|
joether -> RE: TSA Vetting Terrorists (6/11/2015 12:51:54 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
I really don't know how any country can be made to be smuggling-proofed (if there's such a word!). I can't recall any instance of it happening at anytime anywhere. To me it seems a simple function of price differentials - if the price differential of any product between any two nations is large enough, there will be successful smuggling of the commodity in question, no matter what it is, no matter what the penalties are.
By "contraband," I was referring to guns, weapons, and/or potential explosive materials. My fault for not being more specific. This isn't about smuggling a "commodity" to defeat a price differential or to supply some black market for that commodity.
In many countries across the glob, firearms and explosives ARE a form of 'commodity' and often traded in black markets. Back in the late 80's early 90's, there were many Europeans whom would smuggle 6-8 pairs of LEVI's jeans back home (because the price for those jeans was triple the USA price). Firearms, which are more restricted than jeans in most countries, could very well be worth many times its USA price tag. But that is amateur hour. If one wants to smuggle guns, its easier with a cargo ship.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The TSA is supposed to prevent potential terrorist stuff (highly technical term, I know [:D]) from getting aboard planes at US airports. In one example, the metal detector went off, but the TSA agen failed to detect the fake bomb strapped to the auditor's back during the patdown.
The TSA is NOT suppose to prevent terrorist stuff; that's why we have the FBI and MANY other agencies/organizations. Their job is to make sure the regulations set forth by the US Government are followed. In this particular instance, in airports across the nation. The US Government, through an act (or many acts) of Congress of directed an agency to handle things in a particular way. Part of the problem is the TSA is limited to its actions according to the US Constitution (for better or worst).
As I said, if we want nearly-complete security, strip everyone one, scan them top to bottom, put them on the plane (naked) and not allow them anywhere near anything of theirs from point of entry into the airport to arrival at their destination. Until of course someone invents a way of smuggling something nearly invisible or concealed past both the pat down and scan while naked.....(then we'll have to think of something else).
Also, force everyone that works at the airport to live in dormitories that are effectively prisons for five out of seven days. All suppliers have to have their cargo checked down to the square millimeter for each piece of cargo (including chemical verification of drugs) two weeks in advance of being placed on any plane. Perishables have to undergo the same testing.
Highly annoying process, if not unconstitutional. Here is the problem that all of us have collectively on this subject: What is the point in which a society states 'this is an OK action' and 'that is not an OK action' as it concerns the airline industry?
I dont think we have reached that point yet. We may never reach it. Where we weigh the 'good' against the 'bad' and accept that anything negative that takes place is the result of that decision. In other words, we understand in a responsible and mature manner the nature between 'freedom' and 'order' (in this case, 'order' is being the opposite of freedom.
|
|
|
|
