Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
^Yep dogs are inexpensive, and by all accounts just as good or better at detecting residue of explosives. Not to give any terrorist's ideas but really all they have to do is make a hole in the window or fuselage over the ocean at cruising altitude and it is all over. I can think of several ways to do this off the top of my head, that I bet I could get through security today, and could also get through a body scanner. For instance you could make an undergarment out of explosively impregnated material and probably get enough boom to do the job, and no body scanner would catch that.
Again this morning I hear dismay at the fact that we don't have these body scanners in all airports.
Anybody else remember the stink that was made about the scanners? How they would show our private parts? So...you people would rather be blown up than have someone see your junk?!?!?
Anybody else remember the stink that was made about the scanners? How they would show our private parts? So...you people would rather be blown up than have someone see your junk?!?!?
Sorry for the rant, but it can't be both ways.
What do you mean it can't be both ways? Sure it could.
There could be two lines - one for people who don't mind using the body scanners and one for people who don't want to use the scanners.
The line that doesn't have body scanners would probably take longer and would be a more thorough search process.....but those few people who don't want to see their junk on a scanner have the option.
What do you mean it can't be both ways? Sure it could.
There could be two lines - one for people who don't mind using the body scanners and one for people who don't want to use the scanners. terrorists.
I saw your mistake and fixed that up for you
Well obviously that's why I said they'd have to go through a more thorough search. It would be more intensive then the current system is now so I don't think it would make things easier for terrorists.
Of course, i'm talking out my ass and am no safety/security expert.
^Not to mention the flight originated in Amsterdam. Unless we are going to supply them to every airport flying into the US it will not do much good. That being said I completely support the use of bomb trained dogs at all airport gates just past the security check, this is a fairly easy measure that would have stopped this particular incident, and would have worked on the Shoe Bomber as well.
There is a scenario that could play havoc with a public air transportation system that uses dogs and equipment to detect explosives, and causes no loss of life.
Operatives spill powdered ammonium nitrate on the roads and walkways leading into a number of airports. The chemical is dispersed unnoticed onto passengers' shoes and clothing as they enter the airport. Alarms trigger at every gate.
^Not to mention the flight originated in Amsterdam. Unless we are going to supply them to every airport flying into the US it will not do much good. That being said I completely support the use of bomb trained dogs at all airport gates just past the security check, this is a fairly easy measure that would have stopped this particular incident, and would have worked on the Shoe Bomber as well.
There is a scenario that could play havoc with a public air transportation system that uses dogs and equipment to detect explosives, and causes no loss of life.
Operatives spill powdered ammonium nitrate on the roads and walkways leading into a number of airports. The chemical is dispersed unnoticed onto passengers' shoes and clothing as they enter the airport. Alarms trigger at every gate.
There is a scenario that could play havoc with a public air transportation system that uses dogs and equipment to detect explosives, and causes no loss of life.
Operatives spill powdered ammonium nitrate on the roads and walkways leading into a number of airports. The chemical is dispersed unnoticed onto passengers' shoes and clothing as they enter the airport. Alarms trigger at every gate.
quit giving the terrorists ideas!!!!!!!
The idea isn't new. It's the reason there's not more widespread deployment of dogs and sniffers. You could play the same trick with finely powdered corn at our southern border crossings.
I just think we're a horribly repressed society with way too many double standards. Porn is one of our number one industries. Our movies and TV are full of sex. Yet we wont talk about it and our kids shouldn't do it, and we're deathly afraid someone might see our nasty bits. If it saves lives, including my own, I could really care less if some TSA agent sees my schlong before I get on an airplane.
Bob the TSA agent doesn't need to peep at our junk.
But if that kind of exposure is vital to national security, why not also repeal any and all prohibitions on public nudity?
You're being a little extreme about this. While they are called "naked scanners" by some people it's not like we'll literally be seen completely nude by random people.
Reports have emerged calling the scanners "naked scanners" because they show clear outlines of body parts and reveal hidden body piercings.
Outlines of body parts. It's not like a real x-ray glasses type thing.
It's really not that bad. Stop equating it to people running the streets without clothing on.
