If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slashdot)   In response to lawsuit, TSA changes its rules, now stating that it can only screen for unsafe materials. I guess that means we can bring fingernail clippers and water bottles on planes again. Tag is for the rule that forbade them to begin with   (news.slashdot.org) divider line 338
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

26061 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Nov 2009 at 1:11 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



338 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-11-15 03:05:11 AM
vernonFL: I've never had a problem with airport security.

I'm polite and patientcowed and white as a goddamned sheet.


FTFY.
 
2009-11-15 03:07:21 AM
Weaver95: scouts

The BSA uses federal and state subsidy (usually through land use grants and in many instances free or greatly below-market value access to facilities and services) and actively discriminates against atheists and homosexuals. Thus they use public funds to violate public policy in/re separation of church and state and anti-discrimination policies.

The SS people don't benefit from any public largess other than those granted via the constitution.

/former scout (Life, didn't make Eagle)
//jew, not a fan of Nazis but will die to defend, etc.
 
2009-11-15 03:07:40 AM
I'd first heard the opening clause of the second amendment explained thus:

"The state militia is not necessarily bound to the will of the people. It is, after all, the state militia. The thing that regulates them, them being the armed agents of the government, is the nature of an armed populace. It gets kind of hard to go house to house terrorizing people, if you don't know which houses aren't going to take it, and which ones are armed."

This implies, to my humble understanding, that "a well regulated mallitia" might not be the product the states rule, but rather is created by a populace willing to force the state to act within rather strict limits. I'm not suggesting that the person who explained this to me in this manner was a constitutional or legal scholar. But, given the conditions that led to the founding of this country, the inclusion of a clause that both justified the violent actions that birthed this nation, and ensured that, if necessary, great tyranny could be prevented here is no real surprise.
 
2009-11-15 03:09:21 AM
As amusing and seemingly stupid as it is to see nuns, priests, and children being accosted and/or molested by security personnel... can we really blame them?

All I'm sayin' is.. I've seen Lost.
 
2009-11-15 03:11:50 AM
thereadlines: The All-Powerful Atheismo: Water is clear. Obviously the xray machine saw right through it. QED.

The bottle would show up on the scanner, and it contained both air and water. I don't know the exact scanning technology they are using (so I just said "xray"), but presumably air and water would show up differently, having different densities? Or was that a joke?


ಠ_ಠ
 
2009-11-15 03:14:05 AM
I've never understood why people dislike the ACLU. No one has ever given a decent explanation why they do, and if they try, they're just repeating the words of some jackass who told them what to say who has some specific agenda in mind which doesn't mesh well with the Constitution and amendments as they stand. That is, extremists, kooks, or people who neglect to think.
 
2009-11-15 03:14:22 AM
Occam's Chainsaw: vernonFL: I've never had a problem with airport security.

I'm polite and patientcowed and white as a goddamned sheet.

FTFY.


There is some truth to that. My good friend, who is one of the nicest guys I know, is of Oman decent and always gets chosen for "random" screenings.
 
2009-11-15 03:19:57 AM
SuperCatBarf: I've never understood why people dislike the ACLU. No one has ever given a decent explanation why they do

Helen Keller was a Socialist.

/just kidding. She was, though.
 
2009-11-15 03:20:48 AM
SuperCatBarf: I've never understood why people dislike the ACLU. No one has ever given a decent explanation why they do, and if they try, they're just repeating the words of some jackass who told them what to say who has some specific agenda in mind which doesn't mesh well with the Constitution and amendments as they stand. That is, extremists, kooks, or people who neglect to think.

To be fair, you could copy/paste this statement (replacing ACLU) and use it for everything under the sun.
 
2009-11-15 03:22:36 AM
vernonFL: SuperCatBarf: I've never understood why people dislike the ACLU. No one has ever given a decent explanation why they do

Helen Keller was a Socialist.

