Live data from Hacker News

Airport Security Is Killing Us

businessweek.com

121–130 of 262 posts

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#121
post #106
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very specifically talking about custody searches, not pat-downs or "enhanced pat-downs" (an imaginary term created by the TSA's marketing team). Anyway, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no Supreme court ruling on the constitutionality of any of these techniques in the context of airport security. I'm glad to be proven wrong. The most relevant ruling I know of was from a half century ago and it wasn't t…

Quoting from the DC Circuit opinion in "EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security": """As other circuits have held, and as the Supreme Court has strongly suggested, screening passengers at an airport is an "administrative search" because the primary goal is not to determine whether any passenger has committed a crime but rather to protect the public from a terrorist attack. See United States v. Aukai, 497 F.3d 955, 958…

I appreciate your thoroughness. I fear I am not focusing my argument well.

Administrative search at airports is legal, yes. Consent is not required or relevant, yes. Bag checks and scans are mandated by law, yes. Magnetometer searches are protected by law, yes. Weapons searches are protected by law, yes. Carrying a meth pipe in your pocket is probably a bad idea, yes.

I am very specifically arguing that modern physical custody searches (aka "pat-downs") as performed by the TSA do not qualify under any Fourth Amendment exemptions. They have not been ruled as constitutionally reasonable upon by the SCOTUS, and that until they are, they are forbidden by the fourth amendment.

Administrative searches must be 'minimally intrusive' and 'escalat[e] in invasiveness only after a lower level of screening disclose[s] a reason to conduct a more probing search'. Custody searches, in my personal opinion, do not qualify as minimally intrusive. Prior to the TSA's inception they were only used in very restricted settings. Now they're considered commonplace.

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#122
post #20

Tangentially - the thing that most surprised me about this article was reading that over 150,000 Americans have been murdered in less than a decade. I find that number utterly staggering. Wikipedia says that the homicide rate in the US is 4.2 per 100,000, which is more than 2.5 times the rate in Canada and 3.5 times the rate in the UK.

If you find that staggering, then absolutely avoid looking at Japan homicide stats. Japan is 0.4 per 100,000. Japan has had the strictest gun control in the world for the longest time, and has a homicide rate to match. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona...

Comparison between the USA and Canada is probably more meaningful. In recent times, Canadian gun laws have been stricter, but that was not always the case. There's something else behind the numbers. Universal healthcare? Cold weather? Who knows?

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#123
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you find that staggering, then absolutely avoid looking at Japan homicide stats. Japan is 0.4 per 100,000. Japan has had the strictest gun control in the world for the longest time, and has a homicide rate to match. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona...

I support gun control and everything, but how do you know that the low homicide rate is because of the gun control? Japan has been a model for social order (putting aside organized crime, in the sense that you lose your wallet and it gets returned to you, muggings don't happen often, etc.) for a long time.

I don't know that the homicide rate is because of gun control. I don't think it is possible to directly come to that conclusion given the other societal factors.

But it's an interesting data point.

This article tries to dissuade that control gun is responsible for the low homicide rate in it's summary.

http://www.guncite.com/journals/dkjgc.html

"The idea that Japanese gun laws should serve as model for other nations is not uncommon. Some Americans propose laws even more severe than Japan's.[124] Often, the suggestion comes as an offhand remark in an newspaper editorial, but even when the suggestion is advanced by scholars, the reasoning is often superficial and unpersuasive.

L Craig Parker, an American expert on the Japanese police, proposes that the United States adopt Japanese gun control and also other Japanese strategies, such as a National Police Agency. Parker's brief discussion of guns, however, simply recites statistics showing that Japan has less guns and less gun crime. His only evidence that gun control would actually reduce crime in America is a study by Dr Leonard Berkowitz arguing that guns cause aggression. Actually, what the studies by Berkowitz and others showed was that people acted more aggressively towards other people if the other person was associated with weapons; for example, motorists reacted more aggressively to other vehicles slow to accelerate when a red light turned green if the slow car had a rude bumper sticker and a rifle in a gun rack.[125]

Summing up the perspective of many gun prohibitionists, one Japanese newspaper reporter writes, 'It strikes me as clear that there is a distinct correlation between gun control laws and the rate of violent crime. The fewer the guns, the less the violence'.[126] But the claim that fewer guns correlates with less violence is plainly wrong. America experienced falling crime and homicide rates in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1980s, all periods during which per capita gun (p.40)ownership, especially handgun ownership, rose.[127] And Japan, with its severe gun control, suffers no less murder than Switzerland, one of the most gun-intensive societies on earth.[128]

Japan's gun control does play an important role in the low Japanese crime rate, but not because of some simple relation between gun density and crime. Japan's gun control is one inseparable part of a vast mosaic of social control. Gun control underscores the pervasive cultural theme that the individual is subordinate to society and to the Government. The same theme is reflected in the absence of protection against Government searches and prosecutions. The police are the most powerful on earth, partly because of the lack of legal constraints and particularly because of their social authority."

I found that article from this:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-l...

