"Naked" X-Ray Scans At The Airport.. Your Thoughts?

[kaytieeldr]

I don't think you really want to turn this into a 2nd Amendment rights issue do you? Conceal Carry has long been upheld.

And yes, the point that these are foriegn nationals and cannot get permits is key to my point.

Not doubting, and not caring enough to research - however, I was directly responding to your inaccurate claim that:

A conceal carry permit is issued as a right protected by the second admendment as a citizen of the US.

As you know, the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights - no amendment, as a matter of fact - addresses concealed weapons. In fact, a militia is more effective when carrying weaponry out in the open.

 

[shrubber]

That would be Tariq Raja and Abdel Rahim, but both of those were aliases not his LEGAL name. If he was going to apply for a permit, which name do you think he would use? His legal name or an alias?

Not according to the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1729022.stm

Mr Baker said Mr Reid had converted to Islam while serving time in a British prison for minor offences.

Abdul Haqq Baker
Chairman, Brixton Mosque
He said Mr Reid took the name, Abdel Rahim, and came to the mosque for instruction in mainstream Islam, initially taking a studious approach.

But he said he later became convinced his teachers were too "passive" in the face of perceived Western injustice.

 

[bettymae1121]

You mean Abdul Raheem

Was that the name on his ticket and/or id? Because if it wasn't, if it was Richard Reed, then profiling just based on name wouldn't have done a bit of good. Behavior profiling like the Isralies do, dogs, chemical sniffers, or all three would have been a better bet with him. Two of the three would have found the bomb and the third (behavior profiling) would likely have had some good results too.

I'm all for improving security at airports. But I'd rather focus on improving areas that will actually increase safety, not just make me feel better but not do a dang thing to actually make me safe. It's not just the Islamic terrorists I'm worried about, but ANY terrorist, including home grown ones. To assume the only people that want to blow up airplanes only fit certain narrow paramiters leaves a wide open hole in our sercurity process.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Not according to the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1729022.stm

Mr Baker said Mr Reid had converted to Islam while serving time in a British prison for minor offences.

Abdul Haqq Baker
Chairman, Brixton Mosque
He said Mr Reid took the name, Abdel Rahim, and came to the mosque for instruction in mainstream Islam, initially taking a studious approach.

But he said he later became convinced his teachers were too "passive" in the face of perceived Western injustice.

Many in Islam take another name, but their legal name is unchanged. It's not that uncommon.

 

[shrubber]

Not doubting, and not caring enough to research - however, I was directly responding to your inaccurate claim that:



As you know, the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights - no amendment, as a matter of fact - addresses concealed weapons. In fact, a militia is more effective when carrying weaponry out in the open.

You must have stopped reading after two then...
Remember #10?
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[bettymae1121]

And extra screening is short sighted? gimme a break.

No, I said it was short sighted to improve screening that only targets those that fit the profile of those that have attacked us in the past. Not all would-be terrorists are going to be Islamic, or hale from the Middle East.

Just because they haven't changed taticts yet, doesn't mean they won't (or haven't already, who knows what they have in the works?). It's all well and good to target Abdul Mohammed Jamal, but in a few years when a bomb is set off by Patrick Alan Jones, what good does that do us?

 

[Tiggernut_jadie]

On all three of the 9/11 hijackings, passangers knew that the palne had been hijacked, and at least two of the fights, the passengers had made plans to thwart the attempts.
Ya think a gun might have come in handy?

The pecieved wisdom prior to 9/11 was to 'cooperate' with hijackers as until that time no-one had used a plane as a suicide bomb. The cabin crew and pilots would have been trained to co-operate and get the plane on the ground so that 'negotiations' could take place to free the hostages. Sadly that percieved wisdom was changed forever by the event of that day. So until the people on the second two planes that day found out what had happened in New York they would have been following the same 'protocols'. Do I think a gun would have helped....maybe, maybe not.....I don't honestly think the final result would have been any different.

A conceal carry permit is issued as a right protected by the second admendment as a citizen of the US.

By default, none of these terrorists could even apply.

When was the last time you heard of an American hijacking or attempting to blow up an airplane?

...SO FAR! As others have pointed out the bombs on the London tube were carried by British citizens. Our country is much smaller than the US so how can you be so sure that there isn't a 'Joe Smith' somewhere in the US who has converted to islam and is planning the next attack? I think it's very naive to think this isn't happening and if people with permits are allowed to carry weapons on a plane what is to stop this 'Joe Smith' getting a permit?

Well they seem to be batting at 1000 so far. Joe Smith has'nt taken down a plane has he?

...SO FAR! See Above!

