View Poll Results: Do you agree or disagree with the action undertaken by MKEbound?
Agree
766
75.92%
Disagree
144
14.27%
Neither agree nor disagree
75
7.43%
Not sure
24
2.38%
Voters: 1009. You may not vote on this poll
I was detained at the TSA checkpoint for about 25 minutes today
Oct 2, 2006, 9:14 am
#1441
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by Wally Bird
It is your assumption (you're not alone, apparently) that anyone writing on a baggie does not "just want to board ... without incident"; and in demonstrating that assumption you (and others) miss the whole point. Which is understandable due to having only recently appeared in this forum.
As suggested, there is a wealth of history, principles and experiences in dealing with the TSA in countless other threads as well as just this (narrow) one. All your objections(sic) have been discussed many times; I'm not about to do it again. Others may choose to.
As suggested, there is a wealth of history, principles and experiences in dealing with the TSA in countless other threads as well as just this (narrow) one. All your objections(sic) have been discussed many times; I'm not about to do it again. Others may choose to.
There is absolutely not possible way you walk up to security armed with this and expect to board without incident. He wanted the attention and he got it.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:16 am
#1442
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
So you were there? How slow did the lines move because security was heightened? I can assure you that other screens did in fact have a more watchful eye after the incident.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:16 am
#1443
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Arguing by analogy produces logically invalid conclusions. Isn't that still taught in critical thinking classes or is that "old school"? 
So you are my professor now?
Oct 2, 2006, 9:16 am
#1444
Moderator: Midwest, Las Vegas & Dining Buzz
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 17,976
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
So you were there? How slow did the lines move because security was heightened? I can assure you that other screens did in fact have a more watchful eye after the incident.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:17 am
#1445
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
I would say to all of you in regards to flying.. If you don't like the rules then don't fly, drive to your destination.
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
Everytime one of you pulls these antics at security you are infringing upon me.
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
The time spent dealing with you is more time I have to spend waiting in line.
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
If you want to demonstrate against the rules do it in another place. Make some picket signs and stand outside, take out a newspaper add, circulate a petition, run for office, the options are unlimited. You are free to exercise your constitutional rights but not at my expense.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:18 am
#1446
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by Wally Bird
So you were there ?
I didn't have to be, I've been through the lines after someone has pulled a stunt like this and I've seen first hand just how watchful they become. They have to.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:19 am
#1447
Moderator: Midwest, Las Vegas & Dining Buzz
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 17,976
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
They have to.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:20 am
#1448
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
So you are my professor now?
Oct 2, 2006, 9:20 am
#1449
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by GUWonder
That's a suggestion I reject.
Unless we are acting as an agent of the government, these so-called antics at security cannot and do not infringe upon your constitutional rights. To think otherwise betrays an impoverished understanding of the Constitution and of America.
Is that a complaint? Your choice.
You don't make the rules of how people may exercise their constitutional rights. Did you notice the failure to apply critical thinking in this post of your? If the options are unlimited, then the following words have little meaning: "you are free to exercise your constitutional rights but not at my expense". If someone's constitutional rights come at your expense does not equate with your constitutional rights being denied. Apply some more of that little critical thinking coursework and your post may have a bit more substance.
Unless we are acting as an agent of the government, these so-called antics at security cannot and do not infringe upon your constitutional rights. To think otherwise betrays an impoverished understanding of the Constitution and of America.
Is that a complaint? Your choice.
You don't make the rules of how people may exercise their constitutional rights. Did you notice the failure to apply critical thinking in this post of your? If the options are unlimited, then the following words have little meaning: "you are free to exercise your constitutional rights but not at my expense". If someone's constitutional rights come at your expense does not equate with your constitutional rights being denied. Apply some more of that little critical thinking coursework and your post may have a bit more substance.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:21 am
#1450
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by GUWonder
No. And I don't need to be a professor to recognize the limitations in critical thinking exhibited in a post.
I suppose you think you are free from "limitations" in your own attempt to think critically?
Oct 2, 2006, 9:22 am
#1451
Join Date: Jul 2004
Programs: NW Gold, '06. Good times.
Posts: 7,363
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
So you were there? How slow did the lines move because security was heightened? I can assure you that other screens did in fact have a more watchful eye after the incident.
As for your insistent "were you there?" questions, I could easily respond in kind. After all, how do you know that "other screens did in fact have a more watchful eye after the incident"? Were you there?
Either way, I'm done responding to your uber-left-wing, "obey the government because it knows best" posts. Have a nice day.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:22 am
#1452
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
I didn't have to be, I've been through the lines after someone has pulled a stunt like this and I've seen first hand just how watchful they become. They have to.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:22 am
#1453
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: IND
Programs: AA LT Gold, 1.5MM, Marriot
Posts: 1,307
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
Why should I stay off the plane? I'm not the one with questionable motives. You see, the screener must try to figure out if the motive is legitimate or whether or not it's just someone spewing. I'd rather they not ignore, but I will say that is is socially irresponsible for you to waste their time and ours when your intent is just to spew. Like I said before, there are places and forums where you are free to exercise free speech, holding up the security line at the airport is hardly the appropriate forum public or not.
Your use of "socially irresponsible" seems to mean "poor social etiquette." Maybe protesting is impolite, but it's very, very socially responsible.
GG
Oct 2, 2006, 9:25 am
#1454
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 40
[QUOTE=GeoGirl]Free speech isn't limited to appropriate forums.
Quite contrary.
Quite contrary.
Oct 2, 2006, 9:26 am
#1455
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
I suppose you think you are free from "limitations" in your own attempt to think critically?