TSA mess and the police

[bicker]

Frankly, there are people in this thread who seem to get offended just because everyone doesn't agree with them.

Perhaps, but that's not surprising because it shadows the perspective that they're presenting, itself, doesn't it? Very early in the thread LuvOrlando outlined her standing for making the comments she made. Very clearly she said, "My thread isn't about the big picture really. It's about me not liking what's happening here and now." I think, in the heat of the discussion -- and this applies beyond online forums - I believe it affect the overall national discussion on this -- in the heat of the discussion, many critics lose sight of this distinction that LuvOrlando made. They're projecting their own personal liking and not liking as a basis for what the big picture should be. They're asserting that the nation should be governed so as to make them like traveling, instead of governed so as to best serve the obligations and objectives of the nation.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Because you don't, I think I have tried on numerous occasions to be generous and accept that an opposing conclusion is valid. It's not my way but it's valid anyway. When did you do that?

I accept that your ideas are valid to you. Why must I agree that they are valid to me?

 

[OceanAnnie]

See, and this sums up the difference between me and you (and her). I can accept that and not be offended. I can laugh it off. I don't mind that we disagree. I do not see this as a tthread that can be "won".

No, I don't think it does.

I can understand opposing arguments and at times agree. I enjoy reading different perspectives. Debate. Again, I'm not "offended" by the put downs. But I do see them as unkind and harsh.

I'm not trying to shut down opposing views by putting down posters.

I do agree with you the thread can't be "won", but the debate can continue in a civil manner.

 

[skater]

Then the law of averages is truly skewed... or people are making a big deal out of nothing.
The new procedures have been in effect for almost a month. In all that time, of all the millions of air passengers, only ONE menstruating passenger has gone through the backscatter scanner and needed additional screening and been so traumatized she took her experience to the media? Really? Yes, I read the article; yes, I realize this passenger had been sexually assaulted some time in the past.

What I find difficult to believe is that no other passenger using pads or diapers in the last month went through the scanner and then still had to be patted down - and didn't complain about it. None. Not one.

Averages don't matter to most of us too much until it happens to us.

 

[DMRick]

Maybe it's not "as important" to others. I have read posters say exactly that.
Maybe posters don't understand how important it is to those with opposing opinions.

I think everyone agrees it's important. It's just some of us aren't as upset as others (or aren't upset at all), and still intend to fly.
Opposing opinions doesn't mean one side feels it's less important.

As for amount of posts, I've never understood that the person that starts a thread usually has the most posts. I've seen threads where the OP has never come back to the thread. That said, amount of posts should have nothing to to with anything.


I did find the 'you and your little group' to be rather insulting. I don't get the little group part..there are m any opinions, and just because someone has an opinion different from yours, doesn't make them part of a 'little group'.

 

[LuvOrlando]

The government shouldn't be engaging in parenting. They should be engaging in governance. Perhaps that's really the problem: Some folks are expecting their preferences and choices as a parent to prevail over the law that affects more than just their own family.

That kind of statement, directed at a specific poster, even if that specific poster posted a similarly in appropriate statement, contributes nothing to the discussion other than perhaps inciting a hostile response. Let's avoid that sort of thing, eh?

I seem to think a great many laws apply to parenting.

ummm, the nasty comment about logic was the match. It's not ok to derisively undermine people who look at this issue from different points of view. I am part logical being, and part parent. To some people that might be a vulnerability but I think it's a strength. You don't have to agree with me on that. You guys can even PM each other about how hilarious it is, but if someone says it to my face you can expect a response. It's not funny

 

[bicker]

In case you missed it, this is my thread which means a good number of the posts are going to be from me. That is sort of how it works

Sorry. No one owns threads. You've said this at least twice in the thread, and it is no more true now than it was the first time.

You are the original poster, and that perhaps could serve as some foundation for explaining why you might post more than someone else in the thread. However, even that's a pretty weak assertion. A discussion regarding a controversial issue should ideally have just as much discussion of one side as the other (or evenly among all three sides, for issues that have three sides). So the most frequent poster should be among those who is supporting the side of the issue that fewer people are willing to post support for in the thread. In this thread, the posters are pretty-much evenly-divided between both sides, so rightfully, no one should be posting significantly more than anyone else.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

No, I don't think it does.

