thats nice. it can apply to anything. you could make that point when the government doesnt allow me the liberty of building a nuclear plant in my backyard. if an airline allowed terrorists on the plane with knives, you could avoid that airline. but you couldnt avoid it when it crashed into your office. of course it is crazy to harass this old woman. but your point is very stupid and meaningless. you might as well say nothing at all. there is OBVIOUSLY some level of privacy and freedom that we must give up for security. i want the liberty to have all my money. but the government takes some of it away for the military, which provides security. so it is a necessary trade off. so, again, your point is not valid, and is fact, inane. goofy platitudes dont help anyone. they are just things stupid people say when they dont have a real point.
rex, do you simply want people to saunter aboard planes unchecked? we know the system is flawed. the TSA people are morons. and maybe they arent even helping much. but they are helping some. what else can we do? we cant just act like a bunch of lunatics screaming "FREEDOM!" and blowing up planes left and right. what do you propose? better education for TSA agents? ok. more common sense policy? ok, we all favor that as well. i dont understand what it is you think we need. just rephrasing that old liberty/security quote doesnt mean anything.
The govt. shouldn't be in the business of protecting airlines. If the govt wasn't in the way we probably wouldn't of had 9/11. You and SF make the point that we need more security to be safe. I don't buy that. The only point you ever make is that nobody has a point. Good argument. Stick to that one it really works for you.
TSA gets a grade of F. They do a lousy job. Let the airlines protect their passengers and property. Not the inept govt. and tax payer dollars.
they are not protecting airlines any more than speed limits are protecting car makers. its for the safety of the people. yunno planes can be used as weapons? cmon, you knew that right? yes, i know, bush planed 9/11. i dunno about "more", but i think sabanfan and i would agree that we do need "effective" security. and this is a necessary drag on our freedom. so be it. ask red about balance. you have a point. it is at the top of your head.* again, if i said i cant drive under the speed limit, do you think it would be a valid point for me to make that i dont want to trade my safety for my freedom to drive 140 in traffic? do you have any understanding of why laws exist at all? *this is red's favorite saying after "we have seen the enemy and he is us"