Many in Islam take another name, but their legal name is unchanged. It's not that uncommon.

Richard Reid's passport was in his british name so he would not have 'flagged' anything according to using the 'only choose the ones with Muslim names' way of thinking.

Back to the original point of this thread - the ideal would be to have a variety of methods of screening people getting on a plane....scanners, searhes, sniffer dogs, metal detectors, liquid restrictions etc etc. It isn't the case of one or the other!

 

[sbell111]

Sorry - I meant, "in the process of entering", or approaching, and in direct response to shrubber's invoking the 2nd Amendment.

You bring up yet one more problem with Shrubber's plan. Passengers flying into the US from other countries would never, ever be allowed to carry on handguns.

Was that the name on his ticket and/or id? Because if it wasn't, if it was Richard Reed, then profiling just based on name wouldn't have done a bit of good. Behavior profiling like the Isralies do, dogs, chemical sniffers, or all three would have been a better bet with him. Two of the three would have found the bomb and the third (behavior profiling) would likely have had some good results too.

That reminds me of something that I had read not too long ago. In July, 2001, Richaard Reid flew to Israel and went through El Al's lauded security measures. He made it through their intensive security screening. This suggests that those who believe that the answer to the terrorist problem is 'profiling' are wrong.

I'm all for improving security at airports. But I'd rather focus on improving areas that will actually increase safety, not just make me feel better but not do a dang thing to actually make me safe. It's not just the Islamic terrorists I'm worried about, but ANY terrorist, including home grown ones. To assume the only people that want to blow up airplanes only fit certain narrow paramiters leaves a wide open hole in our sercurity process.

Agreed. I say that we make everyone go through the scanners.

 

[shrubber]

The pecieved wisdom prior to 9/11 was to 'cooperate' with hijackers as until that time no-one had used a plane as a suicide bomb. The cabin crew and pilots would have been trained to co-operate and get the plane on the ground so that 'negotiations' could take place to free the hostages. Sadly that percieved wisdom was changed forever by the event of that day. So until the people on the second two planes that day found out what had happened in New York they would have been following the same 'protocols'. Do I think a gun would have helped....maybe, maybe not.....I don't honestly think the final result would have been any different.

I think it very well may have, I understand we disagree

...SO FAR! As others have pointed out the bombs on the London tube were carried by British citizens. Our country is much smaller than the US so how can you be so sure that there isn't a 'Joe Smith' somewhere in the US who has converted to islam and is planning the next attack? I think it's very naive to think this isn't happening and if people with permits are allowed to carry weapons on a plane what is to stop this 'Joe Smith' getting a permit?



We have been talking about planes here, not trains. And yes so far the threat has been from Islamic Jihadists, not John Smith. Should we not meet the immediate threat?
...SO FAR! See Above!



Richard Reid's passport was in his british name so he would not have 'flagged' anything according to using the 'only choose the ones with Muslim names' way of thinking.

This happened a few short months after 9/11. Today, I would hope that Abdul Raheem would not be able to get on a plane regardless of what passport he used. Although this latest attack leaves me leary.

Back to the original point of this thread - the ideal would be to have a variety of methods of screening people getting on a plane....scanners, searhes, sniffer dogs, metal detectors, liquid restrictions etc etc. It isn't the case of one or the other!

I agree completely, I offer up allowing people to arm themselves as one of those variety of methods. As this latest attack shows, screening has it's faults. And given that, I'd prefer a last line of defense.

 

[shrubber]

.

That reminds me of something that I had read not too long ago. In July, 2001, Richaard Reid flew to Israel and went through El Al's lauded security measures. He made it through their intensive security screening. This suggests that those who believe that the answer to the terrorist problem is 'profiling' are wrong.
Agreed. I say that we make everyone go through the scanners.[/QUOTE]

They actually did let him on the plane, but he was so suspicious, they seated an armed air marshall next to him on the plane! Profiling works.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/15/60II/main324476.shtml

 

[shrubber]

...SO FAR! As others have pointed out the bombs on the London tube were carried by British citizens. Our country is much smaller than the US so how can you be so sure that there isn't a 'Joe Smith' somewhere in the US who has converted to islam and is planning the next attack? !

This is the list of people charged in the July 21rst attacks in London

http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4732361.stm

Hussain Osman
Ibrahim Muktar Said
Ramzi Mohamed
Yassin Hassan Omar
Manfo Kwaku Asiedu
Adel Yahya
Siraj Yassin Abdullah Ali
Wharbi Mohammed
Asias Girma
Ismael Abdurahman
Shadi Sami Abdel Gadir
Omar Nagmeloin Almagboul
Abdul Sharif
Mohamed Kabashi
Yeshiemebet Girma
Mulumebet Girma and
Muhedin Ali
Of course I am not sure that there isn't a Joe Smith out there, but profiling seems like it might be a good idea, no?