I can understand opposing arguments and at times agree. I enjoy reading different perspectives. Debate. Again, I'm not "offended" by the put downs. But I do see them as unkind and harsh...

But you are okay with her comment? And you can't see the inconsistency? Then let me point it out to you.

You are okay with comments that are "harsh" as long as they are directed at people who disagree with you, but not when they are directed at people with whom you agree. See - clarity.

 

[JLTraveling]

And my guess is that for every 100 people who were upset, there were 1000-3000 people who weren't. Some percentage of people are going to be intent on being upset, just because they don't like that these measures are in place, without any regard whatsoever to any objective actuality of offense. They just want to personally control the situation, even though the situation is in a public context.

Even if your numbers are hypothetically correct, 10 percent of people who have traveled is statistically significant, especially when the sample size is so small to begin with. Despite all the hype over the number of air passengers this week, the reality is that 94 percent of people traveled by car (39.7 million). Only 4 percent flew (1.62 million). The others traveled by some other means.

So you take 4 percent of the traveling public and find that, using your numbers, 10 percent of those were upset by the new measures. Say what you like, but I don't think the airlines are going to be thrilled if 10 percent of their 4 percent market share stops flying.

When I first started this I was upset but now I'm just sort of resigned to the fact the TSA won't change and we'll never fly again until the wars are over. DH and I sat around yesterday looking at places we can go locally and we have a fairly decent list of shorter trips for 2011, Cape Cod, Cape May, Hershey, NJ Shore & Cedar Point. What can I do? When the world changes only a fool doesn't change with it, I can't abide by the changes so I'm going to have to do without. It stinks but what other choice is there? Too bad, I really used to love flying but I guess I can make an adventure out of embracing the way my generation traveled as kids. In the 70's people didn't fly. No-one flew, it was way too expensive. Instead families packed up cars ala Clark Griswold style and saw the country, stopping at roadside diners and motels. Look out AAA I see Trip Ticks in my future.

Between the way the economy is going and this hostile flying climate I think there could be some new trends, we all got here for different reasons but here we are anyway. Could be fun!

Honestly, I've loved road trips my whole life...to the point that I now live full-time in an RV and am always on a road trip. It's so much fun, and you actually get to SEE the country on your way through. I've met so many great people in so many little offbeat towns, had some fantastic meals in local dives, and learned so much about our country's past, present and future. I'm glad you're embracing road trips, I think you'll really have fun! For international travel, ships are an awesome way to go. So quaint and relaxing. Ditto for the train. Don't rule out seeing the country by train, there's just something amazing about riding the rails.

Our little group gets it. You are the dominating person who has made more than 10% of the posts in this thread.

We are just choosing not to surrender our lives due to a simple policy. We want to travel the world and expose our children to fantastic experiences abroad. I want to be able to take my nieces to New York next weekend for holiday shopping. We want to be able to get to Disney in 2 hours via plane.

It seems like you are your family are being hurt by your decision. And you know what - that is fine. You are able to do that.

But do not make the same decision for me and mine.

Who's surrendering their lives? LuvOrlando and I are both talking about road trips. I travel in lots of different ways, and flying's always been just a small piece of the puzzle. If I remove that piece and replace it with a car or a ship or a train, what exactly have I lost?

The government shouldn't be engaging in parenting. They should be engaging in governance. Perhaps that's really the problem: Some folks are expecting their preferences and choices as a parent to prevail over the law that affects more than just their own family.

I agree entirely. But somewhere along the line, someone decided that the government SHOULD engage in parenting. The entire TSA is based on the nanny state mentality. The government will protect us from the big, bad people who want to hurt us, and we'll submit to anything they say as long as they keep us safe. It's exactly the same thought process that abused children use about their parents.

That kind of statement, directed at a specific poster, even if that specific poster posted a similarly in appropriate statement, contributes nothing to the discussion other than perhaps inciting a hostile response. Let's avoid that sort of thing, eh?

Pot, meet kettle.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

This thread can now be summed up easily -

 

[skater]

See, and this sums up the difference between me and you (and her). I can accept that and not be offended. I can laugh it off. I don't mind that we disagree. I do not see this as a thread that can be "won".

