h a l f b a k e r yStrap *this* to the back of your cat.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
There is a tatoo category in Fashion. (not my fishbone, but I don't care for ideas in the general category.) |
|
| |
I'll change it but I can't help but think that fashion is
the wrong category for a tattoo engineered to get you
a strip search |
|
| |
Vehicle:Airplane:Comfort? (Discomfort should be filed
there too, right?) |
|
| |
Its not a thumb your nose at security idea.
Its a sexual see if you can get strip searched take
advantage of an underappreciated opportunity kinky
kind of thing. There is no tired mess with the TSA
nature here. But thanks for the fishbone. |
|
| |
21 Quest - the issue some people (I include myself) have with airport security is that it's security theatre. Things are done not because they improve security, but to make it look like things are being done. |
|
| |
For example, here is an observation I made on a flight a few years ago, after the increases in 'security' were made.
As you go through security, you are obliged to give up various things which might be used as weapons. For example, knives. There are often displays of knives they've taken off people - ranging down to tiny pen-knives. Okay, well that's fine, in isolation. |
|
| |
However, *after* that stage, you progress to a waiting area where you can - amongst other things - purchase a meal at various eateries. One of those served various meat-based items, including steak. The eating utensils were provided on an open rack; one could help oneself to various metal implements including large, heavy-duty steak-knives. |
|
| |
This was the last area before boarding - no further checks were made other than of tickets. |
|
| |
Almost all security involves a bit of theater; in the US,
approximately 75% of visible security cameras are fake,
and the primary role of a security guard is to be seen (this
is the second thing I was taught when I worked as a
security guard). Even big bank vaults are partly built for
show. I have a habit of sizing up safes and vaults whenever
I see them, not because I intend to steal anything, but just
because I work with metal and I know they aren't really as
secure as they seem. I could get into your average day safe
in 10-15 minutes. With the right tools and a lack of adult
supervision, I could cut into a big bank vault in under 10
hours. But, because they look impenetrable and are
combined with other security features, most people think
huge gleaming vault doors can repel any assault. |
|
| |
//If they're anything like the large, heavy-duty steak knives found at Denny's restaurants, for instance, they'd be far more effective at bludgeoning a flight attendant than cutting or stabbing one.// |
|
| |
While I didn't pick any up to test their sharpness, I do remember that these looked fiendishly pointy. |
|
| |
But this misses the point, which is that lots of the confiscated knives were distinctly less whelming as weapons. Nail-clippers are what catch many people out I believe. |
|
| |
//What you call 'theater' is known in the security industry as 'deterrence'.// |
|
| |
...And to everyone else as a unneccessary hassle. |
|
| |
Do you really think that terrorists are deterred by it? the fanatics who are willing to blow themselves up won't try to find another way?
I mean, the initial security screen often has a queue which snakes back and forth in a crowded and partially enclosed area. It would be relatively easy for a single terrorist to wheel a large bomb into the middle of the queue at a busy period. It would be easy for a group to simultaniously attack multiple airports. Or, indeed, other large serpentine queues.
I can only think that the explanation for why this has not happened already is because noone actually wants to do it. |
|
| |
//I rather doubt that. I don't recall ever seeing a 'fiendlishly pointy' steak knife at any restaurant, and I've eaten out in Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, California, Idaho, Washington State, Oregon, and Okinawa, Japan. Some do the job better than others, granted, but fiendishly pointy? Eh.... I'd want to see a photo.// |
|
| |
It was Birmingham, England. Don't have a photo, but if it's just of one in a restaurant I'll try to remember next time I'm in one (might still be a while).
Incidentally, that's your typo, not mine. I checked. |
|
| |
//They'll be slowed by it, while they try to find another way. The bombs they've managed to sneak through (such as the shoe bomb and the underwear bomb) weren't exactly successful, were they? The modifications required to get them through security made them difficult and time-consuming to detonate without being seen and stopped by other passengers first. You can thank the irritating security measures for that. // |
|
| |
That's because most wannabee terrorists are stupid, not because the security measures are so great. (To clarify - I can't speak for American air security; I have personal experience only of that at European and Asian Airports. We get the odd nutter crashing their car into the bollards outside airports and so on, too.) |
|
| |
//Not every criminal has the expertise or finances to design weapons that can be smuggled through security checkpoints, so those sorts of people might well be deterred, or might resort to searching the internet for solutions to their dilemma, which can trigger red flags and bring the Feds down on them before they ever get a chance to actually build their weapon.// |
|
| |
Well, sure. But then again, don't many States let you buy weapons relatively easily? Why would the terrorists attack planes rather than some other weak spot in the infrastructure? You know - McVeigh style.
I think the fact is that people who (a) want to be terrorists, (b) are skilled and methodical, or able to become so with their chosen method, and (c) don't get put on any 'watch lists' are very rare. But - you can't catch all of them.
