- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 20,915
- Reaction score
- 546
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
curt said:The gov't should not have the right to dictate to business' how they should operate. If they choose to enact ethnic profiling, I support their decision to do so. If they choose not to, I support that as well. Let the free market determine what the superior system is.
curt said:I'm going to be a prick and not answer the question. Perhaps "Other" would be an extra option.
The gov't should not have the right to dictate to business' how they should operate. If they choose to enact ethnic profiling, I support their decision to do so. If they choose not to, I support that as well. Let the free market determine what the superior system is. I would think not subjecting customers to un-needed hassle would be better business, because terrorism is over-hyped anyway.
Kandahar said:What does the free market have to do with flying airplanes into buildings?
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Over hyped? Get real. And as far as not harrassing customers needlessly what do you think is happening now? It's because they won't allow for ethnic profiling that old women and kids are being searched it is a waste of time, man power, and resources and simply inefficient and ineffective. Furthermore; I'm pretty sure that airports are publicly owned it's the airlines that operate out of them that are private.
I voted no...Kandahar said:Who voted "no" to this poll? Please defend this indefensible position.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Over hyped? Get real. And as far as not harrassing customers needlessly what do you think is happening now? It's because they won't allow for ethnic profiling that old women and kids are being searched it is a waste of time, man power, and resources and simply inefficient and ineffective.
Furthermore; I'm pretty sure that airports are publicly owned it's the airlines that operate out of them that are private.
curt said:I stand by my over-hyped comment. I didn't say it was non-existent.
Please don't put thoughts in my head. I didn't state my support of strip searching Irish nuns, Swedish males et al, but said that it should be the airlines choice on what security measures to enact.
I wasn't aware of this. As a libertarian, do you support airports being owned by the gov't? My argument hinges on gov't encroachment on business, so if airport aren't privately owned, then I suppose my it's all a moot point for me.
curt said:Bit of a loaded question is it not? They can make their own decisions on how to best provide security, such as properly armed security guards on board, impenaturable cockpit doors etc. I do know that an airline having their plane shot out of the sky by an F-14 would be bad for business, so they'll likely take the precautions they feel are needed. I do support the gov'ts right to shoot a plane out of the sky when it becomes a threat, and I believe they should have the discretion to make that choice.
Caine said:So..... your trying to tell me that the only people who are capable of conducting terrorist attacks are people who appear to be "Middle Eastern"?
Caine said:Come on, remember the guy who set off a bomb at the olympics?
How about the guy who blew up the Oklahoma City Government Building.
Hmm...
These are just two examples.
Caine said:And no, don't say that domestic terrorists don't hijack planes, Just because they haven't done it yet, doesn't mean they haven't thought of it and/or are capable of doing it.
Kandahar said:No, but the overwhelming majority of them are.
OK, I'll accept your two examples if you accept the 10,000 counterexamples.
Of course any ethnicity is capable of hijacking a plane; that doesn't mean that all ethnicities are equally likely to do so.
Caine said:Hmm.... So...You want to discriminate against 2nd Generation Muslim-Americans out of fear of the Middle Eastern Boogey Man?
I agree with curt, Terrorism is WAYY overhyped.
Kandahar said:Is your opposition to ethnic profiling because you don't believe it's fair, or because you don't believe the "terrorism hype" in general? Would you be any more inclined to support such profiling if the United States were suffering from ten terrorist attacks per day, 99% of them from Middle-Eastern Arab Muslims? Or would you point to the 1% as proof that others are just as capable of committing terrorism?
Caine said:One, I seriously don't believe in the Terrorist Hype. Ya, terrorism blows, but it happens, and its best to stop keeping your OWN nation in "terror" by constantly threatening them with threats of terrorism.
Caine said:Lately, any bit of opposition and YOUR HELPING THE TERRORISTS! If you don't agree with Middle Eastern Racial Profiling YOUR HELPING THE TERRORISTS! If you think the executive is taking advantage of powers that aren't required in the Patriot Act, and wish to extend it only so you can reform it, YOUR HELPING THE TERRORISTS! If you don't agree that the Prez was within his constitutional authority when conducting wiretapping for reasons of National Security, YOUR HELPING THE TERRORISTS!
Caine said:Two, I DO NOT agree with ANY form of Racial Profiling, if we can get away with profiling Arabs, why don't we start profiling Blacks for violent crime? Whites for "White-Collar" Crime, Latinos for Cocaine Trafficking, Christians for bombing Abortion Clinics? (Heaven forbid that would happen, John Gibson would scream bloody murder) Its just silly. Discriminate against everyone and you cover all ethnicities, INCLUDING, the Middle-Eastern Boogey Man.
Caine said:Three, Back to the threat of Terrorism, I think, personally the government is using it as a way to terrorize the people into giving up personal freedoms and giving powers to the government that they don't necessarily need in order to protect us all from the Middle-Eastern Boogey Man.
Kandahar said:Who voted "no" to this poll? Please defend this indefensible position.
aquapub said:100% of terrorist attacks on American airliners have come from young, Arab, Muslim men.
aquapub said:When Bobby Kennedy was investigating Klan violence, he only investigated white people, primarily young to middle-aged, white men because they were the only ones lynching blacks. Nobody threw the Klan a pity party, painting them as misunderstood victims.
100% of terrorist attacks on American airliners have come from young, Arab, Muslim men. Why are we having this debate? Is it really that controversial to look closer at those who fit the description more than little old white ladies from Iowa? What are we worried about on behalf of these people anyway, airline inconveniences? As opposed to mass murder?!? Many Muslims are fine with contributing to national security by letting themselves be scrutinized. One man on the news once even said that HIS safety was why he was fine with letting the government profile him.
We DO have white militia terrorists, and there are female terrorists who don't fit the profile, but if profiling ALONE can prevent the 95% of attacks from people who DO fit the profile, isn't it worth it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?