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#124
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. My point is that SCOTUS has not said word one about these standards. "Constitutionally reasonable administrative searches" in the context of an airport are legal, per SCOTUS. Consent has nothing to do with it, that concept does not apply here. But, critically, SCOTUS has never ruled on whether the current TSA techniques are constitutionally reasonable. The only thing for sure is that the 3rd says that they m…

Nobody will cheer more loudly than I will if SCOTUS holds that electronic strip searches cross the line from "reasonable" to "unreasonable", but I don't know of a credible constitutional law source that predicts that they will do that, so baldly asserting that these searches are prima facie unconstitutional is a losing argument. The case you've cited here is one where the 9th circuit held TSA's searches to be reasona…

No, this case I've cited specifically says that magnetometer wanding and a pat-down over a duration of 18 minutes in search of a suspected weapon is a constitutionally reasonable administrative search.

My beef is with mandatory -custody- searches, which are implemented as either electronic/radioactivity scans of the entire flesh and/or full physical inspections of the body. These were not in use prior to the TSA's inception and nobody has ruled on whether they are constitutionally reasonable or not.

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#125

I don't see why there isn't more interest in high speed rail in the US: New York and Boston/Washington DC could be less than two hours travel time apart, which though it may well be an hour slower than a flight, has a lot less overhead (no arriving two hours before departure, etc). The technology is quickly reaching the point where San Francisco to Los Angeles may be equally doable in around two hours, again an obvio…

The overhead comes from the government, otherwise air flights would be like taking a greyhound bus, and in the past, they used to be like that. Now the TSA is leaking to Amtrak and so on, so you might see similar delays in the future with rail!

High speed rail has a lot of land acquisition problems for the most part, air flight doesn't.

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#126

Hear. Hear. I want to be able to walk into an airport with my shoes on and walk calmly to an arrival gate to greet arriving passengers there. And I want to be able to carry a Swiss Army knife in an airline carry-on bag. And I want the terrorists to be attacked relentlessly where they live, so that they have to hide in caves and ride on goats, while Americans and other people in developed countries get to lead civiliz…

"So, yeah, if a peaceful process of information flow could bring Afghanistan into the Twenty-First Century, I'm all for that."

I'm constantly surprised that when it comes to regime change that there isn't an effort to set up some satellites and air-drop some mobile smartphones with data plans designed with the same principals as one-laptop-per-child.

Look at what Facebook and Twitter did for the Arab Spring.

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#127
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America has a single federal government, yes. If you just want a ranking, you can go ahead and use the national average. However, America is ridiculously diverse culturally, and just using the national average is useless for understanding anything about America. Perhaps the Americans in the thread aren't trying to avoid an unfavorable comparison - it's not like Americans aren't aware of the pros and cons of their own…

> and just using the national average is useless for understanding anything about America. I agree. We're talking about understanding America compared to other countries, not things about America internally. >it's not like Americans aren't aware of the pros and cons of their own country I completely disagree with that statement. How many times have you heard someone say "Best country in the world" with no understandi…

Those are strawman arguments. Meeting uninformed Americans is not evidence that the entirety of the American populace is ignorant of their failings as a developed nation.

For example, we are taught about slavery and the genocide of Native Americans in primary school. We dedicate an entire month to Black History because we are acutely aware of our status as one of the most institutionally racist countries on the planet. We have impasses at the highest levels of government over dealing with our failure to control healthcare costs, and that is something that many Americans are cognizant of. We are repeatedly informed of our failure to create a stable market economy. I can go on.

Please leave your preconceptions at the door when having a serious discussion.

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#128
The probability of a tragedy occurring is almost completely irrelevant to the common person (including my mother and wife). What does get people's attention is the shock factor when that one-in-10-million event occurs. Which helps explain the bewildering popularity of Nancy Grace...

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#129
post #111
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finland is 5.3 million people. Norway is 5 million people. Sweden is 9.5 million people. Michigan is 9.8 million people. California is 37.6 million people. New York is 19.4 million people Germany is 81.7 million people. Please keep scale in mind.

Why does scale have anything to do with a per capita statistic?

As scale increases, you invariably include populations that affect your per capita statistic. The EU as a whole has a 3.5 per 100k murder rate, for example; much higher than Germany or the UK alone.

Re: Airport Security Is Killing Us

#130
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you find that staggering, then absolutely avoid looking at Japan homicide stats. Japan is 0.4 per 100,000. Japan has had the strictest gun control in the world for the longest time, and has a homicide rate to match. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentiona...

Comparison between the USA and Canada is probably more meaningful. In recent times, Canadian gun laws have been stricter, but that was not always the case. There's something else behind the numbers. Universal healthcare? Cold weather? Who knows?

If you're talking about the recent long gun registry, Canada has always had much stricter gun legislation than the U.S.

This website gives a walk through of the process required to legally obtain a gun in Canada:

http://www.howtogetagun.ca/

In 35 years of urban living in Canada, I've never seen a firearm that was not being carried by a law enforcement official. I do not know anyone who owns a fire arm.

This seems very different compared to some of the slogans I saw in the recent U.S. election where you could "vote and win a free gun". http://www.inquisitr.com/376318/vote-in-georgia-win-a-free-g...

Post reply on HN