Congressman: Search only the scary brown people

[rambone]

Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA) is calling for a change in security procedures at airports. He says that only "arab looking" people deserve to be radiated and groped in illegal Federal checkpoints. While the current system is totally ****ed, this idea of having a master race & second-class race doesn't appeal to me either. The best thing to do would be to privatize security and arm passengers.

Republican: 'Political Correctness Wont Save Lives'

 

[RockofStrength]

lol'd at the second-to-last paragraph/sentence. He thinks security trumps civil liberties? You don't say .


Maybe if enough idiots like him make their position known, the Republican party will be able merge with the Democratic one and leave room for an actual group of conservatives.

 

[Redemption]

Sounds good. They are the terrorists after all.

It's time to quit pretending every other race poses as great a threat as the Arabs do when it comes to these acts. Their track record speaks for itself.

 

[firehawk1]

The best thing to do would be to privatize security and arm passengers.

I believe from your prior posts by privatizing you mean the airlines themselves providing security. I don't think you'd like that either.

Let's say I own my own airline, Firehawk Airways. I provide my own security since the TSA has been disbanded. Since I own my airline, I make the rules. I don't like your haircut.... sorry YOU don't fly. I only cater to the "beautiful people". Ain't no jackbooted government thug going to tell ME how I can and cannot run my Airline. I should have the right to do whatever I want. There are more than enough travelers to make up for the few I decide I do not want business from. Sorry ugly people, I profife. What's the difference if a private company or the government engages in the same "thing"?

As far as arming passengers, isn't going to happen. You know that, and I don't know if I would feel any safer with some redneck packing his .44 mag onto a flight I was taking.

I don't know what the answer is, the current system is f***ed up no doubt. But somewhere there has to be common sense. If a robbery suspect leaves the scene in a bright red Impala, common sense tells you you don't waste time looking for black one's dosen't it? If a woman is raped, you don't bother looking for women do you? Forms of profiling go on everyday.

As far as persons of middle eastern decent being upset over possible profiling. It is understandable but... IMO it's way past time for the Muslim community around the world to stand up and become VERY vocal about the small minority of Islamic lunatics causing the problems in the first place. ONLY then will this problem begin to be solved. Where are they in all this, the silence is deafening. It HAS to be the Muslim community that takes the lead in this.

 

[gunowner930]

Sounds good. They are the terrorists after all.

It's time to quit pretending every other race poses as great a threat as the Arabs do when it comes to these acts. Their track record speaks for itself.

well, the attempted underwear bomber was African, and the times square attempted bomber was Pakistani (not Arab), and Jose Padilla, accused of plotting to detonate a dirty bomb in CONUS is an American of Latino ancestry.

 

[indykid]

well, the attempted underwear bomber was African, and the times square attempted bomber was Pakistani (not Arab), and Jose Padilla, accused of plotting to detonate a dirty bomb in CONUS is an American of Latino ancestry.

Please don't confuse the issue with facts! (does this really need to be purple?)

 

[sadclownwp]

If I was not of a very pale skin, I might be offended, but this is just funny.

 

[RockofStrength]

I believe from your prior posts by privatizing you mean the airlines themselves providing security. I don't think you'd like that either.

Let's say I own my own airline, Firehawk Airways. I provide my own security since the TSA has been disbanded. Since I own my airline, I make the rules. I don't like your haircut.... sorry YOU don't fly. I only cater to the "beautiful people". Ain't no jackbooted government thug going to tell ME how I can and cannot run my Airline. I should have the right to do whatever I want. There are more than enough travelers to make up for the few I decide I do not want business from. Sorry ugly people, I profife. What's the difference if a private company or the government engages in the same "thing"?

As far as arming passengers, isn't going to happen. You know that, and I don't know if I would feel any safer with some redneck packing his .44 mag onto a flight I was taking.

If it were truly private, they would have every right to do that. I still don't understand people who insist that the government profiling people, searching people etc is equivalent to the government doing so. If that guy/company does so, you can avoid him. If all of them do so, you won't be spending your money there. That's how a free system works. If the government does so, you either leave the country or prepare to undergo ridiculous time-wasting garbage that still is against your rights as a citizen because you had the misfortune of being born brown. Oh, and it is universal and perpetuated by fines and possible imprisonment merely for refusing to bear such an insult. And, it bears repeating, Such actions are illegal in the first place per the 4th Amendment.

As for carrying a firearm, I see no difference between me carrying one onto a plane and a U.S. Marshal doing so. He is human as am I and can make the same good/bad decisions I can. Yet he is permitted to be the only armed man on a plane, ostensibly to do what I am perfectly capable of doing for myself, while I am left defenseless. I am able to drive, walk about, and generally transport myself wherever I want with a firearm: what is so mystical about a plane that will cause so much danger if a firearm is present on my person?

 

[rambone]

I believe from your prior posts by privatizing you mean the airlines themselves providing security. I don't think you'd like that either.

Yes that's what I mean. If the airlines handled their own security, then they'd have to balance their security model with the customer's demands. If some company is openly discriminating, then they'd likely be boycotted. The free market would handle it just fine. I'd choose an airline that let me be armed.