Should we try and stop them? Of course. But there should be a cost-benefit analysis performed - and not one which factors in the politics. |
|
| |
It goes beyond monitoring fertilizer sales, even. The ATF
works in concert with several other acronym agencies to
track large purchases of many substances that can be
obtained without ID, including so-called 'common
household chemicals'. Buying a ton of Kingsford charcoal
briquettes will put you on their radar (unless it's an
established part of your spending pattern). |
|
| |
//Well, there's your cost-benefit analysis at work. Checkpoint security doesn't have to be full-proof. It just has to be fool-proof, and that's what you're bitching about.// |
|
| |
I think you've got that the wrong way round. I'm arguing for scaling back the security, not increasing it. I'm particularly in favour of removing the silly restrictions and requirements which don't actually increase security, just waste time. (Actually IIRC they relaxed the restrictions on fluids last year.) |
|
| |
You may not be aware, but England does have some experience of terrorism, with the result that we too monitor fertiliser sales etc, and have quite an active intelligence service. Occasionally they shoot someone in the head at random, then claim that the victim was a rapist - so I'm not entirely happy with them either. |
|
| |
//Ah. Well, that would explain, in part, why knife crime is so rampant in England.// |
|
| |
This perception interests me, because it's not something I was aware of. I might look into it in more detail; a cursory search was all I had time for right now, and the top hit was clearly quite partisan.
I certainly could imagine that with easy access to guns they are the primary weapon choice, while in their absense knives are typically used. However, knives arn't unregulated here either - there are laws against carrying knives of over a certain length on the street too; I'm sure the aformentioned steak-knives wouldn't be legal carry.
While I didn't find a nice table relating to knife-murders, I did find one on murder rates. England and Wales was 1.6 per 100,000 pop in 2004, while USA was somewhat higher at 5.9.
I suppose it's entirely possible that knife crime is much more prevalent but just doesn't result in fatalities. |
|
| |
I do remember seeing a documentary by Michal Moore. For some reason I imagine you hate him, so won't have seen it. However, he made the point that Canada has similar gun access to the USA, yet a much lower murder rate - this is borne out by the table, which indicates a murder rate of 1.5 per 100,000 - averaged over the years 2002-2004. |
|
| |
I actually thought Michael Moore was not against carrying guns per se, but that may not be the case. |
|
| |
//Well, that would explain, in part, why knife crime is so rampant in England.// |
|
| |
Actually I think I have an explanation for this now. It comes from a comment in the aforementioned partisan article, which I'll link to. |
|
| |
::Knife crime in the UK means – for the most part "CARRYING A KNIFE"
That is what 88.4% of "Knife crime" in the UK is.:: - Paul Clarke |
|
| |
I've had a quick poke around, and not exactly corroborated this stat, but it did point me in the right direction. I found some official information in a knife crime report: |
|
| |
::There were 4,490 people admitted to English hospitals in 2011/12 due to assault by a sharp object ...:: |
|
| |
Note this is only England (i.e. not Wales, Scotland or EIRE etc), and these were mostly non-fatal, because: |
|
| |
::There were 200 homicides using a sharp instrument in 2011/12, accounting for 39% of all homicides.:: |
|
| |
So to be conservative we could sum these and say there were at most 4,690 serious attacks with knives (and other sharp implements). Given 53 million people in England this gives a rate of 8.85 attacks per 100,000 pop. Which doesn't sound entirely like an epidemic of wanton violence. However: |
|
| |
::We can crudely estimate the numbers of violent incidents in which a knife was used on the basis of the sample figures in the survey and the proportion of such incidents in which a knife was used. Such a calculation suggests that amongst the adult population there were 126,000 violent incidents involving a knife in 2010/11.:: |
|
| |
Which I think basically means knives are used in muggings a lot, but the victim isn't wounded. |
|
| |
Does anyone have anything similar on knife crime in America? |
|
| |
I really do not mean to spoil the debate but none
of
these issues have anything to do with a metallic
tattoo that increases your chances of being strip
searched. |
|
| |
This is no TSA protest idea. I like airport security
to
be plain I agree as long as the fools are fooled I am
a
more comfortable traveler. I am also in favor of the
TSA because it created some jobs. |
|
| |
I travel a great deal, going through security is
typically the highlight of travel that is always the
same, getting to see what kinds of socks people
wear is fascinating. I now believe that people who
wear stripey socks are more interesting and are
more informed conversationalists on average.
I have also discovered that stripe width is a factor
thin stripped sock wearers are more fun to talk to. |
|
| |
You're right, sorry for the tangent. I can see that the idea might be desirable to those who enjoy being strip-searched.
Incidentally, could you correct the spelling in the title? |
|
| |