Error editing post! Your message is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.
Wow.. always liked Gilmore
Wish I had the dough to take on some dumb laws...





"Basically what they want is a show of obedience."
This guy is such a putz.This is such bullshit.
All he had to do was show his ID.
Im sorry,but when i fly,i would like they guy with the ticket next to me,to be who he says he is.
Im just glad this guy wasnt middle eastern or someone would have tossed in the race card.
If its the airlines rule that ID's are required,show it or walk.
If its a real law, then again,show it or walk.
Airports are seccure areas and i have no problem with someone having to show ID to get into sensitive areas.
Its a post 9/11 world.





Ditto.Originally Posted by discretedancer
As for it being a post 9/11 world, boy am I sick of hearing that.
Because there ain't no tits on the radio
So am I HardKandee , so am I.Originally Posted by hardkandee
The phrase is nothing more than propoganda intended to keep people in fear.
Terrorism existed before 9/11 and it continues after 9/11. It exists in every nation on the planet and in some form or another always has existed. It is nothing new.
There are some people in this country who seem to think that 9/11 was the first and only terrorist attack the US has ever faced, which is patently untrue ofcourse. But try telling that truth to some of the Bush supporters out there and they will look at you as if you have three heads. I so wish those people would wake up and smell the coffee because they appear to be nothing more than puppets on the GOP string.
Last edited by Mark W.; 02-28-2005 at 09:29 PM.





I am so happy to hear someone say exactly what I think!!Originally Posted by Mark W.
![]()
Because there ain't no tits on the radio
If the airlines want to require ID's as a company policy, that's their business. If the government wants to require it, that's my business.
I wouldn't go into a restaurant that required me to show ID...how many strip club customers would allow their personal info to be tracked?
What the "post 9/11 world" needs to realize is there is NO safety. If someone wants to blow you up, they will. An ID won't stop that...
All too true. There are, or should I say were so many Americans who thought that they were exempt from terror attacks. There is or was this disconnect from the real world.Originally Posted by discretedancer
Those people are pretty easy to spot now as they use the terms like "Post 9/11 World" to justify things like torture and discrimation against the Middle Eastern people, the Muslim faith and even things like right to privacy i.e parts of the so called "Patriot" Act.





In Virginia,every customer must have ID while in the building,its the law.Originally Posted by discretedancer
The strip clubs dont take personal info,but they have to check it before they let someone in.
Its like that anywhere booze is sold,strip club,restaurant,nightclub.
I have never heard of a restaurant checking IDs to get in unless it had something to do with the booze.
If they were checking IDs to get into MacDonalds or Burger king,i guess i would have a problem with that.As for someone boarding a jet,a huge potential weapon,I fail to understand the problem someone would have showing thier ID.
I think this guy was looking for publicity and got it.
^ The issue is the efficacy of the implementation of ID checking at airports, which is to say, is it a viable, pragmatic means of insuring security in a quantifiable manner?
The answer is no. Airport ID checks are not only ineffectual at picking up terrorists, but are symptomatic of feel-good measures that make the general public believe something is actually being done when in fact the most useful and effective efforts are largely secret.
If savages are in the airports intent on doing damage, it's already too late. Our nation is currently too focused on defensive, passive security measures; we're slowly yet radically expanding our proactive and preemptive intelligence and military measures which would take the fight to the savages. Terrorism is not a game you win by waiting for them to hit you--you have to hit them first, and hit them so hard they can't strike back.
Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.
William F. Buckley, Jr.





