Freedom and Chains Juxtaposed

[Guest oldsmobile98]

I flew back the other day from my best friend's wedding, which was on Long Island in New York. At Reagan Airport in D.C., I saw a guy with a t-shirt that said "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security". I went up and told him I liked his t-shirt, and I showed him the Kuhnhausen manual I was reading on D, E, and I-frame Colt double action revolvers. He said "cool", or something like that. I was encouraged to see somebody wearing that in an airport in D.C.

Our layover in D.C. was gonna last a few hours, so my parents went and walked around for a while. Dad told me he had seen a full body scanner. He said he hadn't gone through it (I had warned the fam not to go through any of these if we ran into them). I went to go see for myself. People were just going through, even though they apparently could choose to go through a metal detector and (and possibly get frisked... not sure on this) instead. I sat there for a while and watched. It was very discouraging.

I thought about it, and there's really only one reason for this: more invasion of privacy. If a metal detector can do the job just as well, why spend a bunch of money to install these expensive machines? They're only in some airports, and they are still optional ... but I think this will eventually be mandatory for all airplane passengers. Some people will just refuse and opt to drive everywhere. I'm one of them...

We gotta write our reps and tell 'em we're not gonna put up with this garbage.

[MCSCOTT]

I'd say it's definately a better way of invading one's privacy by giving a better sense of security to the people involved, whether their actually safer or not. Don't really know where I stand on the issue, but it would seem to me that if terrorists wanted bombs on planes, or to hijack planes, they would just train one of their members to be a pilot or maintenance man for an airline and convince the companies to hire them. I mean heck, they managed to convince the majority of the American population to elect a terrorist for a President, so I would have to think it should be just as easy to get one hired on for an airline.

Personally I'm way ahead of you, in that I've already opted to drive everywhere from now own. Call me what you will, but with everything going on in this country these days I just don't care that much for venturing too far from home.

[vontar]

There are far eaiser ways, however due to the public nature of the internet I will not disclose them, as I don't want to give anyone the wrong ideas or scare the masses any more.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I've been driving most everywhere for a long time. I go flying with my brother when

the opportunity arises. The closest I get to BNA is at the drive up, and that's to let

a family member in or out of the car.

[Guest Ghostrider]

I fly all the time. The only annoying part of the FBS is that you have to take EVERYTHING out of your pockets; papers and all, it's annoying.

As for privacy, if anyone wants to look at my pasty white fat butt all they have to do is ask

I doubt anyone will try to walk much of anything in through security in a US airport anymore, much easier to work in the airport, on a maint crew, or as a janitor, baggage handler, etc, etc.

I worry more (a LOT more) about mechanical and maint issues than I do terrorism. Our civil fleet is OLD and I mean in cycles and years and miles.

No plane will go down with passive passengers ever again. And I'd much rather die on my feet than on my knees. Or strapped into a seat knowing in a minute or so I'll be torn to pieces or burn to a crisp.

Just an opinion.

[kb4ns]

And I'd much rather die on my feet than on my knees. Or strapped into a seat knowing in a minute or so I'll be torn to pieces or burn to a crisp.

+1

[mikegideon]

I've been driving most everywhere for a long time. I go flying with my brother when

the opportunity arises. The closest I get to BNA is at the drive up, and that's to let

a family member in or out of the car.

I'm with you. I drove a 6 state region because I hate dealing with airports. Last few times I flew, it was charter.

[Guest Broomhead]

You have the freedom to move about the country, that is for sure. However, you do not have the freedom to fly, that is a privilege, one given to you by a private industry. If you don't want to go through the security to get on your plane, then by all means take a car, bus, or train. It is not an invasion of privacy. When you put your baggage on the conveyor for the x-ray machine, or you begin to walk through the metal detector/body scanner, you have given the security officers permission to check however it is deemed necessary.

You also need to read up on technology a bit. The walk-through metal detector does not do the same thing that a full body scanner does. A metal detector can not detect the organic/inorganic compounds that the scanner can, it is impossible.

[1gewehr]

Prior to 1968, no American airliner had ever been successfully hijacked. US Pilots were encouraged to carry pistols as airliners were often carrying US Mail.

In 1968, Congress passed restrictions on carrying firearms on airplanes. Almost immediately the phrase "Fly me to Cuba" entered the national jargon.

All of this airport security stuff is strictly for show. It cannot stop a terrorist. This has been demonstrated several times. Google 'shoe bomber' and 'Air France 447'. Also, in the first few years after 9/11 Homeland Security performed penetration tests of airport security. If they still do it, they are being VERY quiet about the results. Several news stories have been done about how easy it is to get almost anything past airport security.