/just kidding. She was, though.


numberonenoob: SuperCatBarf: I've never understood why people dislike the ACLU. No one has ever given a decent explanation why they do, and if they try, they're just repeating the words of some jackass who told them what to say who has some specific agenda in mind which doesn't mesh well with the Constitution and amendments as they stand. That is, extremists, kooks, or people who neglect to think.

To be fair, you could copy/paste this statement (replacing ACLU) and use it for everything under the sun.



Double true.
 
2009-11-15 03:36:01 AM
Anyone else been tempted to try and go through security with a frozen bottle of water and argue elementary school chemistry with the TSA monkey? Dry ice would be even more amusing.

/always chickens out.
 
2009-11-15 03:36:16 AM
Zombie Neurosurgeon: Um, there's still the part about well regulated.

"regulated" means trained, not governed by regulations. compare the term "British Regulars"
 
2009-11-15 03:45:59 AM
belowner: Seriously, folks, we are policed by people who have less education requirements than the US Postal Service. It's our fault.

Why do you keep posting this lie?
 
2009-11-15 03:46:01 AM
In the early days of spam, ACLU came out all for it. And as far as I know, they're still against any laws that would limit it. Dipshiats think it's free speech or something.

So yeah, ACLU has moments of brilliance, and moments of utter stupidity. Bullheaded one might say.
 
2009-11-15 03:49:58 AM
Weaver95: but not the Boy Scouts, 'cause those bastards had it coming, right?

A fundamentally-religious organization that gets a share of my tax money? They can go straight to hell.
 
2009-11-15 03:51:08 AM
CruiserTwelve: Why do you keep posting this lie?

Because unlike the Postal Service, police departments actively refuse to hire people above a certain intelligence level?
 
2009-11-15 03:56:44 AM
Man On Pink Corner: Because unlike the Postal Service, police departments actively refuse to hire people above a certain intelligence level?

Another lie. Now show me that 13 year old case from a guy that claims he was not hired because he was too smart as "proof" of your assertion.
 
2009-11-15 03:59:26 AM
<b><a target="_blank" href="http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4770369&IDComment=55964506#c559 64506">Weaver95</a>:</b> <i>gee...the ACLU thinks Nazis good, Boy Scouts bad. and ya wonder why people don't trust 'em...</i>

If Weaver95 ever had for whatever reason ANY credibility on fark, surely he has pissed it all away with this idiotic analysis.
 
2009-11-15 04:02:29 AM
CruiserTwelve: Now show me that 13 year old case from a guy that claims he was not hired because he was too smart as "proof" of your assertion.

Oh, you must mean this lie.

I guess it's true what they say: "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its boots." In this case, the lie seems to have made it all the way into professional legal and law-enforcement journals.
 
2009-11-15 04:02:30 AM
buzzcut73: I want to know who stands up for my third amendment rights? I have yet to see the ACLU, NRA, or any other group file a third amendment case. Who is watching out for us?

/drunk


Engblom v Carey (1982) (new window)

As far as I can tell, in 200+ years, this is the only third amendment case to make it as far as the US Court of Appeals.
 
2009-11-15 04:18:20 AM
Zombie Neurosurgeon: Occam's Chainsaw:
*2nd Amendment need not apply.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Let me know when you sign up for the state militia, national guard, army reserves, etc. Until then, STFU.

/Don't know anything about you. If you are a member of the aforementioned groups, well... I look like a jackass, don't I?


Since he, I and you are, by law, members of the unorganized militia, my guess would be YES.
 
2009-11-15 04:24:32 AM
Zombie Neurosurgeon: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Let me know when you sign up for the state militia, national guard, army reserves, etc. Until then, STFU.


So lemme get this straight. You SERIOUSLY believe that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to individuals? In other words, you believe that the framers of the Constitution said to themselves, "Hey, you know what we gotta put in here? The right for the military to have guns! Cause, y'know, what if Congress passed a law saying the government wasn't allowed to use guns in the military? We'd have to defend our country against invasion using sharp sticks!"

