[Damn True]

So I think we can all agree that it's a good idea to search people going into airports, subway stations, Govt. buildings etc. right?

But how?

I mean pulling aside 1 out of 5 is just silly. Why waste time searching octagenarians and other highly unlikely types? But at the same time how do you resolve the fact that the overwhelming majority of terrorists are between 18-30 of middle eastern descent. McVeigh, the Atlanta dude and the old IRA being a statistically minute fraction of the whole.

We know that pulling aside every brown skinned young man for a search is kinda wrong, but......that's who, by and large we are looking for.

Ideas?
Options?

Discuss.

 

[Changleen]

It is my personal opinion that allowing the actions of your 'enemy' to remove your liberties is a small step towards defeat.

Having said that, I agree that in terms of doing the job it's supposed to do, random searches are useless tools if they are implemented strictly according to procedure. No offence to Airport security, but some of them aren't MENSA candidates, and in my experience, I have mostly seen fairly 'random' searches performed.

I maintain my position that the actual risk of death by terrorism for 99.9999999% of your population 99.999999999% of the time is pretty freaking low, and would be lower still if the successive governments of the US, this one more than any, stopped ****ing with people.

 

[MikeD]

Random searching does nothing...stopping one bomber out of 3, 5, or 12 in a group is nice, I guess, but a little less than perfect. It has little to no deterrent effect, either. Only 100% searches (as in airports and federal buildings, etc.) matter.

Searching 100% of the people on mass transit isn't practical or desirable (as far as efficiency and liberty are concerned). Searching on grounds of suspicious behavior isn't necessarily going to be much protection, either. Lots of sucide bombers (and non-suicide ones) are cool as cucumbers. Plus it'll lead to the same charges of racism.

Fact is, unless you search 100%, searching by ANY method...random, profiling, whatever, isn't doing you much good. Searches are a peace-of-mind issue and a form of public posturing. Makes people feel safe without really making them so.

The answers, I think, may lie in technology...explosive-detecting gear and such.

 

[Changleen]

Yes, I'd agree that fast, effective scanning of every person and piece of luggage has to be a major goal in the short term. Current techniques, whilst considerably better than nothing, do not have the range or resolution required and also rely on falible human interpretation.

Ideally we need computer analyised real time 3d mass spectrometry without bombarding the subject with anything harmful.

 

[Westy]

It seems to me that most airport security is about making people feel they are safer not stopping terrorists. I will retract my comments immediately if some terrorist manages to hijack an airplane with a pair of nail clippers.

 

[Echo]

Remember that cool ass x-ray machine they had in "Total Recall"? That thing kicked ass.

Profiling sucks but if you're in a position where it's your job to find people doing illegal things, it just happens. I mean if a cop sees a POS car full of (insert minority here) in a rich white neighborhood, is he really gonna pull over the Cadillac full of little old ladies?

 

[Senôr Lopez]

While I don't agree with racial profiling the fact is that most terrorists do fit the profile Damn provided. Until the govt. can implement electronic bomb sniffing devices or even the Sci-Fi vision in Total Recall the best defense is a good offense. To prevent acts such as the London bombings is extremely hard, in fact its near imposssible to stop a determined enemy bent on sucide. But if our intelligence agencies and police forces can get out in front of these guys and monitor explosives inside the US (which is already being done) and depend on the border security to prevent imported materials we may have a (long) shot to prevent attacks here.

 

[Reactor]

Remember that cool ass x-ray machine they had in "Total Recall"? That thing kicked ass.

Profiling sucks but if you're in a position where it's your job to find people doing illegal things, it just happens. I mean if a cop sees a POS car full of (insert minority here) in a rich white neighborhood, is he really gonna pull over the Cadillac full of little old ladies?

try this the back scatter x-ray machine.

 

[ridetoofast]

racial profiling....hmmmm, could you please show me where a non muslim/islamic person has commited an act of terrorism lately?

dont give me the IRA either. if the shoe fits wear it and STFU until technology allows otherwise.

bu f'ing hoo you got searched, if you have nothing to hide why should it matter?