What's the difference if a private company or the government engages in the same "thing"?

Then I wouldn't have to keep bringing up the 4th Amendment being violated. We could just discuss the most gun-friendly airline that treated us like human beings and kept their grabby hands to themselves. Free market security.

As far as arming passengers, isn't going to happen. You know that, and I don't know if I would feel any safer with some redneck packing his .44 mag onto a flight I was taking.

Its no different that riding a bus with the same redneck who is armed. I don't advocate gun control laws so folks would just have to stop hating the sight of guns in public.

As far as persons of middle eastern decent being upset over possible profiling. It is understandable but... IMO it's way past time for the Muslim community around the world to stand up and become VERY vocal about the small minority of Islamic lunatics causing the problems in the first place. ONLY then will this problem begin to be solved. Where are they in all this, the silence is deafening. It HAS to be the Muslim community that takes the lead in this.

Be real here. If there truly is some radical bunch of people ready to blow themselves up for a cause, then it really doesn't matter what anyone else says. People have no control over the "radicals."

Don't fall into the trap of grouping them all as an enemy. We are a society that is supposed to advocate individualism... So punish people as individuals, based on probable cause of an individual crime.

 

[firehawk1]

If it were truly private, they would have every right to do that. I still don't understand people who insist that the government profiling people, searching people etc is equivalent to the government doing so. If that guy/company does so, you can avoid him. If all of them do so, you won't be spending your money there. That's how a free system works. If the government does so, you either leave the country or prepare to undergo ridiculous time-wasting garbage that still is against your rights as a citizen because you had the misfortune of being born brown. Oh, and it is universal and perpetuated by fines and possible imprisonment merely for refusing to bear such an insult. And, it bears repeating, Such actions are illegal in the first place per the 4th Amendment.

As for carrying a firearm, I see no difference between me carrying one onto a plane and a U.S. Marshal doing so. He is human as am I and can make the same good/bad decisions I can. Yet he is permitted to be the only armed man on a plane, ostensibly to do what I am perfectly capable of doing for myself, while I am left defenseless. I am able to drive, walk about, and generally transport myself wherever I want with a firearm: what is so mystical about a plane that will cause so much danger if a firearm is present on my person?

We can, and do discuss right and wrong on here all the time. It come down to, SOMETHING has to be done to keep lunatics off of airplanes or whatever. NO ONE has ever given a sane intellegent answer as to what THEY would do. It NEVER goes behond b***hing about the evil Gubment.

I don't mean this directed towards you personally but generally, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? What is the answer? How would you protect the American public? I want specifics, not well the US deserves what's happening to us because of blah, blah, blah.

Come on guys, give me SPECIFIC steps you would take to insure the safety of the American public. No generalities, but VERY specific measures.

 

[rambone]

We can, and do discuss right and wrong on here all the time. It come down to, SOMETHING has to be done to keep lunatics off of airplanes or whatever. NO ONE has ever given a sane intellegent answer as to what THEY would do. It NEVER goes behond b***hing about the evil Gubment.

I don't mean this directed towards you personally but generally, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? What is the answer? How would you protect the American public? I want specifics, not well the US deserves what's happening to us because of blah, blah, blah.

Come on guys, give me SPECIFIC steps you would take to insure the safety of the American public. No generalities, but VERY specific measures.

I thought I was being specific.

Privatize security and let passengers be armed. 9/11 happened because Gun Control laws allowed it to happen. If citizens weren't disarmed, the those hijackers would have never made it into the cockpit.

 

[firehawk1]

I thought I was being specific.

Privatize security and let passengers be armed. 9/11 happened because Gun Control laws allowed it to happen. If citizens weren't disarmed, the those hijackers would have never made it into the cockpit.

Come on rambone.... everyone on an airplane BEFORE gun control laws were implemented were armed? And THAT in itself is the reason airplanes were not hijacked? 5-10 bubba's blasting away inside an airplane at 40,000 feet???? When would they stop? When they ran out of ammo, or when the plane hit the ground?

Not very specific. Any data to back that up?

And getting the mean 'ol government out of airline security would solve the problem too?

Here again, I do not like what the TSA is doing at all, but you are being way to simplistic here.

Private security, and packing heat... problem solved?????

 

[RockofStrength]

We can, and do discuss right and wrong on here all the time. It come down to, SOMETHING has to be done to keep lunatics off of airplanes or whatever. NO ONE has ever given a sane intellegent answer as to what THEY would do. It NEVER goes behond b***hing about the evil Gubment.

I don't mean this directed towards you personally but generally, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? What is the answer? How would you protect the American public? I want specifics, not well the US deserves what's happening to us because of blah, blah, blah.

Come on guys, give me SPECIFIC steps you would take to insure the safety of the American public. No generalities, but VERY specific measures.

No offense taken

I accept that freedom comes with the price of a reduced perception of security, while in fact the reality is that I am just as secure as I was before provided that I take responsibility for my own safety.