I guess I'm exaggerating to make a point. Everyone screams for better security, but then we don't want said security when it is provided.
I'd be happy with the aforementioned bomb-sniffing dogs, but I suppose someone would have a problem with dogs in airports?
I think no matter what we do......the people who want to get away with stuff will just adapt and find new ways to do things. I'm not saying we shouldn't try and make things safer......just that no safety measure will 100% ensure our safety forever.
I can't believe you people are taking some of these facetious exaggerations at face value. At least bigjohn seems to get it.
Idunno... I just think about these things through the prism of Ben Franklin's words: Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Now excuse me if I'm wrong... but "liberty" includes not having the government unnecessarily looking at my genitals, no?
I can't believe you people are taking some of these facetious exaggerations at face value. At least bigjohn seems to get it.
Idunno... I just think about these things through the prism of Ben Franklin's words: Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Now excuse me if I'm wrong... but "liberty" includes not having the government unnecessarily looking at my genitals, no?
Well first off they do not/can not look at your genitals they use an algorithm to obscure that part of you. Secondly you certainly have the liberty not to fly if you find security to onerous. Just like you can choose not to go to Bonnaroo if you find the car searches to invasive. I think the big part though is what you said about "unnecessarily" looking at you on a scan. If people are trying to attack us through our airlines again then security for our airlines becomes necessary. Honestly I would sooner walk through one of these than get frisked by some random individual on a much more regular basis.
I can't believe you people are taking some of these facetious exaggerations at face value. At least bigjohn seems to get it.
When we're having a serious discussion about things.....throwing out extreme comparisons (whether you're serious or not) will be taken at face value because you're entering it into a normal, civilized discussion. If you're just going to make wild statements to over-emphasize your point....try making a point first.
Don't just use exaggerations to try and make it seem like it's a bigger deal than it is. That's like when Jigawig was using the flu vaccine callback as a way to attack government healthcare. You're taking one thing, and blowing it out of proportion to try and prove your point. Next time just do some quick research and maybe give us a thought-out, discussion-oriented post instead of just a few lines of exaggeration.
Idunno... I just think about these things through the prism of Ben Franklin's words: Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Giving up a little liberty for a little security is nothing new. Look at the security cameras outside of apartment buildings and businesses or current security checks at concerts, airports, and other places. People have been giving up "liberty" in order to be a little more secure for years.
Ben Franklin couldn't have possibly imagined that one day there would be suicide-bombing terrorists that want to board airplanes filled with people and kill them all. We don't know what he would have thought of a technological device such as the full body scanners
They say about these full body scanners that it wouldn't detect if a person had anything hidden in any body cavity. So if you had a bomb in your pocket, the TSA agent would know. But if you shoved it up your butt, they wouldn't find it.
They say about these full body scanners that it wouldn't detect if a person had anything hidden in any body cavity. So if you had a bomb in your pocket, the TSA agent would know. But if you shoved it up your butt, they wouldn't find it.
Damn. Why does everything have to be so difficult.
They say about these full body scanners that it wouldn't detect if a person had anything hidden in any body cavity. So if you had a bomb in your pocket, the TSA agent would know. But if you shoved it up your butt, they wouldn't find it.
They say about these full body scanners that it wouldn't detect if a person had anything hidden in any body cavity. So if you had a bomb in your pocket, the TSA agent would know. But if you shoved it up your butt, they wouldn't find it.
Damn. Why does everything have to be so difficult.
Considering there's an "underwear bomber" in the headlines, this is a valid point.
They say about these full body scanners that it wouldn't detect if a person had anything hidden in any body cavity. So if you had a bomb in your pocket, the TSA agent would know. But if you shoved it up your butt, they wouldn't find it.
This is why dogs make so much more sense.
I could volunteer my dog. She seems to love sniffing people's butts when they come over.
I'll preface by saying I voted for Obama (if you hadn't figured that one out yet )
During the election, Obama said everything would be open, televised, etc., etc. Now that we get down to the matter, the Health Care meetings between the Senate and the House are going to be behind closed doors. I realize this is business as usual in D.C., but I don't like it.
To me, it seems like they should be open to the public. We screamed bloody murder when the Reps were doing it during the Bush years.