 

[Changleen]

try this the back scatter x-ray machine.

I saw a piece on this recently, and whilst it is no doubt cool, it is currently requires several images to be taken and is simply too slow to scan everyone. Again we have to wait for the technology to improve a little, but things like this show it's on the way.

Secondly, I'd like to read a little more about the way this thing works. I don't really want to be bathed in radiation every time I need to fly, even at their so called safe dosages. A passive scanner would be far better.

 

[Ciaran]

bu f'ing hoo you got searched, if you have nothing to hide why should it matter?

That's brilliant.
Why? Because that's how people lose their liberties and freedom. Little by little. Whether or not you are doing something "wrong" isn't the issue. The issue is that it's my damn body and my damn life and no other human being on this planet should be able to tell me what I can or can't do. Because a government shouldn't tell people how to live or what to do. Because eventually they are going to get to YOU and strip YOU of your rights. "Why should it matter?" Because this is The United States of America DAMNIT! We fought a revolution to get away from things like this. Because there is no such thing as limited freedom. Because that's the attitude that allows people like Hitler to come to power.

Your statement has to be one of the dumbest I have heard. And sadly you are not the only one who thinks like this, nor is this the first time I have heard this argument, which I hate. If we're going to claim to fight for freedom and all that then we should fight for freedom at home first.

This my opinion. Your milage may vary...

 

[H8R]

The issue is that it's my damn body and my damn life and no other human being on this planet should be able to tell me what I can or can't do.

If you get on a plane I want you searched and scanned.

And everyone else on the plane.

 

[Changleen]

Your statement has to be one of the dumbest I have heard. And sadly you are not the only one who thinks like this, nor is this the first time I have heard this argument, which I hate. If we're going to claim to fight for freedom and all that then we should fight for freedom at home first.

Indeed. As I said: It is my personal opinion that allowing the actions of your 'enemy' to remove your liberties is a small step towards defeat.

 

[Changleen]

If you get on a plane I want you searched and scanned.

And everyone else on the plane.

Why? Because you are scared. Why are you scared? Because you know there may be a threat to your life. Why is there a threat to your life?

Don't treat the symptom, treat the problem.

A large part of that problem is a direct result of your own Government's foreign policy.

 

[H8R]

Why? Because you are scared. Why are you scared? Because you know there may be a threat to your life. Why is there a threat to your life?

Don't treat the symptom, treat the problem.

A large part of that problem is a direct result of your own Government's foreign policy.

We're finally at a point where we're asking these questions. Unthinkable 10 years ago, right?

We should have had tight security all along. There are nutjobs everywhere, not just because of the US's current lameness. IT just amplifies a potential problem. It gave some people balls where they didn't have them before.

Scared? Hell yes. Hurtling unnaturally through the air at 400+ mph in a big metal box, I want everyone next to me to NOT have a weapon. Is that unreasonable?

 

[Changleen]

Not at all.

 

[valve bouncer]

I don't often agree with my present government but it seems they're holding the line here.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/war-on-terror/canberra-rejects-racial-profiling/2005/08/03/1122748699968.html

 

[Reactor]

I saw a piece on this recently, and whilst it is no doubt cool, it is currently requires several images to be taken and is simply too slow to scan everyone. Again we have to wait for the technology to improve a little, but things like this show it's on the way.

Secondly, I'd like to read a little more about the way this thing works. I don't really want to be bathed in radiation every time I need to fly, even at their so called safe dosages. A passive scanner would be far better.

Actually it's quite a bit faster now. As for the radiation you're already bathed in it when you fly, because jets fly above most of the earth's atmosphere. You get about 50 mr for a flight from the land down under to the U.S. an a lot of that is fairly high energy cosmic rays. This machine uses low energy x-rays and watches the backscatter, will probably add only a couple of mr to that. If they tested everyone, and if you flew frequently on short trips, it might add up to a meaningful dose. That being said the FAA doesn't paln to use it on everyone, just "suspicious" people. Which will minimize the exposure and probably limit it's effectiveness as well.

