In my experience, doctors are less than 95% accurate.
Yea, that was probably a bad example.
I give you credit for actually having a response to my “what would you do” question. I’ve debated the whole TSA issue with a number of people and when posed with the same question I usually get a blank look.
I would still like a comment on profiling and my response on it. You see to lean conservative (could be wrong) with does not fit with the prospect of the privacy issues with profiling.
I actually lean towards the libertarian point of view, which I must admit doesn’t really lend itself to profiling, either. My basic philosophy is to have common sense. If the vast majority of terrorists are from one area or one religion, then let’s concentrate on that.
And that will not fly. Period and you probably know that. If there’s going to be profiling, everyone will be profiled. If you don’t agree with that, then you 100% security argument is moot.
That’s the sad point - this country isn’t ready for profiling selected groups.
It’s a dog eat dog world. There will never be 100 percent security when a determination of risk is subjective.
And when it comes to computers making a risk determination (objective), it’s a matter who built a better mouse trap and even then, the “mickies” of the world will nibble away at whatever they can get to accomplish what they want.
I am all for profiling, but by the same token, that profiling should not lower any standards of security for the lesser risk groups of people. The “Tim Mcvay’s” of the world still lurk, and just because we profile a nationality should mean others should not be looked at any less. In other words, lets learn from profiling and apply it to upping the security standards.
Terrorist know no boundaries including using teddy bears as a means to hide an explosive device.
The only guarantee in life is yesterday.
The only thing I would ask of TSA is consistency between airports. At TUL, they don’t ask us to take out portable DVD players with screens less than 8", portable GPS, etc. However, flying back from DEN, they made a huge fuss over us not taking out the DVD player (7" screen) from my son’s carry on. They got pissed at me when I said, “I really wish TSA would be consistent with their requirements between airports. It would make the security experience a little better and easier.” The one TSA moron that was cordial asked me to explain my statement. I told him that I fly frequently for work and at every airport, the “rules” for what has to be taken out from carry-ons, in terms of electronics, varies greatly. I have no problem taking the DVD player out of the bag, but it is easier, especially when traveling with a 3-year old to be able to just put as much as possible through in a bag.
An nor should it ever. Singling out a specific group has been done in the past… Look how that turned out.
+100
Not getting into the size factor, as that only leads us back to 3 oz vs 3.4 oz… However…
Could it be the DVD player in the Xray machine looks like a laptop / mini laptop?
Could it be the Xray machines at some airports are more technologically advanced causing the discrepancies on how things are handled??
I like you agree, one would think there would be consistency, but it’s not there.
Also “workload” could be a factor? (doesn’t make it right naturally, but a factor?) My thought on this is that I notice more “delays” at smaller airports because it seems to me the screeners have more time to scrutinize.
I was told that shifting of the baggage content could change the way things “look” under the Xray (two solid items become one indistinguishable item when butted up against each other) This could cause two different experiences.
My perception for what it’s worth.
They claim they are inconsistent because they want to keep the bad guys on their toes. That’s just BS for anyone of the following statements:
-I have the right to make you mad
-My girlfriend (wife, cousin, whatever) didn’t put out last night so I’m taking it out on you
-I’m a supervisor for TSA. I can do whatever I feel like because I’m a small, petty man
-I have the IQ of a rock so I know that milk in the bottle your baby has been drinking from is full of explosives
And perhaps the worse statement: We are here to protect you so just shut up and do whatever unreasonable, non-common sense thing I say to do.
I’d love to see a credible web source that I can read for myself that supports that TSA applies security measures in an inconsistent manner to keep the bad guys out.
Which in many ways is the same and profiling, sir!!! You cannot have it both ways.
This is the same sort of argument that has always come into play with a truly secure computer system. The only truly secure system is inside an impregnable container, not connected to anything and turned off.
I am guessing Cinnibon… 
What’s wrong with profiling? The cops do it all the time, especially on the NJ Turnpike. Kidding aside, profiling is an invaluable tool used to solve many crimes. What is wrong with that?
As deef1999 says, it’s a very valuable tool and, unfortunately, as long as the government remains politically correct and is afraid to offend somebody, profiling will not be used as a tool in the war against terrorists.
I never said profiling was bad. I said profiling one particular group is bad. As I said before, your 100% security argument goes out the window the instant you don’t profile everyone. Period.
Don’t bet your cat on that, they just won’t talk about it, (in the interst of national security). It would be foolish not to profile starting with muslim males from Saudi Arabia.
Screen everyone, profile certain groups for a higher level of scrutany.