9-11 world
WHo is them, the IRA, Al-Quaeda, KKK, Kamikazes, Mafia, anti-aboriton bombers, ELF/ALF (environmental/animal terrorists), NRA, ???Originally Posted by Casual Observer
and how long before there are so many "thems" that "we" start coming under scrutiny?
I believe that every facet of human society has extremists, and they have always been and will always be a problem. I do not think "we" need to continually trade in liberties to "be secure" and that things like holding "suspected terrorists" in jail without evidence, charge or trial is wrong...no matter what group they may belong to.
As for IDs in airports, I never thought much about it...because it's really the airlines wanting to make sure the person that bought the ticket is flying...it's as much marketing research as it is security.
Up here, they check IDs at strip clubs too, but don't record the data - I bet if data was recorded customers would complain
You already are under scrutiny. Ever try flying? Ever try to bring a large amount of cash over the border? Ever been driving in the "wrong" neighborhood.Originally Posted by discretedancer
In Amerika, Slavery Is Freedom
Oh I agree...that's the way it is or soon will be.
I just hope we all wake up and fight the urge to be "safe" at any cost.
"Post-9/11 is nothing more...."
Well, it can be different things to different people. As for me, I'm fairly confident that had present-day security measures been in effect on 9/11, the hijiackers would not have picked up four passenger jets for a murderous joyride. So if present-day security measures prevent more of the same, it doesn't bother me. And I fly somewhere about once or twice a month, so security measures do occupy a fair chunk of my time.
As for the need to show ID at airports means showing them everywhere, including stripclubs, I don't quite agree. Stripclubs aren't going to be flown into skyscrapers.
It all lies in balance. Security measures have to be tighter than they were on September 11, 2001. That was proved. That's what "post-9/11" means to me - that complacency can result in massive destruction and loss of life. That public safety must be balanced against constitutional rights. It's not a constitutional right, as far as I know, to ride on an airplane unidentified.





areed,I think it would be suicide for any open club to do that,I think many customers would turn around at the door and leave.Im sure i would be with them.Originally Posted by discretedancer
I have seen many private clubs and members only clubs that track info for many reasons,most of them being marketing related.I guess its part of the hidden cost of being in that club.

The only major change between then and now is that you're not allowed to bring knives on planes anymore, they had to show ID, it didn't matter.Originally Posted by Jay Zeno
Really security doens't need to be tighter, if you were on a plane and 5 people with knives tried to hijack it would you just sit there and wait to be flown into a building? I think you'd fight back. Before 9/11 hijackers used the passnagers as hostages they made demands, they flew off to cuba, it was in your interest to stay docile and try to get out of it alive. The hijackers knew this that's eally how their plan worked. It was a one shot deal if nothing changed it could never be done again the same way.
You can by the way still fly without ID if you agree to be strip searched first.
That being said if showing your id makes you feel safer by all means show it to anyone you'd like, staple it to your forehead. For me I don't like the goverment tracking my every movement. If you're driving acar you're required to show ID to any police officer who asks for it, if you take a train you need ID to buy a ticket, if you fly they want ID, as a free citizen should i not have the right to move from place to place without having to show my papers to the gestapo in order to do it? Without having extra attention paid to me and my bags becuse I'm flying to the east coast when I usually fly to the west or becuse I'm flying a different airline than I usually do? How long before that nice big database the goverment is working on for "security" gets forwarded to the IRS who can decide that I shouldn't be able to afford to travel so much and need an audit?
When it comes to new laws and security measures a good test would be what would the worst evil abusive scumbag you can think of do with this becuse sooner or later someone like them ends up in a postion they can abuse.
End long rant
Apologies for typos and spelling errors, I'm sleepy
No apologies for my opinions![]()





