Liberty Activist takes on Detroit TSA. Unreal!

[C_F_H_13]

About 2 years ago at the vancouver international airport a polish man named Robert Dzchensky was killed by the rcmp.

yeah that shit was totally fucked. He literally did absolutely nothing except got angry because he didn't understand why he was being harassed. And then 3 cops and tazered and killed him...3 different cops...three different tazers.

It's still in the courst right now.

 

[Metaltastic]

I scanned this article and posted it in a thread over two years ago, never thought it would come in handy again!

 

[Bekanor]

^ye sure he has the the right to film but hes got no proof that hes press and hes not answering any questions(being beligerent) so some dude with no proof of who he is and who is not being coopoerative is filming security operations in a secure area. That is asking for trouble hes lucky he didnt get thrown in jail.

I'm watching this in another window, I deleted my post 'cos I just reached that part.

 

[JBroll]

Jeff: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/menezes for just one example. Killed by London police, ensuing investigation wound up with blatantly nonsensical explanations and testimonies... everything was fucked up, and all this guy did was wear a coat. There's your first start - just the one name that came to mind, and my short-term memory (which carries information about as well as houses of cards in tornadoes) wasn't too poor to catch the name. (Again, if you can't find things like this, look harder.) Slovak officials planted contraband on civilians to test Dublin ports. These two incidents - one just weeks ago, the other in 2005 - alone would be enough to put a sun-sized hole in your assertion, and these incidents are two of many that are within easy reach.

On filming... in a public place, with 'no expectation of privacy' as the mindbogglingly vague expression goes, filming is fine.

Jeff

 

[JeffTD]

About 2 years ago at the vancouver international airport a polish man named Robert Dzchensky was killed by the rcmp.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/11/14/bc-taservideo.html

According to that news report, sounds to me like the guy wasn't exactly "innocent." Who the fuck arranges chairs infront of a door and throws a computer and expects not to be tased at an airport???

 

[JeffTD]

Jeff: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/menezes for just one example. Killed by London police, ensuing investigation wound up with blatantly nonsensical explanations and testimonies... everything was fucked up, and all this guy did was wear a coat. There's your first start - just the one name that came to mind, and my short-term memory (which carries information about as well as houses of cards in tornadoes) wasn't too poor to catch the name. (Again, if you can't find things like this, look harder.) Slovak officials planted contraband on civilians to test Dublin ports. These two incidents - one just weeks ago, the other in 2005 - alone would be enough to put a sun-sized hole in your assertion, and these incidents are two of many that are within easy reach.

On filming... in a public place, with 'no expectation of privacy' as the mindbogglingly vague expression goes, filming is fine.

Jeff

While those are horrible incidents, I fail to see how they have anything to do with TSA/their policies and more with either immense fuckups by individuals or lack of foresight/planning/common sense on someone elses part.

 

[JBroll]

I'll agree that our mindsets have changed greatly and that's a large part of it, but I'm not going to say that that's 100% the cause for our increased safety on planes, and not the measures taken by the TSA.

Saying something is 'bullshit' and citing some dude who wrote a ton of shit is great and all, but it does absolutely nothing to dispute the effectiveness of the TSA.

Even if they're not preventing as much as they say they are, I fail to see the harm in preventing passengers from bringing certain items on board, aside from the inconvenience for not having your toenail clippers or shampoo in your carry-on. Personally, I feel safer knowing that people don't have box cutters and anthrax and all kinds of other shit on my plane.

The burden is on you to show that the TSA is doing a whole lot of anything. How much can the TSA prevent? They couldn't stop *an engineer who couldn't set off his own bomb*, they can't detect explosives with particularly high efficiency, and they still allow things like laptop batteries and phones... if you can't see how it'll be hard to use those things in a way that could severely harm (or completely compromise) an airplane, you don't get to talk until you know just how much energy can be stored in them. Further, how many of their arbitrary, absurd policies actually account for their successes? The simple fact of the matter is that thanks to attitudes like yours they have carte blanche - and they will until they're actually held accountable.

Jeff

 

[JBroll]

While those are horrible incidents, I fail to see how they have anything to do with TSA/their policies and more with either immense fuckups by individuals or lack of foresight/planning/common sense on someone elses part.

They have to do with the originally quoted sentence being *completely wrong and unjustifiable* - the fact that they happened elsewhere and not here is not a consequence of superiority in our agencies but random chance, and these are civilians who either could have been or were killed *through no fault of their own*. They did nothing wrong, they had nothing to hide (that they knew of, in the more recent cases, but it's hard to suspect federal officials of planting explosives in your bag), they weren't doing anything they weren't supposed to... and they had a hell of a lot to lose as a result. Game, set.