What would I do in this instance to protect people? I would take every reasonable measure to ensure that all passengers and staff were well-armed and trained in the use of those armaments. For the passengers, it would be encouraged, perhaps with price discounts for "helping with security" or whatever. With staff they would be issued a firearm and trained in its use and told when and where they will likely need to use it. Certain members of the staff would be on board every flight and would be trained as fire-coordinators in order to reduce collateral damage. Armed passengers would check-in with this coordinator and be separated into areas of responsibility if the plane is large enough to require separate teams to secure it.

Obviously I would also require that anyone who wants to protect others (staff or armed passenger) is educated on when it is legal to shoot someone or threaten them with death by fast-moving projectile. They would be very firmly informed of the consequences of wanton firing and of the destructive nature of both lawsuits and the bullets of the other passengers.

If I'm still under 4th Amendment restrictions (as a government security coordinator or whatever) I follow it strictly. I still treat abandoned packages and the like with extreme suspicion and will search them if they are truly abandoned, but I don't order random strip searches or any of that other mess. I can, of course, instruct my staff to ask to search anyone they wish if I feel it would aid security, but they would respect anyone who told my security officers that no search is permitted without a warrant and would post large signs to indicate to citizens that they may refuse on that basis.

If I'm not under those restrictions as a private airline, I require searches if they seem to help etc. within the bounds of the law. I doubt I would need to after the effectiveness of the above citizen/staff securing teams is proven.

Will people die because of lunatics if I do this? Yes, it is guaranteed that people will die, planes will be blown up etc. But nothing changes if you add in all the garbage we have now. The only thing all that stuff does is give you and me the impression of an impregnable fortress when in fact all it does is make us absolutely helpless when the inevitable breakthrough occurs. It is high time that the government started looking to us to provide security for ourselves instead of demanding that we walk about blithely trusting our approved protective forces.

 

[Garb]

Come on rambone.... everyone on an airplane BEFORE gun control laws were implemented were armed? And THAT in itself is the reason airplanes were not hijacked? 5-10 bubba's blasting away inside an airplane at 40,000 feet???? When would they stop? When they ran out of ammo, or when the plane hit the ground?

Not very specific. Any data to back that up?

And getting the mean 'ol government out of airline security would solve the problem too?

Here again, I do not like what the TSA is doing at all, but you are being way to simplistic here.

Private security, and packing heat... problem solved?????

I think you're the one who is making it too simplistic here, not Rambone. What Rambone is saying "hey, this system sucks, and violates the Constitution. Let's let the owners of the plane decide." I don't think anyone is suggesting that Rambone's ideas would totally solve the problems we face, but at some point you have to realize that there's no such thing as a perfect system. It's up to us as human beings to go with the closest option to perfect we can possibly get: freedom. The TSA is the opposite of freedom, and I don't believe there is anything as a happy medium between freedom and security.

 

[rambone]

Come on rambone.... everyone on an airplane BEFORE gun control laws were implemented were armed?

Not everyone. Anyone.

Just like in public now. You never know who is armed. Out of 150 passengers, anybody could be the one to foil the hijacker's plan.

5-10 bubba's blasting away inside an airplane at 40,000 feet???? When would they stop? When they ran out of ammo, or when the plane hit the ground?

How do firefights usually end? Isn't it preferable to have some shots fired rather than allow your plane to be hijacked and driven into a building?

Why are all gun owners called rednecks and bubbas?

Private security, and packing heat... problem solved?????

Yeah... what problem remains?

Tell me your ideas. You agree with this congressman? Should we have two lines to board the plane, one for arabs and one for non-arabs?

 

[shibumiseeker]

Sounds good. They are the terrorists after all.

It's time to quit pretending every other race poses as great a threat as the Arabs do when it comes to these acts. Their track record speaks for itself.

What race is an American?

 

[chraland51]

Take any group of people that just happen to total about 1,500,000,000 world-wide and say that only 10% of them might have opinions that some other people might consider to be radical and dangerous, that 10% is composed of about 150,000,000 members. That is a lot of members!! Seems like it is totalling in at about half the population of the USA.

 

[96firephoenix]

how about they hire behavioral psychologists and have them watch the crowd for aggression indicators. then pick out anyone that is acting fidgety, angry and violent. Then get rid of the stupid lines at security that make EVERYONE fidgety, angry and violent.

problem solved.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

I have no problem with profiling.

If your house has a termite infestation you solve nothing by setting rat traps.

I have no problem with "rednecks" or "bubbas" being armed on commercial aircraft.

Will a gunfight on a commercial aircraft be dangerous? Sure it will. But if six innocent people on an aircraft with a passenger complement of one hundred are killed in a gunfight between armed passengers and terrorists the fatality rate is 6%.

If NO ONE has a gunfight with the terrorists and they fly the aircraft into a building the fatality rate is 100%, and that's without counting the fatalities on the ground.

I'll take my chances with Bubba any day of the week.

Come to think of it, if we could go armed on commercial aircraft I'd BE Bubba.

 

[steveh_131]

Their policies already violate our civil liberties.

He is simply proposing that they violate our civil liberties in a way that might actually be effective.

While I oppose the violations to begin with, I don't think this is making it any worse than it already is.