Or bought cold medicine with psuedoephedrine in it...Originally Posted by Deogol
http://www.nga.org/center/frontAndCe...D_7947,00.html
Or lived in a town where in order to help solve a murder, the police ask every male in town to "volunteer" to a DNA swab....
http://www.boston.com/news/local/art...some_in_truro/
Amerika indeed.
Former SCJ now in rehab.
For the record, there are a few strip clubs in Dallas that scan the driver's license of every person entering. The reason is that the club is operating in a "dry" area, so it is technically a "private club" as far as the liquor laws are concerned. When they scan your driver's license, you are technically becoming a "club member". I never worked at one, so I couldn't say what, if any, effect it had on attracting customers.
On to the real subject. Call me crazy, but I don't see why it is the role of the government to provide security for the airlines. These are after all, private businesses. I know, an airplane can be used as a weapon by terrorists. But a semi pulling a tank of gasoline could be used as a weapon as well. You don't see a police car leading a tanker truck into the parking lot at the Exxon. Also, I'm convinced that the airlines could do it better and more efficiently. Take two hypothetical passengers. John Smith is vice-president of a large corporation, he flies on business on average one a week. John pays for his ticket with his corporate credit card and has been a member of XYZ Airlines frequent flyer club for 10 years and racks ups thousand of frequent flyer miles a year. 31 year old Mohammed Ahkbar recently entered the U.S. from Egypt on a student visa. He's never flown on XYZ Airlines before today when he arrived at the airport counter and bought a one-way ticket to Washington D.C. and paid cash for it. Mr. Smith and Mr. Ahkbar both get in line to board the plane for D.C. Does it make any sense for these two men to go through the exact same security? XYZ knows Mr. Smith, they've been flying him all over the country for years, it doesn't make sense for him to have to take his shoes off and stand beside Mr. Ahkbar and get wanded. That's not racial profiling, that's common sense.
Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle
Jay, but they whole problem with this is thatm these groups aren't stupid enought to do that again. The will try it a different way. It's the whole slight of hand trick that magicians are famous for. Watch this hand while I steal your wallet with this one. Our stupid government is too busy worrying about the airlines when they could be trying to catch these guys doing something else. It's like we are 4 steps behind them.Originally Posted by Jay Zeno
Anyway, I think it's cool that he's sticking to his principals. My Dad's the same way. I remember when I went off to college and we went to Best Buy to get me a computer. The guys asked for his SSN for the free 2 yrs of internet service, and Dad went off.
He was like, "My social security number is not your concern, nor is it the concern of this internet company. You are not a law enforcement officer, nor are you a member of the United States Government, so you do not need to see and will not see my card." They poor guy was just standing there shocked. I was laughing. Anyway, I got my computer with the internet and Dad didn't show his SSN. I don't think he could get away with it post 9-11, but back then he did.
Kitana
Excellent link Deogul. Unfortunately the privacy genie seems to have been released from the bottle. I'm not sure if it can ever be retrieved.
It's unclear to me how, if at all, traditional "card" ID checks [so CO's post] are effective for anything other than a false sense of security. I recently experienced a whole new breed of ID checking (authentication) when I signed up for netteller.com. Apparently, the service utilizes some sort of background check to get personal info on who you claim to be, then proceeds to query the prospective user about family, occupations of relatives, and places you've lived, in very clever ways. For example, the automated system asked me a multiple choice question about which among a number of cities was closest to a former residence of mine. Among these was the city Emeryville, CA (where I have never lived) but is adjacent to Berkeley, CA (go bears). Mind you I've had at least 7 addresses since then and it took a minute for me to identify Emeryville, CA as the correct answer. The process was spectacularly unnerving. Finally, even after passing this test, I had to speak to an actual human and answer further questions. This was a real ID check. Used to be called an FBI background or DOD security clearance check. All this to kill some time playing a few hands of online Texas hold 'em. [Anyone up for it, pokerroom.com is a great venue. A private SW game would be simple to set up. As an added bonus you get to experience just what an open book your life really is.]
Having some time ago been a victim of ID theft in a very pernicious way, I reluctantly accept this privacy invasion as the price of participating in today's economy. I'm hoping I can be persuaded that privacy has a future, other than opting out of the mainstream.
Excellent argument. I think this properly characterizes military preemption as the useful, and in fact well utilized tool of the US that it has been for decades. The debate over preemption is more appropriately where to draw the line. Is a preemptive invasion of an entire sovereign nation ever appropriate? I can envision this possibility.Originally Posted by Casual Observer
Great libertarian argument. You do realize, I hope, what the libertarian solution for protecting consumer security is under this "less regs" philosophy?Originally Posted by Destiny
Torts. Yep, sue the bastards for negligence. [Ask the new resident libertarian guru ShOt.] Tort reform and curtailing regulations or their enforcement are mutually exclusive to justice. Combined they are a clear path to corruption and an unmitigated exploitation of those without a voice.
Last edited by stant; 03-07-2005 at 03:50 AM.
Bookmarks