Jeff

 

[garry666]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/11/14/bc-taservideo.html

According to that news report, sounds to me like the guy wasn't exactly "innocent." Who the fuck arranges chairs infront of a door and throws a computer and expects not to be tased at an airport???

yes and apparantly he tried to attack the cops with a stapler but the biggest issue of that event was an email that got leaked that was sent between the cops where they had decided to taeser the guy before they even arrived at the airport. Also one of the cops is a complete dick who just got out of a drunk driving conviction where he killed a guy, he got out of it by leaving the scene have a couple shots of vodka at home to "calm his nerves" and they werent able to prove he was drunk at the time of the accident, total fucking bullshit.

The guy does have a point in that sometimes things are taken too far such as in the case in canada but going out and intentional provoking them is just plain stupid and is aking to get put on a no fly list.

 

[garry666]

also i dont beleive that TSA is effective. airport security as a whole is teribly ineffective i could tell you millions of ways to bypass security. but i think its more meant as a pacifier, people need to think their being protected.

 

[JeffTD]

The burden is on you to show that the TSA is doing a whole lot of anything. How much can the TSA prevent? They couldn't stop *an engineer who couldn't set off his own bomb*, they can't detect explosives with particularly high efficiency, and they still allow things like laptop batteries and phones... if you can't see how it'll be hard to use those things in a way that could severely harm (or completely compromise) an airplane, you don't get to talk until you know just how much energy can be stored in them. Further, how many of their arbitrary, absurd policies actually account for their successes? The simple fact of the matter is that thanks to attitudes like yours they have carte blanche - and they will until they're actually held accountable.

Jeff

In order to prevent what you've mentioned, they'd have to disallow cell phones, laptops, anything electrical or containing a battery, would have to strip search and possibly cavity search every single person flying. Nobody wants that - it's a compromise. I don't want to deal with TSA every time I go to an airport, but 1.) I like knowing that when I do, obviously insane shit like weapons and large explosives aren't going to be let through, and 2.) I can just as easily not fly if it really bugs me.

Anyone who is hellbent on destroying an airplane is going to do it; whether it's a shitty thermite bomb strapped to their balls or an RPG or some kamikaze shit is up to them. I personally like knowing it takes far more than a water bottle of combustible liquid or a box cutter to take down my plane.

 

[Metaltastic]

also i dont beleive that TSA is effective. airport security as a whole is teribly ineffective i could tell you millions of ways to bypass security. but i think its more meant as a pacifier, people need to think their being protected.

That, and a dissuader to those who might be inclined to try something, just to keep them on edge - of course, the smartest criminals would know they could sneak whatever they wanted through (and thus be confident in their abilities to), but still, I imagine it helps

 

[JeffTD]

They have to do with the originally quoted sentence being *completely wrong and unjustifiable* - the fact that they happened elsewhere and not here is not a consequence of superiority in our agencies but random chance, and these are civilians who either could have been or were killed *through no fault of their own*. They did nothing wrong, they had nothing to hide (that they knew of, in the more recent cases, but it's hard to suspect federal officials of planting explosives in your bag), they weren't doing anything they weren't supposed to... and they had a hell of a lot to lose as a result. Game, set.

Jeff

I can list a million examples of civilians killed not by their own fault - doesn't mean I can go around saying things like police officers, fire fighters, military personnel, etc are fucked up and corrupt because of a few cases where innocent people died.

It's a risk you apparently take when flying - being killed by some freak fuckup on a cops part. Great. That's also a risk you take when driving - being killed by some freak fuckup on another drivers fault.

 

[JeffTD]

yes and apparantly he tried to attack the cops with a stapler but the biggest issue of that event was an email that got leaked that was sent between the cops where they had decided to taeser the guy before they even arrived at the airport. Also one of the cops is a complete dick who just got out of a drunk driving conviction where he killed a guy, he got out of it by leaving the scene have a couple shots of vodka at home to "calm his nerves" and they werent able to prove he was drunk at the time of the accident, total fucking bullshit.

The guy does have a point in that sometimes things are taken too far such as in the case in canada but going out and intentional provoking them is just plain stupid and is aking to get put on a no fly list.

Hahahaha holy shit fucking crazy Polish guy!

I agree that's totally fucked up beyond any argument, but the same kind of shit could've potentially happened at a bank or a mall - I'm not going to criticize bank or mall security in general because one group of guys fucked up.

