But you know, she could have just not went to the airport right? It's obviously HER fault for wanting to fly, and NOT the TSA agents. Right?
There's a difference in asking for a medical liquids not to be scanned by x-rays but being approved by other means set in place, than just plainly refusing a search just because you don't want to.
By your logic stated a couple of pages back, it's her own fault for chosing to fly.
That's a really stupid argument, you can be able to afford a driver liscence but if you are judged too dangerous or not ready they can refuse giving you the liscence.
i repeat
Carbuncle.Sevourn said:
there is no constitutional amendment that specifically says you have the right to be exempted from a driving exam
try again
I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say with that.
You can't be exempted from being scanned, you can't be exempted from passing a driver exam? If that's what you mean then I don't see what's your point with that.
i'll see if i can break it down.
to get on a plane and fly. you can expect to be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure.
oh hey look. there is a specific amendment in the bill of rights that says, quite clearly, you can't do that.
to drive a car, you need to prove you know how to drive well enough not to hit people. with good reason. cars kill over 2000 times as many americans as terrorists in the us as terrorists do around the world, as i documented in an earlier tsa thread.
oh hey look. there is not a specific passage in the constitution that says it's illegal to have you get a license to ensure you know how to do something safely.
But you know, she could have just not went to the airport right? It's obviously HER fault for wanting to fly, and NOT the TSA agents. Right?
There's a difference in asking for a medical liquids not to be scanned by x-rays but being approved by other means set in place, than just plainly refusing a search just because you don't want to.
By your logic stated a couple of pages back, it's her own fault for chosing to fly.
No, there's a guideline for medical liquids. She was following that guide line. TSA agents ignored it. There's a big difference.
Ragnarok.Zanno said:
Is it just me that thinks that Shiroi is a TSA agent on some airport, and that he loves his job?
But you know, she could have just not went to the airport right? It's obviously HER fault for wanting to fly, and NOT the TSA agents. Right?
There's a difference in asking for a medical liquids not to be scanned by x-rays but being approved by other means set in place, than just plainly refusing a search just because you don't want to.
By your logic stated a couple of pages back, it's her own fault for chosing to fly.
No, there's a guideline for medical liquids. She was following that guide line. TSA agents ignored it. There's a big difference.
there is no difference when it's an illegal violation of her rights, move along.
That's a really stupid argument, you can be able to afford a driver liscence but if you are judged too dangerous or not ready they can refuse giving you the liscence.
i repeat
Carbuncle.Sevourn said:
there is no constitutional amendment that specifically says you have the right to be exempted from a driving exam
try again
I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say with that.
You can't be exempted from being scanned, you can't be exempted from passing a driver exam? If that's what you mean then I don't see what's your point with that.
i'll see if i can break it down.
to get on a plane and fly. you can expect to be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure.
oh hey look. there is a specific amendment in the bill of rights that says, quite clearly, you can't do that.
to drive a car, you need to prove you know how to drive well enough not to hit people. with good reason. cars kill over 2000 times as many americans as terrorists in the us as terrorists do around the world, as i documented in an earlier tsa thread.
oh hey look. there is not a specific passage in the constitution that says it's illegal to have you get a license to ensure you know how to do something safely.
okay guys we're good to go
Point taken, I understand what you mean.
But note it's normal to have more casualities when the car/plane ratio could be like 100k cars for 1 plane.
That's a really stupid argument, you can be able to afford a driver liscence but if you are judged too dangerous or not ready they can refuse giving you the liscence.
i repeat
Carbuncle.Sevourn said:
there is no constitutional amendment that specifically says you have the right to be exempted from a driving exam
try again
I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say with that.
You can't be exempted from being scanned, you can't be exempted from passing a driver exam? If that's what you mean then I don't see what's your point with that.
i'll see if i can break it down.
to get on a plane and fly. you can expect to be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure.
oh hey look. there is a specific amendment in the bill of rights that says, quite clearly, you can't do that.
to drive a car, you need to prove you know how to drive well enough not to hit people. with good reason. cars kill over 2000 times as many americans as terrorists in the us as terrorists do around the world, as i documented in an earlier tsa thread.
oh hey look. there is not a specific passage in the constitution that says it's illegal to have you get a license to ensure you know how to do something safely.
okay guys we're good to go
Point taken, I understand what you mean.
But note it's normal to have more casualities when the car/plane ratio could be like 100k cars for 1 plane.
2000 times as many fatalities as all terrorist attacks on americans around the world using any methods
not just planes
of course, there are a lot more cars than terrorists, so that makes sense
explains why we are spending billions on government programs to save hundreds of thousands of lives by making cars safer instead of spending billions to save us from
a blight that causes less deaths than lightning strikes
no more of a problem than the entire thing in itself, they switch from screening a portion of the people to everyone, and the tsa will receive the response it deserves, I guarantee it.
