Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

linkedin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 98 posts

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#21

Post by anigbrowl »

ta234234 wrote: post #7
colbyaley wrote: post #5

After an event I was at was targeted to be blown up, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Portland_car_bomb_plot ) I have changed my views on anti-terrorist teams at events and mass-gatherings. I do find it silly, however, that these teams are supposedly a devision of the "Transit Security Administration".

targeted to be blown up Mainly by the FBI, based on that wikipedia article. FBI: Hey, do you want to blow something up? Terrorist: OK FBI: Here's a bomb, go blow something up. Terrorist: OK [click] FBI: You're under arrest! Sure, the guy committed a crime, but was I wouldn't say the event was "targeted to be blown up". It was a sting operation. A small probability threat was amplified by the FBI for the purpose of ma…

When you read the actual indictments and court transcripts in cases like this, the would-be terrorists turn out to be nothing like the passive actor you hypothesize here, but rather display a fair degree of initiative; they have typically come to the FBI's attention because people around them are alarmed by their aspirations and report them to law enforcement.

There are tough legal questions about where the borderline between facilitation and encouragement lies. But someone who willingly goes through the steps required t detonate what they believe to be a fully armed truck bomb is not a mere innocent victim. The correct answer to 'Hey, do you want to blow something up?' is 'No, because that would be crazy and horrible.'

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#22

Post by saraid216 »

jmspring wrote: post #20
saraid216 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. American cynicism pretty much makes it impossible. If you can't bring hope to the table, you put a double burden on someone else. Not sure why you think Singapore is not a democracy, though.

Call me a pessimist, but the lemming nature to following the reactionary rules of the TSA makes me believe the person you responded to is correct.

Well, yeah. It's exactly the lemming nature that is unwilling to try for something better. You're following it; I'm following it. The difference between us isn't that one's a cynic and one's not. The difference is that I know how much of a complete failure I am for not pushing back hard enough.

You guys are my justification for saying, "Stop trying. It's not worth it." So thanks. I've been thinking I'll try out the whole happiness thing for a bit this year. See how that goes.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#23

Post by gasull »

saraid216 wrote: post #18
gasull wrote: post #16

I'm already thinking it's too late to prevent the US (and most of the Western World) from becoming an Orwellian dystopia. The US is already more corrupt than Singapore, a country with no democracy: http://www.transparency.org/cpi2012/results So every year we have more corruption, less freedom, more taxes and more IP trolling. Can someone convince me that the pendulum is going to swing back?

I doubt it. American cynicism pretty much makes it impossible. If you can't bring hope to the table, you put a double burden on someone else. Not sure why you think Singapore is not a democracy, though.

> Not sure why you think Singapore is not a democracy, though.

It's a an "hybrid regime", "partly free":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore#Government_and_polit...

Maybe that's what the US is too already.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#24

Post by gosub »

colbyaley wrote: post #5

After an event I was at was targeted to be blown up, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Portland_car_bomb_plot ) I have changed my views on anti-terrorist teams at events and mass-gatherings. I do find it silly, however, that these teams are supposedly a devision of the "Transit Security Administration".

A fool and his liberties are soon parted?

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#25

Post by gasull »

jmspring wrote: post #19
city41 wrote: post #10

The broad and vague ruling that enables the TSA to do anything they want in airports[0] can (and will) be applied to just about any public event. It's probably just a matter of a few years or so before the TSA is searching us at virtually all public gatherings. And there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. [0] http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-...

A public that is passive and follows "the rules" enables this, unfortunately.

In 2011 and 2012 we had Occupy Wall Street and Anonymous. Probably the broadest protest movement online and offline in a long time, if not ever.

And the politicians won. Wall Street won. The TSA won. They all have more power than 2 years ago.

If the broadest peaceful protest couldn't make it, what possibly can?

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#26

Post by eru »

gasull wrote: post #25
jmspring wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A public that is passive and follows "the rules" enables this, unfortunately.

In 2011 and 2012 we had Occupy Wall Street and Anonymous. Probably the broadest protest movement online and offline in a long time, if not ever. And the politicians won. Wall Street won. The TSA won. They all have more power than 2 years ago. If the broadest peaceful protest couldn't make it, what possibly can?

Perhaps a more narrow and focussed protest can?

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#27

Post by saraid216 »

gasull wrote: post #23
saraid216 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. American cynicism pretty much makes it impossible. If you can't bring hope to the table, you put a double burden on someone else. Not sure why you think Singapore is not a democracy, though.

> Not sure why you think Singapore is not a democracy, though. It's a an "hybrid regime", "partly free": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore#Government_and_polit... Maybe that's what the US is too already.

> Maybe that's what the US is too already.

Well, yes. Given that the reason that Singapore scores poorly is due to low pluralism, low political participation, and a weak press. It's a democracy by the merits that most people prefer: legislators and executives are elected, there's a rule of law, etc. It's not a democracy in the same ways the US and virtually all non-Scandinavian countries aren't: too much authoritarianism, too little citizen participation, etc. The difference is in degree.

http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Democracy_Index_2010_web.pdf (I didn't bother checking if 2011 would work; I expect Wikipedia would have updated it if it were upgraded to a flawed democracy.) http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2012/singap... http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2012/singap...

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#28

Post by eru »

gasull wrote: post #16

I'm already thinking it's too late to prevent the US (and most of the Western World) from becoming an Orwellian dystopia. The US is already more corrupt than Singapore, a country with no democracy: http://www.transparency.org/cpi2012/results So every year we have more corruption, less freedom, more taxes and more IP trolling. Can someone convince me that the pendulum is going to swing back?

This just goes to show that democracy and transparency / non-corruption do not march in lockstep. (By the way, I just moved to Singapore from Britain. It's nice here.)

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#29

Post by cgag »

gasull wrote: post #25
jmspring wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A public that is passive and follows "the rules" enables this, unfortunately.

In 2011 and 2012 we had Occupy Wall Street and Anonymous. Probably the broadest protest movement online and offline in a long time, if not ever. And the politicians won. Wall Street won. The TSA won. They all have more power than 2 years ago. If the broadest peaceful protest couldn't make it, what possibly can?

Violent protest.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#30

Post by sneak »

city41 wrote: post #10

The broad and vague ruling that enables the TSA to do anything they want in airports[0] can (and will) be applied to just about any public event. It's probably just a matter of a few years or so before the TSA is searching us at virtually all public gatherings. And there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. [0] http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-...

The headline should read "everywhere _in the US_".

Your comment should read "all public gatherings _in the US_".

There is indeed something you can do about it. You can go live in a country where there is no TSA. (This has the added benefit of your productive energies no longer helping fund the TSA, as well, for incomes below about $92,000.)

A dozen countries have a similar standard of living as the US, and many of those are substantially more free.

Post reply on HN