 EST
Those aren't Bazooms; they're BaBOOMs!

skeeter1: Re: Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects,

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 23:45:06 EST
Oh, and I should add, way back when, I did a lot of photography and put all of my film in a lead-lined bag so it wouldn't get fogged by the x-ray machine. Today, that would be a guarantee of a search. I've primarily moved to digital cameras, an

skeeter1: Re: Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects,

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 23:34:38 EST
"Back when I was naive, I was hopeful that a government agency with uniform standards and training could solve the security problem at airports. Now I see the whole thing is a farce."
My last flight, from Cleveland to Phoenix, was pretty much mor

postillion: Re: body modification

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:47:08 EST
I travel regularly with my favorite fountain pen. A number of people who have felt the heft of the thing have mentioned that it

uncarved block: Disagree, Mostly

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 12:33:31 EST
I agree that those currently in power want to increase the power to search, and to reduce the amount of civil liberties ("for the bad guys", natch)-- but they've wanted these things for decades, perhaps longer. The WoT is an excuse, though a

JimmyHavok: Re: body modification

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 11:48:52 EST
Clearly the world is going to hell in a handbasket when Jimmy Havok and I not only agree, but strongly agree.
We've been doing so more and more lately. The Apocalypse is at hand.

JimmyHavok: Re: body modification

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 11:46:41 EST
But if your piercings are going to set off metal-detectors, and if you want to travel by air, then you have to expect that some inconvenience and even embarrassment are going to result. So in many cases it is simply more practical to refrain from

wetkarma: Re: body modification

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:30:24 EST

But if your piercings are going to set off metal-detectors, and if you want to travel by air, then you have to expect that some inconvenience and even embarrassment are going to result
Depending on the type of detector -- it alerts on

skeptic: Re: body modification

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:50:52 EST
Actually, I tend to accept that people do have a right to body piercing, on the principle that you are the owner of your own body, and can do pretty much what you like with it (although the War on Drugs would suggest otherwise). But if your piercings

JimmyHavok: Re: body modification

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 05:03:34 EST
body piercing is not a human right
Indeed. Your body is the possession of the state, and any use of it that inconveniences the state is forbidden.

JimmyHavok: Re: Doing The Job

Wed, 2 Apr 2008 04:58:36 EST
You've got it entirely backwards. The purpose of WoT and the TSA etc is not to make us feel safer and less afraid, but to make us feel threatened. The people who push WoT want an isolationist America. They want a population too afraid to

postillion: Re: Doing The Job

Tue, 1 Apr 2008 23:42:14 EST
Which is where the TSA changes come in, and silly things like color coded threat levels-- the goal is to make citizens feel safer, not to actually have them be safer, as you note*.
I don't know if it made anyone in NY feel any safer, but it certa

Lou: More backstory

Tue, 1 Apr 2008 14:46:46 EST
Well, as it turned out, Jack Bauer was wrong about the whole "breast grenade" thing. What actually triggered this event a TSA inspector saying to co-worker, "man...check out her boobs! They're the bomb!"
And they rest they say, is history.

uncarved block: Doing The Job

Tue, 1 Apr 2008 12:39:34 EST
Well, if you think all these policies were enacted to prevent terrorism, your complaints are valid, and made even worse by an executive branch that seems more intent on pushing through long-wanted reductions of civil liberties that are mostly

pO157: Re: body modification

Tue, 1 Apr 2008 11:09:20 EST
I don't feel bad either, but I feel the problem still comes back to this: The TSA really doesn't provide the security it claims to. Therefore you are harassing people like this woman (and all other travelers) without any substantive net benefit.
The fa

profwhat: Re: body modification

Tue, 1 Apr 2008 10:59:57 EST
This was also my reaction. Body piercings are not a human right, so I don't feel too badly if we've incidentally made the life of body piercing enthusiasts more difficult as part of an overall security program.

skeptic: body modification

Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:11:30 EST
We have a strange social trend by which many people are now obtaining forms of body modification or adornment which until recently would have been regarded as far too extreme for people who don't actually perform for a carnival. Nipple piercing is fa

JimmyHavok: Re: Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects,

Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:17:50 EST
"incidents of female terrorists hiding explosives in sensitive areas are on the rise all over the world"
I understand that there's been a 10,000% rise, from 0 incidents to 0 incidents. Oops, dropped a zero there, should be 100,000%.

Lou: Bauer would have known

Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:28:53 EST
Oh sure...everyone is laughing now...making up "bra bomb" jokes. But, make no mistake. That woman was a wily terrorist and what looked like innocent nipple rings were actually the pins to her deadly BREAST GRENADES!

pO157: Re: Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects,

Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:57:54 EST
Back when I was naive, I was hopeful that a government agency with uniform standards and training could solve the security problem at airports. Now I see the whole thing is a farce. Instead of low wage workers with high turnover we now have low wage worker

postillion: Re: Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects,

Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:48:47 EST
A year after 9/11, I had to travel to Toronto to exhibit at a convention. Going through security for the flight back, I realized that I had a sheathed knife cutter (I had just finished packing up boxes to send back after the convention was over). &nb

port1080: Re: Warning - No Firearms, Liquids, Sharp Objects,

Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:59:18 EST
Is it really true that their equipment is so poor that it can't tell the difference between two tiny nipple rings and a bra bomb? Because if that's the case, they might as well scrap the whole f*()&ing program. Seriously. What's the point? They're