Privacy vs Security

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by ysabel, Jun 13, 2008.

  1. ysabel

    ysabel /ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5

    Up to which point are you willing to give up your privacy for security's sake?

    One example:

    The scans are for the moment optional (you can choose not to go through it) but it will eventually replace all physical pat-downs of people, making it a mandatory security check when traveling.
     

  2. bball4life

    bball4life Alfred :: Gotham Hero

    thats just plain creepy.
     
  3. Blueyes

    Blueyes Registered Member

    I hope they don't put that at all airports and I can only pray that really is only mandatory because I'd be suing someone.
     
  4. TimmehD

    TimmehD Registered Member

    100,000 people will be on that train before you ever made it to the airport.

    This will never go fully mandatory for exactly that reason, people will just stop going to airports and seek alternative modes of method. Also, what about children? Could you imagine how many people would have to be fired because of anything in their past relating to sexual harassment? This is a fairly old story, anyway, it won't happen.
     
  5. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    The only folks who have to worry are those with something to hide. :p As it is, I'm flying out of LAX tomorrow, but I've known about these scans for awhile--they were big news for a spell--and am well resigned to them.
     
  6. Duke1985

    Duke1985 EatsApplePieShitsFreedom

    I don't fly for starters, the people at the train station are just so happy I actually want to ride a train they leave you alone for the most part.

    I do have to say though I'd take the risk of not having that scanner, throw an air marshal on the plane and I'd be happy. The way I see all this doesn't really make us that much safer, sure we should take some precautions but at the end of the day one of your co-workers could just shoot up your work, and no amount of airport scanning is going to take care of that.

    So I'd gladly have my privacy over a feeling of extra security.
     
  7. ysabel

    ysabel /ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5

    Perhaps I'm just watching too many movies, but I thought those who plan to bring in firearms on a plane don't usually carry them through a security check. They assemble it after or obtain it later with help from an inside job.

    Or were the plane hijackings in history caused by people walking in with their firearm tucked somewhere that the existing normal scan and pat-downs didn't catch (and that this type of scan could have prevented it)?
     
  8. CBNJ

    CBNJ Registered Member

    That's what I always thought too, that they have help from the inside. But this scan will never work. Whoever the people are that would be bringing the weapons on the plane, would just find a different way around it.
     
  9. Merc

    Merc Certified Shitlord V.I.P. Lifetime

    If the choice is between some dimwit feeling me up and some machine taking a computer rendered 3D image, I may just pick the machine. However, I can understand why people don't like this idea. It's more liberty being traded in for security but I bet you they would stop more problems this way.

    Basically, I don't know where I stand on this. If the images aren't stored or shown outside of a small computer screen, is it really that terrible?
     
  10. micfranklin

    micfranklin Eviscerator

    All this equipment for keeping an eye on U.S. civilians and yet we still can't find Osama bin Laden. What a joke.
     

Share This Page