So why do you think they were so concerned that somebody might try to take away the National Guard's guns? Doesn't that seem a bit like worrying that somebody might try to take away the various state legislatures' paper and ink?
 
2009-11-15 04:33:37 AM
GuidoDelConfuso: Doesn't that seem a bit like worrying that somebody might try to take away the various state legislatures' paper and ink?

Sounds like a plan! It could be spun as an octopus / tree friendly environmentalist move!
 
2009-11-15 04:39:41 AM
GoodOmens: Occam's Chainsaw: vernonFL: I've never had a problem with airport security.

I'm polite and patientcowed and white as a goddamned sheet.

FTFY.

There is some truth to that. My good friend, who is one of the nicest guys I know, is of Oman decent and always gets chosen for "random" screenings.


Any time I've been checking in at the airport and see obviously middle eastern people I make a point not to go through the same screening line as they do. Without fail, they always seem to get pulled aside for additional screening.

Then again, the very white woman I know with the same last name as our last president has complained that every time she's flown since the election, she gets pulled out of line for extra screening when she never used to get screened.

/really don't envy the Serbs I know with the last name Milosevic
 
2009-11-15 04:47:59 AM
Man On Pink Corner: Oh, you must mean this lie.

That's the thirteen year old case I was referring to. I figured you'd dig that one up. Do you truly believe that this proves your assertion that "police departments actively refuse to hire people above a certain intelligence level?" One single case that involved a single applicant for a single police department?
 
2009-11-15 05:07:17 AM
I like how you cannot take bottled water through the security check point, but once you are through you can buy bottled water and take it on the plane with you! I certainly hope that they are searching/scanning every single bottle that is shipped to the kiosks and restaurants on the other side of the barrier!

Oh wait. Why am I worrying? Everyone knows that it is impossible for an employee at the airport to be a terrorist, a terrorist sympathiser, or just corrupt!
 
2009-11-15 05:12:30 AM
GuidoDelConfuso: Zombie Neurosurgeon: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Let me know when you sign up for the state militia, national guard, army reserves, etc. Until then, STFU.

So lemme get this straight. You SERIOUSLY believe that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to individuals? In other words, you believe that the framers of the Constitution said to themselves, "Hey, you know what we gotta put in here? The right for the military to have guns! Cause, y'know, what if Congress passed a law saying the government wasn't allowed to use guns in the military? We'd have to defend our country against invasion using sharp sticks!"

So why do you think they were so concerned that somebody might try to take away the National Guard's guns? Doesn't that seem a bit like worrying that somebody might try to take away the various state legislatures' paper and ink?


The framers of the Constitution also knew that they could not perceive the future and created a mutable constitution, and they appointed the Supreme Court to be the arbiters of any disputes over the aspects of the Constitution. And, in a recent case, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment only prohibits the federal government from infringing the 2nd Amendment.

Additionally, AFTER that case federal judges upheld the City of Chicago's ban on handguns as not violating the 2nd Amendment. And if I remember correctly, the first appeal was shot down. I am not totally sure on that, though. But, until such a time as when (or if) this case (or a similar one) makes it to the Supreme Court and they rule otherwise, the 2nd Amendment, as it stands today, only prohibits the federal government from infringing the 2nd Amendment.

Oh, and one more thing, the regulation of the ownwership of firearms as ruled to NOT me an infringement.
 
2009-11-15 05:12:57 AM
SoothinglyDeranged: Hopefully the rest of the world will follow when they remember that liquid bombs are incredibly hard/impossible to create on a farkin' plane. Things like nail clippers... I could do more damage with the bloody plastic forks they hand out.


GAS-O-LEEEEEEEEN
 
2009-11-15 05:19:11 AM
Walker: They're taking a nude picture of this little terrorist.


And they suspect this one is hiding a bomb in her training bra.


Don't even get me started on this very dangerous terrorist leader.


