Daughter Singled Out Going Thru Airport Security

Quote:

But the whole point is, it isn't for the greater good. It doesn't make us any safer.

Righto lets just get rid of these silly security messages and let anyone who wants carry a gun or explosives or a knife on to a plane, after all thats what living in a free country is all about, the opportunity to put ME and how I feel about this above the rights of everyone else.

1 Reply

@dadpad,

That is a completely ridiculous reply to what he said. He's saying that he doesn't believe that the measure increases safety, not that he should put his convenience above the safety of others. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

He doesn't have to have a job that forces him to grope people. He chose to, and then chose not to quit. I wouldn't take or stay in such a job.

Or maybe he had the job before these rules were put in place and can't afford to quit.

1 Reply

Quote:

That is a completely ridiculous reply to what he said.

No its not.

1 Reply

@dadpad,

Come on! You are begging the question[1] and using an ad hominem[2] that is itself a straw man[3] instead of addressing what he is actually saying.

1 - He is disputing the efficacy of this measure, you are assuming that this is false in order to:
2 - Attack him as being self-centered by:
3 - Saying he puts his convenience above the safety of others when he has already explicitly told you he doesn't but that he doesn't believe this is safety but theater.

How is that not absurd? His argument is that this doesn't cause safety and your retort is that he's a self-centered person who puts his convenience above safety. That is intellectually dishonest in a very obvious way.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

He doesn't have to have a job that forces him to grope people. He chose to, and then chose not to quit. I wouldn't take or stay in such a job.

Or maybe he had the job before these rules were put in place and can't afford to quit.

Yeah, I agreed that Soz was right to point out that fact earlier. I should have said 'I would try to find a different job as soon as I could.'

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

What if I believe it contributes to my safety- as a person who flies internationally from one of the busiest airports in the world to one of the busiest airports in the world at least three times a year.

Can I still participate and cooperate without being called 'stupid'?

Yeah - you guys know more about it than all the experts - and know that it's all just theatre and a waste of time.

Give me a ******* break- talk about arrogance.

You'd be the first to complain if your wife or daughter or mother or son or father got blown up on a plane by someone who got through security.

Complainers are complainers- and they complain about everything they don't see the reason for - even if other people do.

My 80 year old mother had to stand up out of her wheelchair so they could check underneath her.
She didn't say a word - she just let the people do their jobs- and thanked them when she sat back down.

2 Replies

@sozobe,

You raise an interesting moral question. I don't think I have a good answer for it.

There are several jobs that involve people who enforce policies that I feel is either an unnecessary imposition, a real inconvenience or at times even an injustice.

Do I really have to treat people whose job it is to be invasive or unfair with respect?

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

Yeah - you guys know more about it than all the experts - and know that it's all just theatre and a waste of time.

Give me a ******* break- talk about arrogance.

You'd be the first to complain if your wife or daughter or mother or son or father got blown up on a plane by someone who got through security.

Come on, this is an argument that can be used in pretty much support of anything. In fact it has been used in support of racism and homophobia where the specter of an exaggerated fear is used to justify any overreaction you want (since, you would be the first to complain when giving women the vote destroys the economy).

This is a flawed argument.

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

What if I believe it contributes to my safety- as a person who flies internationally from one of the busiest airports in the world to one of the busiest airports in the world at least three times a year.

Can I still participate and cooperate without being called 'stupid'?

I think the procedure is stupid, I didn't call anyone who participates in it stupid (I do many times a year as well).

Quote:

Yeah - you guys know more about it than all the experts - and know that it's all just theatre and a waste of time.

Give me a ******* break- talk about arrogance.

The TSA are not experts, and the real experts disagree with it too and have called it "hysterical".

Quote:

You'd be the first to complain if your wife or daughter or mother or son or father got blown up on a plane by someone who got through security.

You don't know me well enough to say such a thing.

Quote:

Complainers are complainers- and they complain about everything they don't see the reason for - even if other people do.

You know, I don't get your animosity. You may feel like you've been attacked for disagreeing but I don't really know why.

If it makes you feel better to just call me arrogant and a complainer then I guess I'm glad I can be of some service after all. <shrugs>

1 Reply

Quote:

1 - He is disputing the efficacy of this measure, you are assuming that this is false in order to:

I'm not assuming it is false. It is false.

Quote:

2 - Attack him as being self-centered by:

I'm not attacking anyone and dont try to put emotive spin on what I say!

Quote:

3 - Saying he puts his convenience above the safety of others when he has already explicitly told you he doesn't but that he doesn't believe this is safety but theater.

Its not theatre its real life. He IS puting his convenience above the safety of others.

Quote:

How is that not absurd? His argument is that this doesn't cause safety and your retort is that he's a self-centered person who puts his convenience above safety. That is intellectually dishonest in a very obvious way.

Its not absurd because its not absurd. I'm happy for these measures to be in place even if it may inconvenience some. It certainly makes it less easy
to carry a plastic weapon or explosives onto a plane and I dont see how anyone can argue with that.
Some random dude that i never have to see again uses the back of his hand to ensure i dont have a gun taped to my groin, BIG F DEAL. Its not like he's getting his jollies feeling me up... or maybe he is, I couldnt care less.