 

[James Murphy]

i'm glad that "cannot exit the screening process once started" thing didn't apply during my recent visit to the Polk County Courts annex this past week... i stopped by to pick up my new yearly auto registration decal ($60, up 100% from last year, fuckin' ass-necks), and i started putting my shit on the conveyor for the x-ray machine... had almost everything on the belt when i reached into my right jacket pocket and started to pull out the last bit and place it into the cup... thank FUCK i stopped myself and they let me go back to my car. they did ask why and i said "i forgot my paperwork"... whew

of course, i had already left my handgun in the car to start with... but look what i almost dropped into the cup at the X-ray machine:

woke me up, i'll tell you that much.

 

[Metaltastic]

Deja vu :Spin:

 

[James Murphy]

Deja vu :Spin:

same thing i said as the pages filled up with two people bickering, lol

 

[JBroll]

In order to prevent what you've mentioned, they'd have to disallow cell phones, laptops, anything electrical or containing a battery, would have to strip search and possibly cavity search every single person flying. Nobody wants that - it's a compromise. I don't want to deal with TSA every time I go to an airport, but 1.) I like knowing that when I do, obviously insane shit like weapons and large explosives aren't going to be let through, and 2.) I can just as easily not fly if it really bugs me.

Anyone who is hellbent on destroying an airplane is going to do it; whether it's a shitty thermite bomb strapped to their balls or an RPG or some kamikaze shit is up to them. I personally like knowing it takes far more than a water bottle of combustible liquid or a box cutter to take down my plane.

The things you're naming don't require the kind of massive machinery we have in place, and the compromise you've made completely gives away any chance at pretending we want safety with this setup.

I can list a million examples of civilians killed not by their own fault - doesn't mean I can go around saying things like police officers, fire fighters, military personnel, etc are fucked up and corrupt because of a few cases where innocent people died.

It's a risk you apparently take when flying - being killed by some freak fuckup on a cops part. Great. That's also a risk you take when driving - being killed by some freak fuckup on another drivers fault.

First paragraph: unrelated. Entirely unrelated - you're claiming that we don't have to worry about getting taken down by misguided 'authorities' when we're doing nothing wrong. I presented clear evidence to the contrary. That was the point, and you still seem to be missing it - this isn't about 'they're corrupt', this is about 'we should worry and hold them to higher standards'.

As far as the risks... guess what? Your risks of dying in a car crash, when all things other than 'traveling from point A to point B via _____' are held the same, are an order of magnitude higher. If you want to save lives, you shove more people onto the goddamned airplanes and drop this security theater because it's doing more harm than it's claiming to be able to prevent. Nothing here holds water.

Jeff

 

[Metaltastic]

James, that was definitely a stroke of luck indeed - and speaking of accidentally carrying compromising things into the airport, when I was flying out to winter NAMM '08 with a group of folks from my school, I had forgotten that like 2 years prior I had plopped this massive fold-out police knife (that I bought off my friend for $5, after he found it at a park ) in my backpack for the fuck of it, so needless to say that caught the attention of the security at JFK when it showed up on the X-ray screen; however, after a quick bout of sheepish apologizing, they confiscated it and let me on my way! Guess sometimes it pays to be white

 

[JeffTD]

First paragraph: unrelated. Entirely unrelated - you're claiming that we don't have to worry about getting taken down by misguided 'authorities' when we're doing nothing wrong. I presented clear evidence to the contrary. That was the point, and you still seem to be missing it - this isn't about 'they're corrupt', this is about 'we should worry and hold them to higher standards'.

As far as the risks... guess what? Your risks of dying in a car crash, when all things other than 'traveling from point A to point B via _____' are held the same, are an order of magnitude higher. If you want to save lives, you shove more people onto the goddamned airplanes and drop this security theater because it's doing more harm than it's claiming to be able to prevent. Nothing here holds water.

The first paragraph is hardly unrelated - granted I was wrong in saying that we don't have to worry about wrongdoings of misguided authorities regardless of our innocence, but I hardly see the chance of it happening in an airport as greater than it would with a police officer or someone in the military. I'd argue that more innocent civilians have been killed by police officers and (non-wartime) military personnel than have ever been killed by TSA agents.

So if your argument is that we should worry and hold all people of that kind of occupation to higher standards, then I agree - but for everyone to sit here and bash at the TSA relentlessly is bullshit if we're not also bashing at cops in general.

I fail to see the use of your last paragraph - you proved my point; we have a huge risk just driving around, especially compared to being killed by TSA agents. My risk of being killed driving on the LA freeways is way higher than the combined risks of being gunned or tased down by TCA/police officers and my plane crashing - I still drive them, just like I still fly despite those risks.

We will never know how much alleged harm the TSA is doing because there's no control group; we can't just remove then and watch what happens and then add up how many people die in each case. I really wish we could, because I'm positive more would die without them in place.