I want to laugh at those pics, but I can't. I don't have a pic, but this is what I witnessed (sorry if you are reading this for the billionth time):

In Philadelphia, I saw a TSA agent make a guy remove his prosthetic leg in full view of the other sheep waiting to be probed. The agent did not ask politely, she barked out an order and expected to be obeyed without question. I was hoping the poor guy would beat that slovenly, arrogant piece of filth agent in the head with his leg. He didn't. He did what he was asked and just stared at the agent with cold, icy eyes, not saying a word. Everyone who witnessed this incident was either on the verge of tears or violence, or both. I had noticed a tat on his arm, and I asked him if he was a Marine. He was, had done tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and everyone who was near by thanked him for his service, shook his hand, gave back pats etc.

I don't know how that agent was able to continue to stand there with all these people looking at her with complete disgust and loathing.
 
2009-11-15 05:22:36 AM
img.photobucket.com

Meh. Fark the map.

Blue states total population in 2004: 148,189,253
Red states total population in 2004: 144,912,628
 
2009-11-15 05:23:25 AM
CruiserTwelve: That's the thirteen year old case I was referring to. I figured you'd dig that one up. Do you truly believe that this proves your assertion that "police departments actively refuse to hire people above a certain intelligence level?" One single case that involved a single applicant for a single police department?

Translation: Yeah, you were right -- my mistake.
 
2009-11-15 05:30:49 AM
Zombie Neurosurgeon: stinieroo: Well, since the article mentions the ACLU, let's have a firefight about that. Forget the shiat-treatment of all travelers by the TSA and their search for non-existent liquid explosives and, of course, small amounts of pot.fark all of you.

It's not fun if we just argue about what TFA states. So far we've got a 1st amendment ACLU fight going on and I'll try my damndest to bring in a 2nd amendment fight for no apparent reason. The anti-TSA fight is no fun. Who's going to stand up for them? If anyone puts up an honest and decent arguement for the TSA I will tip my hat to them.


The TSA exists for one simple reason. Unfortunately, that reason is bureaucracy.

The only reason the 9/11 hijackers got away with their plot was because back in that day, you didn't stand up to plane hijackers, because it wasn't worth the risk. If someone hijacked your plane, it simply meant your flight was going to make an unscheduled stop in Cuba; and the extra few hours wasn't really worth getting stabbed over. However, today, if someone steps up and tries to hijack a plane, they're going to be met by 250 impromptu Sky-Marshalls.

BUT! Our government operates under a very specific rule, that in order to justify the taxes it collects from us, it must provide a service. And one of those services is protection. The government MUST provide this service. It cannot allow/require us to protect ourselves in this manner.

And that is the only reason the TSA exists.

If it weren't for that reason alone, nothing would have changed post 9/11. They'd continue scanning for bombs, guns, and knives over four inches. Everything past that, we (the passengers of the plane) can deal with in-flight.

/my apologies for not providing the actual governmental code that backs up my statements, but it's too late and I'm too lazy to find it for quoting.
 
2009-11-15 05:33:01 AM
img.photobucket.com
img.photobucket.com

I think one of the biggest fark-ups by the TSA is when they tried to confiscate a Congressional Medal of Honor! Apparently one of the TSA folks thought it might be a weapon, possibly a ninja throwing star!
 
2009-11-15 05:35:33 AM
belowner: The next time you get in a fight with a TSA employee, just remember this:

The federal government has not only put your safety on a plane in the hands of a high school graduate, they also gave them the power to get you arrested.

You should be pissed, but you've already given the same power to the same people in your local police department.

Seriously, folks, we are policed by people who have less education requirements than the US Postal Service. It's our fault.


Much of what you said can also be applied to the members of our military and defense of this nation.
 
2009-11-15 05:54:29 AM
Man On Pink Corner: CruiserTwelve: That's the thirteen year old case I was referring to. I figured you'd dig that one up. Do you truly believe that this proves your assertion that "police departments actively refuse to hire people above a certain intelligence level?" One single case that involved a single applicant for a single police department?

Translation: Yeah, you were right -- my mistake.