If they were really serious about airline security, they would simply allow anyone with a carry permit to carry onboard a plane.

[mikegideon]

Their technology is fine. Their strategy is wrong.

[Armed Aviator]

I fly all the time . . . not commercially so much anymore. I can get most places as fast as you can commercially when you consider drive time, parking time, check in time, waiting time, . . . Oh, Yeah... Carrying is mandatory on my plane for those that have an HCP:)

[mikegideon]

Prior to 1968, no American airliner had ever been successfully hijacked. US Pilots were encouraged to carry pistols as airliners were often carrying US Mail.

In 1968, Congress passed restrictions on carrying firearms on airplanes. Almost immediately the phrase "Fly me to Cuba" entered the national jargon.

All of this airport security stuff is strictly for show. It cannot stop a terrorist. This has been demonstrated several times. Google 'shoe bomber' and 'Air France 447'. Also, in the first few years after 9/11 Homeland Security performed penetration tests of airport security. If they still do it, they are being VERY quiet about the results. Several news stories have been done about how easy it is to get almost anything past airport security.

If they were really serious about airline security, they would simply allow anyone with a carry permit to carry onboard a plane.

That's kinda the way I look at it, as I'm standing there in my sock feet. The TSA is a joke... Mall cops. I don't have enough tolerance for stupid to keep my mouth shut.

[Guest stmccann]

You have the freedom to move about the country, that is for sure. However, you do not have the freedom to fly, that is a privilege, one given to you by a private industry. If you don't want to go through the security to get on your plane, then by all means take a car, bus, or train. It is not an invasion of privacy. When you put your baggage on the conveyor for the x-ray machine, or you begin to walk through the metal detector/body scanner, you have given the security officers permission to check however it is deemed necessary.

You also need to read up on technology a bit. The walk-through metal detector does not do the same thing that a full body scanner does. A metal detector can not detect the organic/inorganic compounds that the scanner can, it is impossible.

True - I don't have the freedom to fly, but I do have the freedom to contract with a company to provide transportation - which I do. And that company would have the ability to set the rules that I must follow to enter that contract. Kind of like following the rules of the property owner of a internet web site . If I can choose my airline based on the service and security they provide I would be better off. The government has wedged themselves between the customer and the airline, and has the 'power' to keep me from getting on the aircraft, even though they are not part of the contract....

I would always choose to fly Liberty Airlines - where I could travel armed - than Sheep Pen Air - where they demand no one carries a nail file on board. If only the government would get the hell out of the way....

I contend that the reason September 11th happened the way it did was NOT because we let terrorists on aircraft with boxcutters - but because we prohibited citizens from traveling while legally armed.

The government was in charge of how security was handled at airports on September 11th, and they FAILED, as usual.

And lastly, those that give up liberties for security get and deserve neither.

In Liberty -

Sean

[Guest stmccann]

I fly all the time . . . not commercially so much anymore. I can get most places as fast as you can commercially when you consider drive time, parking time, check in time, waiting time, . . . Oh, Yeah... Carrying is mandatory on my plane for those that have an HCP:)

As an ATC working at Memphis ARTCC - I have seen the FAA and DHS work for almost 10 years now attempting to destroy GA in this country. May you continue to travel unfettered. If you make it to the Memphis area, give me a holler here and I'll try to get you a tour of the facilities - if you don't mind entering a government facility unarmed....

Grrrr.

In Liberty,

Sean

[Guest oldsmobile98]

You have the freedom to move about the country, that is for sure. However, you do not have the freedom to fly, that is a privilege, one given to you by a private industry. If you don't want to go through the security to get on your plane, then by all means take a car, bus, or train. It is not an invasion of privacy. When you put your baggage on the conveyor for the x-ray machine, or you begin to walk through the metal detector/body scanner, you have given the security officers permission to check however it is deemed necessary.

stmccann stated my response better than I could.

True - I don't have the freedom to fly, but I do have the freedom to contract with a company to provide transportation - which I do. And that company would have the ability to set the rules that I must follow to enter that contract. Kind of like following the rules of the property owner of a internet web site . If I can choose my airline based on the service and security they provide I would be better off. The government has wedged themselves between the customer and the airline, and has the 'power' to keep me from getting on the aircraft, even though they are not part of the contract....

If all the private airlines decided to use their money and make full body scans mandatory, that'd be one thing. But this is the government using our money to do it.

The walk-through metal detector does not do the same thing that a full body scanner does. A metal detector can not detect the organic/inorganic compounds that the scanner can, it is impossible.

You're right. I didn't mean that they did exactly the same thing, just that they served the same function of keeping out bombs. A full body scan is probably better at the job, but it is also a violation of decency.