• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The New TSA Regulations: Good Call or Asinine?

These new TSA regualtions: good idea, or asinine?

  • Good

    Votes: 1 4.3%
  • Bad

    Votes: 13 56.5%
  • Neither

    Votes: 4 17.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 5 21.7%

  • Total voters
    23
Personally I consider breaking apart at 30,000 feet moving 700 mph a lot more inconvienent than any of the new requirements. In fact I think it's about time. I've seen a pattern of getting lax after each terrorist incident. As I indicated in another post our inspection of our luggage a few days ago missed several things.

IMO, these new requirements do nothing to assist in making flying - which is already very safe - even safer, smack in the face of common sense, and make something that was relatively painless overbearing.
 
This was a topic last night at the dinner table with a 40 year flight attendent and a retired pilot. They really did not think these rules would make flying any safer and just make flying more of a pain for the passengers.
 
IMO, these new requirements do nothing to assist in making flying - which is already very safe - even safer, smack in the face of common sense, and make something that was relatively painless overbearing.

Possibly not but I'm not an expert in transport safety so can't say for sure. I'm just saying I'm willing to take the chance they do, as the other alternative is not a viable option for me. I guess it takes a lot more than some inconvience to be "overbearing" for me having served in the military. Heck even a military inspection makes this look like childsplay.

One thing we need to consider is the pressure on the TSA. If they appear to do nothing and something happens they take the fall. Doubtful they are willing to accept that risk either.
 
Last edited:
This is destructive critism.
Anything constructive?
Are you an expert in this area?
I, for one, am not happy about all this security, but in todays world, it is necessary.
Its the root cause of terrorism that must be addressed.

Not an expert but in the Air Force my job when working in the passenger terminal did deal with security and screening of passengers on any military or civilian aircraft that we were handling. My current job still requires me to be familiar with the rules and regulations.
 
Not an expert but in the Air Force my job when working in the passenger terminal did deal with security and screening of passengers on any military or civilian aircraft that we were handling. My current job still requires me to be familiar with the rules and regulations.

Welcome Sarge. I may not agree with you but welcome aboard! As you know from WS I was a Sgt. in the ANG. (Formerly Mirror Lake 444).
 
Welcome Sarge. I may not agree with you but welcome aboard! As you know from WS I was a Sgt. in the ANG. (Formerly Mirror Lake 444).

Hello there!

My point was that all these new procedures would not have prevented what happened. As it was said in another post it gives the appearance of something being done but it doesn't address or solve how the guy got the explosives on the plane. Two very different things.
 
The correct response is the eradication or permanent isolation from modern technology of all aspects and persons of Militant (Traditional) Islam.

Other approaches are like trying to make accommodation with the cobra loose in your house.

Before anyone "yanks my chain" about prejudice and intolerance, I didn't make the rules, the Mohammedans did.
 
Last edited:
Hello there!

My point was that all these new procedures would not have prevented what happened. As it was said in another post it gives the appearance of something being done but it doesn't address or solve how the guy got the explosives on the plane. Two very different things.

You may be right. I'd like to see the bureaucrats commmunicate better with each other. And if they miss something make they wish they hadn't just like we do in the military. Court Martials would be fine with me.

Apparently his father warned that his son was radicalized and may be up to something. Why he was on a low priority list and someone like Cat Stevens is on a no fly list makes no sense to me.
 
Hello there!

My point was that all these new procedures would not have prevented what happened. As it was said in another post it gives the appearance of something being done but it doesn't address or solve how the guy got the explosives on the plane. Two very different things.

You may be right. I'd like to see the bureaucrats commmunicate better with each other. And if they miss something make them wish they hadn't just like we do in the military. Court Martials would be fine with me.

Apparently his father warned that his son was radicalized and may be up to something. Why he was on a low priority list and someone like Cat Stevens is on a no fly list makes no sense to me.
 
New precautions in security will not help, if we have information that is not passed.
This kind of thing is why Dept. of Homeland Security was formed.
One would think after his father went to the Embassy,that he would have been put on a no fly list and had is visa pulled.

Dept. of Homeland Security failed.
State Dept. failed

And if you throw in what happened on the Army base.

FBI failed
Defense Intelligence Agency failed
Dept of Homeland Security failed.
 
The correct response is the eradication or permanent isolation from modern technology of all aspects and persons of Militant (Traditional) Islam.

Other approaches are like trying to make accommodation with the cobra loose in your house.

Before anyone "yanks my chain" about prejudice and intolerance, I didn't make the rules, the Mohammedans did.

Yes...that's a grand idea. I got one better. Why don't we stop selling clothes to the Middle East. Anybody with clothing made BEFORE 2009 is a terrorist. Everybody with clothes after? Safe bet they are not.
 
It was kinda nice when everything was grounded after 9/11

Nice and kind of surreal at the same time. I remember looking into the night sky and wondering how I could tell there were no flights as I never noticed them much before, but the sky was definitely different.
 
New precautions in security will not help, if we have information that is not passed.
This kind of thing is why Dept. of Homeland Security was formed.
One would think after his father went to the Embassy,that he would have been put on a no fly list and had is visa pulled.

Dept. of Homeland Security failed.
State Dept. failed

And if you throw in what happened on the Army base.

FBI failed
Defense Intelligence Agency failed
Dept of Homeland Security failed.

My point exactly. Heads need to roll when we have failures but it seems they don't. They didn't roll in the last administration either, including 911 where there were also clues.
 
Last edited:
The correct response is the eradication or permanent isolation from modern technology of all aspects and persons of Militant (Traditional) Islam.

Other approaches are like trying to make accommodation with the cobra loose in your house.

Before anyone "yanks my chain" about prejudice and intolerance, I didn't make the rules, the Mohammedans did.

No chain yanking here. However I would prefer a serious idea vs. a something as unrealistic as you propose.
 
Back
Top Bottom