So you can't answer the question, or you won't answer the question? Which is it? You've presented an incredibly weak argument for your position. Your "translation" response does nothing to further your belief. How about you show me some more cases?
 
2009-11-15 06:01:43 AM
cptjeff: \BTW people, they cannot tell an empty water bottle from a full one.
\\Xrays go right through water.


Incorrect.
Water will absorb/deflect xrays, not much but it will.
You can absolutely tell the difference.

/works in X-ray
 
2009-11-15 06:01:51 AM
Mock26: I think one of the biggest fark-ups by the TSA is when they tried to confiscate a Congressional Medal of Honor! Apparently one of the TSA folks thought it might be a weapon, possibly a ninja throwing star!

Are we really down to just morons, failed fry cooks and Neo Nazis?

People who actually don't know what a congressional medal of honor looks like?

This.. protect America pose looks pretty lame, atm.

Who is protecting America from slobs with Napoleon complexes in cheap security uniforms and the pieces of crap who sign their checks?
 
2009-11-15 06:03:55 AM
I'm in favor (sometimes not even facetiously) of giving everyone a combat knife when they board the plane. "Welcome aboard, Mr. Smith, here's your Ka-Bar, enjoy your flight." Someone tries to hijack the plane, he ends up looking like a pincushion (more efficient than the current practice of piling on and squashing him).

Like Space Squid said, things changed on 9/11. Risking your life to avoid an unplanned stopover in Havana was a bad tradeoff. Risking your life to avoid an unplanned stopover in a solid object is not. Nobody is more dangerous than the person with nothing left to lose, and Al Quaida put passengers in the situation of having nothing left to lose. This gave us the heroes of Flight 93, the people who have stopped a number of hijackings since then, and the people who will tear the next set of hijackers to pieces with their bare hands, if necessary. It may be better to be a live coward than a dead hero, but when the choice is between guaranteed dead coward and possibly live hero, an awful lot of rabbits grow fangs.

Fortified cockpits and determined passengers have done more for airline safety than every single TSA goon in the whole system put together and tied up with a bow.
 
2009-11-15 06:24:06 AM
CruiserTwelve: So you can't answer the question, or you won't answer the question? Which is it?

Neither, it's just not worth spending $38 on the journal to bolster an argument I've already won. :-P
 
2009-11-15 06:33:04 AM
Man On Pink Corner: Neither, it's just not worth spending $38 on the journal to bolster an argument I've already won. :-P

Wow. The entire internet at your disposal and you can't come up with even one more case to support your argument? Sad.
 
2009-11-15 06:50:01 AM
img194.imageshack.us

Thanks for the TSA, Dasshole.
 
2009-11-15 06:55:00 AM
Interesting fact about the TSA's stupid rules: You can now bring on a bottle of water as long as it's really a frozen bottle of ice, and only under the condition that any of it that is melted must be consumed or disposed of before bringing it through security. [Source.] (new window)


Since solids (like ice) are not strictly prohibited under their rules, you used to be able to carry any amount of ice/frozen material through a checkpoint until the tards running the operation got wise to it and decided that you could no longer do that unless it was breast milk, juice, water and such for emergency medical reasons.


When are they going to finally drop this ridiculous security theater?
 
2009-11-15 07:02:39 AM
AndyMan1: Anyone else been tempted to try and go through security with a frozen bottle of water and argue elementary school chemistry with the TSA monkey? Dry ice would be even more amusing.

/always chickens out.



You can. I've never tried myself, but I will the next time I go to the airport. See my previous post.
 
2009-11-15 07:09:59 AM
bobbette: Occam's Chainsaw: bobbette: Please elaborate on which incidents specifically caused you to hate the ACLU and/or which you consider "contemptible".

I consider the defense of white supremacists contemptible. And necessary for the preservation of a free and just state.

So why do you hate the organization that helps preserve a free and just state? Your position is inconsistent.


"Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."

Mirror. You. Look in it.
 
2009-11-15 07:28:16 AM
It is more telling who weaver95 doesn't reply to then who he does.
 