 

[Changleen]

Actually it's quite a bit faster now. As for the radiation you're already bathed in it when you fly, because jets fly above most of the earth's atmosphere. You get about 50 Mr for a flight from the land down under to the U.S. an a lot of that is fairly high energy cosmic rays. This machine uses low energy x-rays and watches the backscatter, will probably add only a couple of mr to that. If they tested everyone, and if you flew frequently on short trips, it might add up to a meaningful dose. That being said the FAA doesn't paln to use it on everyone, just "suspicious" people. Which will minimize the exposure and probably limit it's effectiveness as well.

Good point about the high atmosphere exposure. I try to block that from my mind most of the time.

Hey did you know that everyone on earch is constantly bombarded by 15.5 million anti-neutrinos per cm squared per second radiating from the core of the planet? They do no damage though.

 

[Reactor]

Good point about the high atmosphere exposure. I try to block that from my mind most of the time.

Hey did you know that everyone on earch is constantly bombarded by 15.5 million anti-neutrinos per cm squared per second radiating from the core of the planet? They do no damage though.

I'm not sure of the number, but neutrinos have no charge and virtually no mass so they don't have any way to interact with most conventional matter.

 

[MikeD]

I'm not sure of the number, but neutrinos have no charge and virtually no mass so they don't have any way to interact with most conventional matter.

So, uh...is this why are you called "reactor?"

MD

 

[Reactor]

So, uh...is this why are you called "reactor?"

MD

Yes, Previously a Nuclear Engineer.

 

[Changleen]

I'm not sure of the number, but neutrinos have no charge and virtually no mass so they don't have any way to interact with most conventional matter.

'Fundamental' particles are cool. Have you done any M-Theory stuff?

 

[Reactor]

'Fundamental' particles are cool. Have you done any M-Theory stuff?

This is getting a little off topic, what's next superstring theory? Bosons? Dark matter? Mass defect?

 

[Changleen]

This is getting a little off topic, what's next superstring theory? Bosons? Dark matter? Mass defect?

Dark Matter!

BTW, Isn't millirads mr rather than Mr? Wouldn't that be Megarads? (Owch!)

 

[Reactor]

Dark Matter!

BTW, Isn't millirads mr rather than Mr? Wouldn't that be Megarads? (Owch!)

Yeah. My typing is sloppy. I went into a reactor compartment with someone else, also refered to as "portable hydrogenous biological shielding". I got about 20 mr, he got about 2 Rads. It pays to be the smart guy. He didn't look at the radcon survey and ended up standing right next to a crud pocket.

 

[Changleen]

Yeah. My typing is sloppy. I went into a reactor compartment with someone else, also refered to as "portable hydrogenous biological shielding". I got about 20 mr, he got about 2 Rads. It pays to be the smart guy. He didn't look at the radcon survey and ended up standing right next to a crud pocket.

Do his children have the right number of.. parts?

 

[Toshi]

Reactor == Homer Simpson?

 

[Reactor]

Do his children have the right number of.. parts?

Two rads is 40% of the U.S. 10CFR20 radiation limit for occupational radcon exposure. It's about what a 2 pack a day smoker gets in a year, except the smoker gets Alpha's to the lungs...not good.

 

[Reactor]

Reactor == Homer Simpson?

Many years ago. Now I build large high speed digital networks, do some computer security, and some programming.

 

[Reactor]

Do his children have the right number of.. parts?

One thing I noticed, and it is amazing, There were 13 births in the families of the people I worked with. Twelve were girls.

 

[MikeD]

Two rads is 40% of the U.S. 10CFR20 radiation limit for occupational radcon exposure. It's about what a 2 pack a day smoker gets in a year, except the smoker gets Alpha's to the lungs...not good.

Obviously, you don't smoke Camel Nuclears...with the depleted-uranium filter for ultimate smoothness and armor-penetration.

MD

 

[Changleen]

One thing I noticed, and it is amazing, There were 13 births in the families of the people I worked with. Twelve were girls.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CoinTossing.html