I like it when we disagree without being personal. I think its an interesting topic for discussion and I think most everybody posting here feels that way. I've felt attacked a couple times, but mostly I've chosen to ignore it and have carefully avoided reading a few people's posts because of it. I think we could all be a little more careful and still have an intelligent debate.

 

[OceanAnnie]

But you are okay with her comment? And you can't see the inconsistency? Then let me point it out to you.

You are okay with comments that are "harsh" as long as they are directed at people who disagree with you, but not when they are directed at people with whom you agree. See - clarity.

"You just don't get it", in response to the lack of logic comment?

Reminds me of an old saying, "Don't hit a hornet's nest and be surprised when you are stung.". Something like that.

 

[skater]

This thread can now be summed up easily -

That's really cute! And sadly, is a truthful statement about myself at times .

 

[OceanAnnie]

This thread can now be summed up easily -

Now that is funny.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

I like it when we disagree without being personal. I think its an interesting topic for discussion and I think most everybody posting here feels that way. I've felt attacked a couple times, but mostly I've chosen to ignore it and have carefully avoided reading a few people's posts because of it. I think we could all be a little more careful and still have an intelligent debate.

That's just it - if no offense is intended, we should just move forward. But if we have to walk around on egg shell because some posters are overly sensitive, how can we ever make topics like this fun?

 

[LuvOrlando]

delete

 

[skater]

Sorry. No one owns threads. You've said this at least twice in the thread, and it is no more true now than it was the first time.

You are the original poster, and that perhaps could serve as some foundation for explaining why you might post more than someone else in the thread. However, even that's a pretty weak assertion. A discussion regarding a controversial issue should ideally have just as much discussion of one side as the other (or evenly among all three sides, for issues that have three sides). So the most frequent poster should be among those who is supporting the side of the issue that fewer people are willing to post support for in the thread. In this thread, the posters are pretty-much evenly-divided between both sides, so rightfully, no one should be posting significantly more than anyone else.

She didn't say she owned it. She was just explaining that as the OP, she has a big interest and it makes sense that she would post a lot. She was responding to someone else. Who cares who posts the most anyway .

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

"You just don't get it", in response to the lack of logic comment?

Reminds me of an old saying, "Don't hit a hornet's nest and be surprised when you are stung.". Something like that.

Cool - I am really just trying to have fun. If any of you become upset by one of my posts, I apologize. It is just in fun.

For the record - I do not consider myself to be any smarter than anyone else on this board. In fact, I have learned a great deal here. (especially from posters with whom I tend to disagree).

 

[bicker]

I seem to think a great many laws apply to parenting.

But not the other way around. The laws are there to ensure parenting is not harmful to children. They aren't there to reflect parenting of citizens by government, no matter how much your are trying to imply that they should (and why you're trying to make that assertion is beyond me - it really doesn't serve your argument well, regardless).

ummm, the nasty comment about logic was the match.

Why? You've as good as said the same thing about your own position, yourself (though not as derisively, for sure).

It's not ok to derisively undermine people who look at this issue from different points of view.

I agree, but outlining that a specific perspective is not grounded in rational logic is not, on its merits, derisive. The tone within which it is presented can be, and perhaps was, but the assertion itself is not.

I am part logical being, and part parent. To some people that might be a vulnerability but I think it's a strength. You don't have to agree with me on that.

Perhaps you are missing the point: I, at least, am not saying that it is a vulnerability; I, at least, am not saying that I disagree with you about that. The point I, at least, am making is that your feeling as a parent has no merit beyond the context of your own family. When you interact in the world beyond your own family, you are subject to society's rules (as nothing more than citizen of society like the rest of us), not what your best parental discretion would dictate. Indeed, your parental discretion, in that context, is to either engage society or disengage - not to impose yourself and what you like on everyone else. That's really the entire point I'm making.

That's why I fully support and even would applaud your decision not to fly, as a matter of principle, even though I don't subscribe to the beliefs on which your principle is based. It is only when you start pointing figures at others, saying that they're doing wrong, that I object.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Cool - I am really just trying to have fun. If any of you become upset by one of my posts, I apologize. It is just in fun.

For the record - I do not consider myself to be any smarter than anyone else on this board. In fact, I have learned a great deal here. (especially from posters with whom I tend to disagree).

Alright then, truce