2009-11-15 07:43:02 AM
I'm guessing nail clippers and bottles of Pert are still dangerous.
 
2009-11-15 07:50:34 AM
Dog Welder: I'm guessing nail clippers and bottles of Pert are still dangerous.

The funny thing is, if nail clippers were ever prohibited it was maybe for the first 2 weeks of TSA's standup back in 2002. Since then, only the ones with knives on 'em aren't allowed.

PSA
 
2009-11-15 08:29:26 AM
the same people that piss and moan that the 2nd amendment is outdated are the same morons that scream the second their 1st amendment rights are messed with.

the founding fathers might not of had automatic weapons in mind when they wrote it, but they sure as hell weren't thinking about protecting penthouse forum letters and various types of porn.
 
2009-11-15 08:32:23 AM
My Boy Scout story:

Long ago, I was the manager of a Tandy Leather store. One of the things Tandy managers did was conduct classes and workshops for youth groups, including the Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts. A scoutmaster suggested that I should become a badge counselor so I could sign off on their leatherwork badges, and dropped off the forms for me to fill out and mail in. I was just about done when I got to the one requiring me to sign an oath attesting to my belief that it was impossible for someone to be a good person without believing in God. Since that would have required me to believe that several of my personal heroes, including Richard Feynman and Sir Clive Sinclair, were bad people, I was unable to accept that. So, I called the district office. I spoke to the Assistant District Commissioner. He said "Just sign it, it's just a form, nobody really cares." Well ... I couldn't. I'm just not like that. So I talked to his boss, the District Commissioner. I told him that I couldn't accept that concept, because there were many good non-believers, and anyway, why did my religious beliefs matter when all I was applying to do was sign a paper saying a kid had made a belt and knew how to oil a baseball glove? His response was, very harshly said, "You're not the kind of person we want working with the boys." No, they want people like his assistant, who told me to just casually lie. :-p

My father was an Eagle Scout. My fiancee (now husband) and his brothers were Eagle Scouts. One of the great disappointments of my early childhood was finding out that all that cool stuff was only for boys; I wanted to be one too. I had grown up with nothing but the greatest respect for the Boy Scouts. That was shattered in an instant when one senior Scouting official told me to sign my name to a lie, and another told me that because I would not lie, I was essentially scum.

So, the kids had to have someone who was religiously correct sign their badge forms after I taught them how to make belts and oil baseball gloves and identify different kinds of leather. One of those people may have been the Scoutmaster who was leading his troop on a hike and told the fat kid who couldn't keep up to sit on a rock and wait until they came back. When they came back, hours later, the boy was gone; his body was never found. But hey, that Scoutmaster signed that statement about his religious beliefs, so he was the kind of person they wanted working with the kids. I guess there wasn't a paper to sign about not leaving kids behind on hikes.

The Boy Scouts have, it seems, been taken over by people with an agenda of promoting their own brand of bigotry and intolerance. As one former Eagle Scout from before that change asked, "I wonder if the new uniform is going to include a pointy white hood?"

Sure, they have every right to be as bigoted as they like -- but they don't have a right to get support to the tune of millions of dollars of tax money, such as the free use of military bases (logistics paid for by the taxpayer) for scouting events. There are other boys' programs -- the Royal Rangers being the first that come to mind -- that are, frankly, no more religious than the Boy Scouts, just more honest about it, who don't get taxpayer support. There is no reason the Boy Scouts should either. Either they should be open to all Americans, or they should be on the same terms as other private organizations, but they shouldn't be able to have it both ways.
 
2009-11-15 08:33:32 AM
Dog Welder: I'm guessing nail clippers and bottles of Pert are still dangerous.

Umbrellas are.

I cannot work out why, every time I fly out of Dublin airport, any umbrellas in my hand luggage are always taken out and opened by the insecurity staff. It's the only airport where I've ever seen it happen.

What are they worried about - checking to see if you are smuggling rain out of the country?
 
Displayed 50 of 338 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report