2 Replies

@dadpad,

dadpad wrote:

I'm not assuming it is false. It is false.

That's not the point, to counter his argument you should say why, instead of just responding with the presumption that it is false. That is what begging the question is.

Quote:

I'm not attacking anyone and dont try to put emotive spin on what I say!

When you portray his argument as being about his self-centeredness you are responding to his argument with an ad hominem. This is not an emotional assessment.

Quote:

Its not theatre its real life. He IS puting his convenience above the safety of others.

You aren't willing to consider that his objection is not sourced in his desire for convenience?

Quote:

Quote:
How is that not absurd? His argument is that this doesn't cause safety and your retort is that he's a self-centered person who puts his convenience above safety. That is intellectually dishonest in a very obvious way.

Its not absurd because its not absurd.

I see, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.

1 Reply

@dadpad,

Quote:

above the safety of others.

This is the whole issue.

It is not about safety, because these measures don't make anyone safer. The experts know that these measures don't make anyone safer and they say as much. It is about theater which government officials set up to give the appearance that they are doing something about the fact we live in a dangerous world.

There are things that they can do to make the world safer (although it will always be a dangerous world), and I am not against them doing these things. But these silly pat downs don't make anyone safer. Period.

We are not trading anyone's safety for anything. But this is about the elaborate and intrusive theater designed to give people the illusion of safety. Sure, I don't think this is worth the hassle.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

I don't feel attacked at all - that's the first comment I've made on this thread- what would I be attacked for?

I'm responding to the arrogance that I detect in first, disregarding all of the safety measures that have been put in place as 'theatre' and 'stupid' (I don't know who used the word, but I know it was used) and a 'waste of time', and second, to the willingness to be rude to someone who's just trying to do his or her job.

Yeah - it's all a big waste of time until or unless someone gets through with something.
And if nothing else - it is a deterrent - at least to some extent.

And reacting and adjusting to a situation that hasn't arisen before, can be a form of learning - it isn't always a bad thing.

Are people NOT supposed to react and adjust to situations that arise?

If you think you could come up with a better plan - go for it.

And I just clicked on your post - because it was the last one I read.

I just get tired of all the whining and second-guessing.

As I said, if someone has a better solution - go for it.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

dadpad wrote:

Quote:

I'm not assuming it is false. It is false.

Robert Gentel wrote

Quote:

That's not the point

Errrrrr.... yes..... I see.

1 Reply

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

I don't feel attacked at all - that's the first comment I've made on this thread- what would I be attacked for..

I'm not sure, I don't know where the notion that you would be called stupid came from and thought that perhaps you had felt like you were being called stupid.

Quote:

I'm responding to the arrogance that I detect in first, disregarding all of the safety measures that have been put in place as 'theatre' and 'stupid' (I don't know who used the word, but I know it was used) and a 'waste of time', and second, to the willingness to be rude to someone who's just trying to do his or her job.

I don't personally advocate being rude to people doing their jobs though. I also think reasonable people can disagree about whether something is stupid without automatically assuming they themselves are being called stupid, I think there is a significant difference.

Quote:

Are people NOT supposed to react and adjust to situations that arise?

I didn't say that either, but not all reactions are created equal and arguing that one reaction is pointless is not necessarily an argument for no reaction.

Quote:

If you think you could come up with a better plan - go for it.

And I just clicked on your post - because it was the last one I read.

I just get tired of all the whining and second-guessing. If someone has a better solution - go for it.

There have been better solutions suggested. I've cited them extensively in other threads.

I don't get the emotional undercurrent to this thread though, and would rather not provoke you further unless you are really interested in hearing about them (I like to avoid being rude, arrogant et al if I can help it).

1 Reply

Quote:

an ad hominem.

Not being a highly educated person I have no idea what that means. I could look it up I suppose but i think i have more imprtant things to do. If i dont i can certaintly make something up.

1 Reply

@dadpad,

I'm not sure you do, even if you are right responding with that presumed is to beg the question.

But I think I'll find a less acrimonious way to spend my evening instead of pushing this.

0 Replies

@dadpad,

It basically means is to attack the messenger instead of the argument.

So if he says:

"This is security theater, it doesn't make us safer." and you say "you are just self-centered and thinking about your convenience" you are attacking (and this isn't supposed to be that emotional, and unlike what most think about an ad hominem just isn't about being nice and not insulting either) the messenger instead of the message.

If you are really interested in this I think Paul Graham has a very nice and thoughtful essay that touches on this called "How to Disagree":

http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Anyway, now I'm outta here for real with a parting wish that disagreement be less disagreeable.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Okay - well, it's early morning here and I don't have to go to work, so I'll go back through the thread and find the phrase that made me feel that I was just some sort of stupid and ill-informed member of the public because I'm willing to go through security and do what they tell me instead of throwing up my hands, staring people down and making them feel like **** for doing their job.

1 Reply

Daughter Singled Out Going Thru Airport Security

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know