Someone needs to sue the TSA

[BellaBellucci]

Arguing statistical probabilities when discussing potential terrorist attacks doesn't really play well when you try to explain to the American people how you plan to keep them 'safe' from foreign enemies.

... because of the fear harnessed, amplified, and used as a weapon by those same politicians in the first place.

~BB~

[scroller]

Arguing statistical probabilities when discussing potential terrorist attacks doesn't really play well when you try to explain to the American people how you plan to keep them 'safe' from foreign enemies.

That is indeed true for dumb people. Explains the state lottery pretty well, too.

[thombergeron]

Except no sane politician can make this argument to the American people, that the 'odds' are against them being blown up on an airline flight, so people there's really nothing to worry about.

Even a 5 megaton nuclear device blown up in one American city won't wipe the United States off the face of the map, and would only kill a few hundred thousand citizens, a tiny fraction of the total 300+ million population, so would you then make the argument that statistically there's nothing to be concerned about after the fact??

Arguing statistical probabilities when discussing potential terrorist attacks doesn't really play well when you try to explain to the American people how you plan to keep them 'safe' from foreign enemies.

Right, this is pretty much precisely my point (and Bella's): U.S. counter-terrorism policy is all about politics and security theater and has virtually nothing to do with actually protecting the health and safety of U.S. citizens.

And you got your math a little bit wrong. A 5 MT weapon is huge. The overpressure radius alone is about 12 kilometers. Here in the SF Bay Area, a weapon that size would instantly vaporize at least 700,000 people, and it's likely that another couple million would died of burns, radiation, and blunt force trauma over the next day or two. So that's about 1% of the U.S. population, and nobody who has a 5 MT weapon is going to fire just one at us...

[lisaparadise]

right, this is pretty much precisely my point (and bella's): U.s. Counter-terrorism policy is all about politics and security theater and has virtually nothing to do with actually protecting the health and safety of u.s. Citizens.

And you got your math a little bit wrong. A 5 mt weapon is huge. The overpressure radius alone is about 12 kilometers. Here in the sf bay area, a weapon that size would instantly vaporize at least 700,000 people, and it's likely that another couple million would died of burns, radiation, and blunt force trauma over the next day or two. So that's about 1% of the u.s. Population, and nobody who has a 5 mt weapon is going to fire just one at us...

you people make me laugh you think your government is out to get you meanwhile there out to save you are you people that stupid that you think everything is a conspiracy to strip you of your rights?

[giovanni_hotel]

'President XYZ, about that bomb that blew up half of downtown Chicago, how are you going to make sure it doesn't happen to L.A. or NYC?'

'Absolutely nothing. Statistically speaking, the odds are remotely small that it ever happens again. And even if it does, what's a few more hundred thousand dead Americans?? These friggin' Christian breeders are dropping babies like feral cats, hahahaha!!

It's an unfortunate tragedy, but the country will survive. Fear is irrational. Statistics is truth.'

Bella, if someone is AFRAID, their fear is very 'real'. It's not really your decision to decide whether someone else's 'fear' is a valid emotional/intellectual response.

Most Americans who fly have a concern that proper security measures are deployed to hopefully prevent another plane from being hijacked by a suicidal jihadist, even if those security protocols aren't fool-proof.
Do you lock the front door to your house?? Car??? Are these measures guaranteed to prevent a thief from breaking into either??
But still you do it, even though the odds are minimal that someone will break into either your house or car, because it gives you PEACE OF MIND.

You're arguing analytical/ philosophical abstracts, Bella.
FEAR is real and must always be mitigated to lower one's level of anxiety.

EDIT: You're right, thombergeron. For this example I should have said 5 kiloton, not 5 megaton.

[lisaparadise]

'president xyz, about that bomb that blew up half of downtown chicago, how are you going to make sure it doesn't happen to l.a. Or nyc?'

'absolutely nothing. Statistically speaking, the odds are remotely small that it ever happens again. And even if it does, what's a few more hundred thousand dead americans?? These friggin' christian breeders are dropping babies like feral cats, hahahaha!!

It's an unfortunate tragedy, but the country will survive. Fear is irrational. Statistics is truth.'

bella, if someone is afraid, their fear is very 'real'. It's not really your decision to decide whether someone else's 'fear' is a valid emotional/intellectual response.

Most americans who fly have a concern that proper security measure are deployed to hopefully prevent another plane from being hijacked by a suicidal jihadist, even if those security protocols aren't fool-proof.
Do you lock the front door to your house?? Car??? Are these measures guaranteed to prevent a thief from breaking in to either??
But still you do it, even though the odds are minimal that someone will break into either your house or car, because it gives you peace of mind.

You're arguing analytical/ philosophical abstracts, bella.
Fear is real and must always be mitigated to lower one's level of anxiety.

best post ive read thus far now i fly maybe 4 or 5 times a year and i have no problem with anythink that makes my odds of getting there safe period.

[BellaBellucci]

Bella, if someone is AFRAID, their fear is very 'real'. It's not really your decision to decide whether someone else's 'fear' is a valid emotional/intellectual response.

Not one person: people. And not just any fear: fear capitalized upon by the police state. And it's not my decision: because I'm not alone in my opinion.

To turn the tables on your position: why should the fearful get to determine how scared the rest of should be? People as a whole should not allow themselves to be terrorized by terrorists even if there are individuals who can't help themselves. They want to say that we should respect their fear and all comply with the new rules, but what about complying with the wishes of those who say that the ends don't justify the means? Again, a terror plot has never been stopped solely by the TSA.

Do you lock the front door to your house?? Car??? Are these measures guaranteed to prevent a thief from breaking in to either??
But still you do it, even though the odds are minimal that someone will break into either your house or car, because it gives you PEACE OF MIND.

Yes, but have you ever seen someone install a machine that violates privacy and raises health concerns in order to get into their house or car? No, they just use their keys, and in some cases, some minor biometrics, but that's it because there are no adverse affects other than the minor inconvenience of having to fumble for keys. And as you said, a pro is going to get in no matter what. If that kind of criminal is that close to your property, it's too late. The same goes for the scanners.

I mean, if we're going to such great lengths to stop terrorism, then why not just ban air travel all together? They used planes once, so nobody should fly, right? It's called overreaction.

FEAR is real and must always be mitigated to lower one's level of anxiety.

What about my anxiety about government intrusion? I trust the statistics on this so much more than I do some TSA lackies who don't even know their own rules most of the time.





~BB~

[giovanni_hotel]

I guess Israel's enhanced security checks are irrational too, an overreaction by a police state.lol

[thombergeron]

best post ive read thus far now i fly maybe 4 or 5 times a year and i have no problem with anythink that makes my odds of getting there safe period.

Passenger and cargo screening does not increase your odds of getting there safe. Period.

It only makes you think that your odds of getting there safe are increased.

Do you see the difference? One is real, one is not real.

[thombergeron]

I guess Israel's enhanced security checks are irrational too, an overreaction by a police state.lol

I thought we were discussing TSA screening procedures in the United States. You know that TSA is a U.S. agency, right? What does Israel have to do with this?