 

[MosMom]

If we stopped all the crazy screening and gave terrorism about as much thought as we give car accidents, it would slow down or stop. If it doesn't terrorize and cause mass hysteria and change to our lives...it ceases to work. A terrorist could bring down a plane full of passengers a day for the deaths to equal roadway deaths daily.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

If we stopped all the crazy screening and gave terrorism about as much thought as we give car accidents, it would slow down or stop. If it doesn't terrorize and cause mass hysteria and change to our lives...it ceases to work. A terrorist could bring down a plane full of passengers a day for the deaths to equal roadway deaths daily.

There is truth in that...I don't fear death, I have no fear in flying now or even in the past prior to 9/11. I am aware of my surroundings, I do what I can to mitigate danger, but I also know I am not the only person in this world and I cannot control everything.

 

[shrubber]

If we stopped all the crazy screening and gave terrorism about as much thought as we give car accidents, it would slow down or stop. If it doesn't terrorize and cause mass hysteria and change to our lives...it ceases to work. A terrorist could bring down a plane full of passengers a day for the deaths to equal roadway deaths daily.

That is the saddest thing I've read in a long time.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I agree completely, I offer up allowing people to arm themselves as one of those variety of methods. As this latest attack shows, screening has it's faults. And given that, I'd prefer a last line of defense.

You'd prefer a plane full of passengers, none of whose abilities (or mental state) are known to most of the other passengers, carrying concealed guns over a brief, anonymous backscatter scan in a relatively accurate - because nothing's perfect - attempt to prevent dangerous items being brought onboard?

Yes, PLEASE start shrubber's Wild West Airlines so the rest of us can travel safely on legacy and low-cost existing airlines.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Of course I am not sure that there isn't a Joe Smith out there, but profiling seems like it might be a good idea, no?

Based on your criteria, a passenger named Barack Hussein Obama would/should be profiled.

note to Moderators: understood if you choose to delete this post; while not intended to be political - but rather use a well-known name similar to those listed by the quoted poster - I can see where you'd want to be equitable.

 

[sbell111]

.

That reminds me of something that I had read not too long ago. In July, 2001, Richaard Reid flew to Israel and went through El Al's lauded security measures. He made it through their intensive security screening. This suggests that those who believe that the answer to the terrorist problem is 'profiling' are wrong.
Agreed. I say that we make everyone go through the scanners

They actually did let him on the plane, but he was so suspicious, they seated an armed air marshall next to him on the plane! Profiling works.

The object of the game is to keep bombs off planes, not to have your people sit down next to them.

 

[LisaR]

If we stopped all the crazy screening and gave terrorism about as much thought as we give car accidents, it would slow down or stop. If it doesn't terrorize and cause mass hysteria and change to our lives...it ceases to work. A terrorist could bring down a plane full of passengers a day for the deaths to equal roadway deaths daily.

There is some truth to that. OT a bit but I have always wondered why terrorists even want to blow planes out of our skies. We will keep flying. We proved that after 9/11. If terrorists started strapping bombs on themselves and began routinely blowing up our grocery stores, libraries, medical facilities, schools, Disney, sporting events, etc. personally that would freak me out. It would put everyone on edge. I don't need to fly but I need groceries and going out on a daily errand would become so much more stressful for everyone. When they start disrupting my everyday life and I never know when or where they are going to strike, I would be frightened. Right now I am far more worried about the plane having a mechanical problem or pilot error instead of a terrorist taking it down.

 

[shrubber]

You'd prefer a plane full of passengers, none of whose abilities (or mental state) are known to most of the other passengers, carrying concealed guns over a brief, anonymous backscatter scan in a relatively accurate - because nothing's perfect - attempt to prevent dangerous items being brought onboard?

Yes, PLEASE start shrubber's Wild West Airlines so the rest of us can travel safely on legacy and low-cost existing airlines.

CC permits are issued by the States. Ohio for instance requires a background check including criminal history, mental capacity, drug use along with required training. I never said over a scan, I said in addition to.

 

[shrubber]

Based on your criteria, a passenger named Barack Hussein Obama would/should be profiled.

note to Moderators: understood if you choose to delete this post; while not intended to be political - but rather use a well-known name similar to those listed by the quoted poster - I can see where you'd want to be equitable.

tiptoeing here.....same note to Mods.

Well, the name fits the profile.
So yes.