• 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!

Backpacks, just say no?

Should backpacks be banned from public events

  • yes

    Votes: 5 9.3%

  • no

    Votes: 49 90.7%
  • Total voters
    54
sawyerloggingon said:
I have made my position clear and will give you the last word. Goodnight :)
Click to expand...

Actually, I kinda thought you were playing devil's advocate when I first saw this thread. For some reason, I figured you for an anti-ban-this-thing person. Guess I was wrong.

My position is still the same though. I am not willing to give up freedom for security unless you can honestly show a major amount of security coming from giving up a small bit of freedom that doesn't greatly impact my life. Banning things only semirelated to the thing trying to be prevented is not worth it at all.
 
roguenuke said:
Actually, I kinda thought you were playing devil's advocate when I first saw this thread. For some reason, I figured you for an anti-ban-this-thing person. Guess I was wrong.

My position is still the same though. I am not willing to give up freedom for security unless you can honestly show a major amount of security coming from giving up a small bit of freedom that doesn't greatly impact my life. Banning things only semirelated to the thing trying to be prevented is not worth it at all.
Click to expand...

Many years ago I was working in Alaska and used to frequent this bar where the patrons had a nasty habit of throwing beer bottles at bands they thought sucked.(Not me of course:lol:) One night a guy was hit in the head and severely injured so they banned beer in bottles and only served it in cans. At the time I was against it but in retrospect it worked and was the right thing to do, so yes I am for banning certain things at certain times under certain circumstances.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
This Boston bombing could not have taken place if people were not allowed to carry backpacks to events like this. Why does anyone really need a backpack anyway? IMO it would not be asking to much to leave your backpack home. The only time I ever wear one is you know, when I'm going backpacking.

"You have people that have their backpacks with them, a runner may have a hydration pack on them, another person may be coming to watch the race and they may have a backpack," Penza said. "You see them so much, you stop thinking that any of those bags might have explosives."

Marathon Security Practices Scrutinized in Wake of Boston Marathon Explosions - ABC News
Click to expand...

Ban backpacks? Come the **** on, let's try to remain reasonable. I almost always have a backpack of sorts. Colleges would be f'd. And have you ever seen a science conference where at least half the people didn't have backpacks?

Ban backpacks? No, we're not stupid.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Many years ago I was working in Alaska and used to frequent this bar where the patrons had a nasty habit of throwing beer bottles at bands they thought sucked.(Not me of course:lol:) One night a guy was hit in the head and severely injured so they banned beer in bottles and only served it in cans. At the time I was against it but in retrospect it worked and was the right thing to do, so yes I am for banning certain things at certain times under certain circumstances.
Click to expand...

As long as it was that bar, they had a specific reason to do so in that bar. They obviously attracted a rowdy crowd that they didn't want to take more effort to control. That would be completely acceptable for that private business. However, other bars should not be forced by law to ban bottles just because of that one incident, particularly if they aren't similar in nature to that bar.

It is all about threat assessment and what you are getting for what you lose. The very little security given by banning backpacks is absolutely not worth the loss of freedom, convenience, and for some people money, not to the majority of people. This is a big reason why many cannot stand the TSA rules and how strict they have become because there really isn't a whole lot of security and safety coming from what is being given up.

As someone else pointed out, banning things only leads to the terrorists thinking of new ways to deploy their methods. They aren't going to give up nor are you really making it harder for them to succeed. You are merely challenging them to make a better, more effective plan. The chances of a person dying in a terrorist attack is much smaller than the chances of being in a traffic accident. You are probably at a higher risk to getting hit by a car crossing the street than actually being injured even during a terrorist attack. (After living in Hawaii and even here in San Diego and observing how the city bus drivers are, I'd say many in bigger cities have a much larger chance of getting hit by a bus than being injured in a terrorist attack, and most attacks occur in those major cities.)
 
Ikari said:
Ban backpacks? Come the **** on, let's try to remain reasonable. I almost always have a backpack of sorts. Colleges would be f'd. And have you ever seen a science conference where at least half the people didn't have backpacks?

Ban backpacks? No, we're not stupid.
Click to expand...

Not ban backpacks, ban them in public events like the Boston Marathon .
 
roguenuke said:
As long as it was that bar, they had a specific reason to do so in that bar. They obviously attracted a rowdy crowd that they didn't want to take more effort to control. That would be completely acceptable for that private business. However, other bars should not be forced by law to ban bottles just because of that one incident, particularly if they aren't similar in nature to that bar.

It is all about threat assessment and what you are getting for what you lose. The very little security given by banning backpacks is absolutely not worth the loss of freedom, convenience, and for some people money, not to the majority of people. This is a big reason why many cannot stand the TSA rules and how strict they have become because there really isn't a whole lot of security and safety coming from what is being given up.

As someone else pointed out, banning things only leads to the terrorists thinking of new ways to deploy their methods. They aren't going to give up nor are you really making it harder for them to succeed. You are merely challenging them to make a better, more effective plan. The chances of a person dying in a terrorist attack is much smaller than the chances of being in a traffic accident. You are probably at a higher risk to getting hit by a car crossing the street than actually being injured even during a terrorist attack. (After living in Hawaii and even here in San Diego and observing how the city bus drivers are, I'd say many in bigger cities have a much larger chance of getting hit by a bus than being injured in a terrorist attack, and most attacks occur in those major cities.)
Click to expand...

Banning bottles in that bar is the same thing as banning backpacks in high value target areas for terrorism, site specific. As for terrorist adapting that is true but why not make it as hard as possible for them to ply their trade especially when your so called sacrifice is in reality a very trivial inconvenience. Most sporting events in a controlled environment like a stadium search backpacks now so why is that different than just not allowing them at all in uncontrolled environments or are you against stadiums and Disney Land searching packs too?
 
