And your supporting documentation for that would be….?

And on the toilet, in bed, in front of your computer (the list is endless), so we should do away with anything that mitigates risk of any kind?

And your supporting documentation for that would be….?

Dead men are not free.

Handguns are not dangerous.

And when you begin to you will let us know, right?

Yes, but not needlessly so.

No, only one side. I am not hostile. I have far too much to do to be hostile.

Of the 300,000,000 or so. An interesting percentage.

And your supporting documentation for that would be….?

Tis the nature of thing to grow, but know that all things that grow must also die.

“Otherwise lawful” means criminals. Either you are a law abiding citizen or you are not, and if the latter then you are a criminal.

No, it wont. Its just words on paper. The idea will win, and so far the highest court in the land has supported airport screenings. Therefore the idea remains intact and continues to support the actions of the TSA.

Just because of airport screening? That’s an … unusual … interpretation of our country.

With the slurpee and lime green tennis shoes I’m sure.

Such as? AIT for example maybe?

Her’s, and yours I’m sure, but there are those who would disagree with both of you. Should we ignore their opinion or completely discount it simply because it is not the same as yours?

Quite true, we are not in the military. I was taught to use those techniques on anyone, civilians included, therefore it is quite relevant.

I do know what the official procedures are. It is mistreatment to slice someone open and yank out their intestines as well, but it happens every day and very few complain.

IF IT HAPPENED. So, should we prosecute those who make these false claims just as ardently as those you think actually do it? Can we fire them as well? Hold them up to ridicule in public forums and debate their falsehoods and lack of honesty until the cows come home? Think carefully, quite a few of these claims have been proven false, and most others cannot be proven to be true. What happened to “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”, for you does it apply to everyone, except TSO’s? Who’s next, the paper boy who missed your front porch?

Different administration, or didn’t you notice? Besides, WMD’s have been found numerous times in Iraq, and occasionally the news even reports it. But that is not a subject for this forum.

An opinion from someone who know little about the subject is usually less than useful.

And your supporting documentation for that is …. ?

Quite a bit has changed. Far more than you are obviously willing to admit.

Has the military told you how to arm a nuclear weapon? Have they told you how to build an F-22? Has Russia told you how many chemical weapons storage areas they have and what’s in them?

It’s a pretty basic concept, there is information out there that you do not need to know, and that if made public could have significant national consequences. You do not need to know what our procedures are, and if the information was in the wrong hands it could be used against us. But if you are serious about wanting to know more about our procedures, join the TSA. Then you would have a valid “Need to Know”.

As I said, you “think” you do. “Think” in many ways is like “assume”.

I snipped the remainder of your diatribe because it does nothing for the conversation. The “I HATE TSA” line gets a bit old. If you would like to contribute to the conversation you are more than welcome to, but please leave the rhetoric at the door.

And I agree with you 100%. Dogs are a great deterrent, not always practical, but they do the job very well.

And you are welcome to your opinion. I can even find a great bit of respect for it. But the threat in Israel if different than it is in Toronto, or Dubai, or Cleveland. Different approaches are required, different priorities (economic and political both), different procedures. Any reasonable person would know this, but alas my current tag line says it all.

The actual screening staff nation wide is roughly 45,000+. They service 400+ airports, and more than 2,000,000 passengers every day. That’s roughly 5 passengers an hour per TSO, and as a minimum a checkpoint requires 3 TSO’s and one supervisor. Half the work force is off-duty at any given time, and another third are on their scheduled days off. But the number of passengers varies very little. So that leaves roughly 15,000 screeners to meets the demands of 2 million passengers. Of course at that number some TSO’s are holding down 2, 3, or even 4 different jobs. Many of our staff are part-time, especially in the smaller airports. CAT IV airports often are operated by nothing but part-time TSO’s. IOW, we don’t have enough people as it is, not for the job we are being asked to do.

Indeed there is a reason for every single rules we have. And honestly it does not take a great deal of thought to figure out what those reasons might be. The problem comes when someone refuses to accept those reasons because they are either ignorant of the facts or can’t bring themselves to believe them.

You could not be more wrong. Doctors are licensed by the government, trained using government funding, working in government supported facilities, and get the bulk of their income directly from government agencies. If a doctor’s authority is not supported by the government then they cannot work in this country.

How about Air Force-ville? Army-Ville? Do you trust that everything is just dandy there? Or do you think that they going to go mad with their tanks and their nuclear weapons and wipe us all out? How come you pick and choose which parts of the government are “just dandy” and which are not? I think I understand, the TSA is the “flavor of the month”.

I question just as you do. I understand the answers, or at least give it the old college try to comprehend. I refuse to be intentionally ignorant.

I know quite a few people who would disagree with you.

I had my say. I spoke. I voted. My guy either did or did not win. I occasionally write my congress person and state my opinion, but I also know that they were elected because the majority of people agreed with their views and that elected individual would legislate based upon those very same views. I may not like his or her views, and I am more than willing to let them know that. But to blame a single individual, or even 3 individuals, for policies that have been around for nearly a decade now and have been through more than one administration is just plain stupid. Many people don’t like the war in Iraq, but then again Iraq is most likely to end up an ally to the US because of it. I don’t like New York’s gun laws, which is why I choose not to live there. I think that nut-job in Argentina needs a new job, prisoner preferably, which is why I do not buy my gas at his gas stations. But I am not standing on the capitol steps screaming about the war, I don’t live in New York, and I refuse to support a dictator by giving him my hard earned dollar. I know why I do these things, but I don’t know the intimate workings of each and don’t need to know.

Just as you know that liquids are limited to 3.4 ounces, why you can’t bring a knife, and why when the seatbelt sign comes on its time to sit down and buckle up. You really don’t have to know why, but you do have to comply. And if you actually take the time to think about it, you can figure out the “why”.