Ikari said:
Ban backpacks? Come the **** on, let's try to remain reasonable. I almost always have a backpack of sorts. Colleges would be f'd. And have you ever seen a science conference where at least half the people didn't have backpacks?

Ban backpacks? No, we're not stupid.
Click to expand...
Many older K-12 schools have removed student lockers, and most new schools don't even install them at all. If backpacks were banned, which I could see this going in that direction given our society's propensity to overreact, what would students use to carry all their books and stuff?
 
radcen said:
Many older K-12 schools have removed student lockers, and most new schools don't even install them at all. If backpacks were banned, which I could see this going in that direction given our society's propensity to overreact, what would students use to carry all their books and stuff?
Click to expand...

When I was a kid we carried books under our arm, oh the horror!:lol:
 
I think a small burro would be sufficient to carry all that we require at such events. Some women may require a full fledged pack mule, and exceptions can be made for such instances, but in general the burro would do.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
"No, that is stupid" because......
Click to expand...

It's a dumb notion that it will do anything. Also my possession of a backpack does not infringe upon the rights of others. You cannot just ban things based on coincidence of them being used in a crime. That is stupid.
 
Ikari said:
Ban backpacks? Come the **** on, let's try to remain reasonable. I almost always have a backpack of sorts. Colleges would be f'd. And have you ever seen a science conference where at least half the people didn't have backpacks?

Ban backpacks? No, we're not stupid.
Click to expand...

He wasn't serious:

sawyerloggingon said:
Here is what I find really interesting about this thread. Many of the same people who are vehemently anti gun and want them severely restricted in order to "save lives" are not willing to give up their little backpacks to save lives. The right to keep and bear arms is clearly spelled out in the constitution whereas the right to carry a backpack is never mentioned but the anti gun pro backpack crowd says you can have my backpack when you pry it from my cold dead fingers but please take those damn guns. I am also sick to death of hearing the oft repeated catch phrase, 'if we give up XYZ the terrorist win". BS, the terrorist win when they kill and maim Americans. Do burglars win when you install a deadbolt to make it harder for them to break into your house? Did Japan win after they bombed Pearl harbor and America changed its way of life to win that war? I am proud to be in the minority on this subject. I refuse to be a sheep and this is why I call myself an independent, I will not engage in this group think crap. GFY. :)
Click to expand...
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Not ban backpacks, ban them in public events like the Boston Marathon .
Click to expand...

Which is still too far. 2 people out of hundreds of thousands at one event used their backpacks to plant bombs on a really crowded street. What if they had just been going to school or going to work (I often carry my uniform or at least things I need with my uniform in a backpack)? Plenty of people go to see an event and then leave from there to go to another obligation. Or perhaps it is a family who doesn't want to have to spend a lot of money on drinks and snacks waiting for their runners to cross (afterall, to all but the most experienced runners, this thing takes hours, up to 8 hours for a mobile-impaired person). Plus, I don't think they shut down the businesses along the marathon route. And that is a lot of area to ban backpacks in, some of which I believe is close to a college campus.

It really is just impractical to ban backpacks just to avoid something that is unlikely to happen again. People will be more vigilant during such events or they simply will stay home if they aren't willing to take the chance something similar will happen.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
When I was a kid we carried books under our arm, oh the horror!:lol:
Click to expand...
We did, too, but we also had lockers where most stuff stayed when not in use. The only time we took books home was for homework, and then it was only 1-2 books at a time, not every book for every class all day every day.
 
Can't we just ban young foreign born Muslims from sections of the world known for terrorism?
 
sawyerloggingon said:
When I was a kid we carried books under our arm, oh the horror!:lol:
Click to expand...

Not practical anymore. I have two books and several notebooks that I have to take to some of my classes. One of my classes has an investigation kit. And I am in college classes. Younger students usually have to carry books for more than one class with them. Plus many carry their computer with them to class. There is a reason we make advancements such as backpacks. It is to aid us because it was an inconvenience in the past to have to carry your books in your hands.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Banning bottles in that bar is the same thing as banning backpacks in high value target areas for terrorism, site specific. As for terrorist adapting that is true but why not make it as hard as possible for them to ply their trade especially when your so called sacrifice is in reality a very trivial inconvenience. Most sporting events in a controlled environment like a stadium search backpacks now so why is that different than just not allowing them at all in uncontrolled environments or are you against stadiums and Disney Land searching packs too?
Click to expand...

Banning glass bottles in that bar was a private owner doing it for his own liability purposes more than safety and it actually will go a ways to protect people from harm. Banning backpacks won't do a whole lot at all toward safety/security because the backpacks are merely a transportation device and aren't even dangerous in themselves (even glass is more dangerous).

No the sacrifice is not trivial, not to those doing the sacrificing.

Most sporting events don't take place in the middle of a very long distance of public street, are on private property, and only search backpacks coming in, they don't ban them. Big difference between searching a backpack and banning them.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Here is what I find really interesting about this thread. Many of the same people who are vehemently anti gun and want them severely restricted in order to "save lives" are not willing to give up their little backpacks to save lives
Click to expand...

and troll thread emerges.

everyone wave hi to the troll
 
roguenuke said:
Not practical anymore. I have two books and several notebooks that I have to take to some of my classes. One of my classes has an investigation kit. And I am in college classes. Younger students usually have to carry books for more than one class with them. Plus many carry their computer with them to class. There is a reason we make advancements such as backpacks. It is to aid us because it was an inconvenience in the past to have to carry your books in your hands.
Click to expand...

You keep changing the subject. This thread is about banning backpacks at crowded events that are terrorist targets not banning them altogether.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom