Got news for ya...
Yes, most of the rest of the world does use the TSA type model.
For the past 10+yrs I traveled the world for work and saw all kinds of airport security. Some more asinine than others.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Laptop Ban May Expand to Flights Coming to U.S. From Europe
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Got news for ya...
Yes, most of the rest of the world does use the TSA type model.
For the past 10+yrs I traveled the world for work and saw all kinds of airport security. Some more asinine than others.
TL;DR:
Guns are just big Phallic replacements. The 2nd amendment is balls. 100s of children die from accidental gun incidents each year, thousands hospitalised all so billy big nuts can wield a hand cannon under the pretence it's his god given right.
I get "it" without being as patronising as you or Saying that I don't have a say as I am in London. I'm dual nationality as it goes. Born in Brekenridge.
Or completely disregarding the fact that that scrap of paper was written 230 years ago by slave owners and *parts* of it are utterly outdated. The very fact that people cling to it like a life raft as the current Presidumb drags us all back to the 1950s. Not the good Happy days 1950s... the Cold War, fear and racism 1950s
So you're gonna claim that most mass shootings in the U.S. are caused by immigrants?
Sorry, nope. Try again.
Are you gonna claim that most guns used in mass shootings come across the Mexican border?
Nope, try again.
Yup, you've run out of objectivity and now you resort to nonsense. Say hello to the Queen for me, mate.
[doublepost=1494737672][/doublepost]
Yet, you've just explained why Brits have lost their place as the premier nation in the world, why their adoption of socialism has been proven disastrous, why Brexit succeeded, and finally ,why the States continue to be more profitable than the UK ever was. It's not a mystery liberty and freedom leads to prosperity.
So kids deaths are nonsense in your eyes? Let alone all the other rampant gun crime?
Fact is that small children kill more people in the US than terrorists.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-toddlers-kill-more-people-than-terrorists-do
Why? Because the US has an archaic view regarding guns and whatever you say the laws in some ways are so inflexible that no one dare their political careers tackling it. NRA and money is king in this matter.
As for states being profitable... I hope so.. the US is 40x the size of UK - it's half the size of California and 5x the population... oh but wait a minute US has the second highest national debt and is basically owned by china.
Say hello to President Dumbf for me Pardner, yehaaaar pow pow pow.
Fact is that small children kill more people in the US than terrorists.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-toddlers-kill-more-people-than-terrorists-do
Why? Because the US has an archaic view regarding guns and whatever you say the laws in some ways are so inflexible that no one dare their political careers tackling it. NRA and money is king in this matter.
As for states being profitable... I hope so.. the US is 40x the size of UK - it's half the size of California and 5x the population... oh but wait a minute US has the second highest national debt and is basically owned by china.
Say hello to President Dumbf for me Pardner, yehaaaar pow pow pow.
I haven't claimed that. We are not perfect and we've lost our place as the most powerful nation because we are no longer raping other countries economies for our gains like we used to. Socialism and conservatism are to blame for our current situation, get it right.
Your gun culture and obsession with the war of independence is not the reason for economic success. Even if it was I am smug I live in a safer society, thanks.
Neither are things I've said at all.
You've completely made up arguments in my name and have the arrogance to say "Nope, try again" to those, as if it has anything to do with what I said.
No wonder things don't get better in your country.
If those soldiers you hired routinely miss dangerous items when tested, yes! They've never prevented any real attack yet they've repeatedly failed to prevent the entry of dangerous items in simulations, they're failures. Why would you expect them to be effective against a real attack when they cover simulations like a sieve? Reevaluate your security methodology because you are wasting your resources on those soldiers when they could be expended in more effective ways.
I didn't say don't take any precautions, I said be smart about it. Blindly continuing to support an ineffective process is ridiculous.
You can say that about anything that is old. What a silly comment.
Don't like guns? Don't buy one.
I think this laptop and iPad bad thing is not good. They have enough security in place. I fly quite often and they always make you take out your tablet or laptop from your bag for screening.
This could have been avoided, very easily. Simply let the President have his temporary (it was to be temporary) travel ban on the 7 countries that were identified by the PRIOR ADMINISTRATION as high-risk for exporting their extremism and terrorism, then reassess the situation on an ongoing basis.
Shut down the sources of terrorism and you do two things: 1) you immediately reduce the odds of something terrible happening today. 2) You set the expectations for tomorrow's behavior worldwide.
And all you people calling for gun control, just calm down. Gun control has nothing to do with the subject of laptops in plane cabins. Bringing it up does nothing but clutter your argument.
Shut down the sources of terrorism and you do two things: 1) you immediately reduce the odds of something terrible happening today. 2) You set the expectations for tomorrow's behavior worldwide.
And all you people calling for gun control, just calm down. Gun control has nothing to do with the subject of laptops in plane cabins. Bringing it up does nothing but clutter your argument.
Agreed on this. The ban might be pointless (Of the 36 million flights that fly every year, I'd take the risk of being on the one or two flights that get blown up every year than going through this BS, I'm still more likely to get hit by a car on the way to airport) but thanks for helping the Canadian economy. We'll call it even for your president consistently lowering our dollar by blowing around hot air. What he doesn't realise is everytime he does it, he's just making things even cheaper for American companies to buy from us.
Yes you can and you'll find that MOST things written 230 years ago are irrelevant now. Medical knowledge springs to mind. And treating semi auto guns of today the same as the single shot minute to reload muskets is plain stupid. Not matter how you wash it gun lovers are collectively responsible for all the deaths that occur and they act all surprised when their toddler blows a hole in leg or worse.
And you know what I am not anti-guns completely. If you hunt and actually eat what you get.. all fine with me... taking a selfie with a lion I hope they get eaten.
So the fact that I don't like guns because of the thousands of accident deaths, murders and plain idiocy in the US Regarding guns is to "not buy one". And my comment was silly?
It is the same process that the rest of Europe is using. I fail to understand how you can say the methodology isn't working. When was he last US flight hijacked? Oh right, before the increase in security. Have they missed things? Sure, but that doesn't make them ineffective, it makes them human. They can be retrained and if you don't think soldiers make mistakes I can assure you that thought process would be incorrect. What, about the process, do you find ineffective? I would love to hear how you could do this better.
Last edited:
That a pretty pessimistic view on the evolution of the human race. I disagree.
I agree. Your rights are your rights and they are not "granted" to you by a person or government. The document in question is the Bill of Rights and it simply lays this out in plain language for all by listing all the things that the government is NOT allowed to do to you. How can that be a bad thing?
To say that this goes out of style just because it's 230 years old is to say that truth itself goes out of style after 230 years, which is preposterous.
But again, this is not part of the issue of laptops in planes. Dangerous US citizens (having proven themselves dangerous by the crimes they have committed) should be in jail and not able to fly on planes, not even TO another country to perpetrate violence abroad. Fixed, no gun control needed, and no apologies needed to other countries.
Dangerous non-citizens (having proven themselves dangerous) can also be prevented from flying. Fixed, no gun control needed, and airport security lines eliminated.
When a whole country becomes known as a hotbed of danger, then why can't we just restrict everybody from that country until the country changes its ways? Fixed, no requiring laptops to go in the plane's hold needed. Bonus: Body cavity searches also not needed.
Telling somebody that they can't come to my country because they're dangerous is not mean. Telling a whole country that they can't come to my country because they habitually and regularly foment hatred and breed, raise, and train little kids to be terrorists is not racist, bigoted, nor is it even cruel. It's just common sense and it would set the expectation that the leaders of those countries should change their ways and do the right thing.
The US should immediately implement the temporary travel bans for countries that spread terrorism. I believe much of Europe would follow suit once they see a little bit of backbone from a real leader.
My understanding of the reason why the age of the constitution was brought up is as an answer to the argument that the second amendment was included so as to provide the right to the population to fight a tyrannic or corrupt government: indeed things have changed a lot in 230 years, and if such a situation arose, other means would need to be used (e.g., the start of a legal process to impeach the President).
That being said, I think the gun control (or absence thereof) discussion is irrelevant to this thread.
That being said, I think the gun control (or absence thereof) discussion is irrelevant to this thread.
Yet another thread that has been dragged into a conversation about guns.
Painful.
Painful.
Whay exactly are you disagreeing with here?
[doublepost=1494845633][/doublepost]
Or an armed revolution. It's easy for us to forget that **** can get real bad, real quick. If Trump was 1/100 of the monster he's made out to be, it sure would be nice to be able to forcefully remove him from office, wouldn't it?
People can make the same flawed argument about any part of the Constitution for any arbitrary length of time. Separation of church and state? Nah times have changed let's bring them together. Women's right to vote? Ya know, times have changed I don't see why we need that. Etc etc.
If you want to argue about restricting firearms, that's fine and I'll show you how you're wrong, but don't use a really poor argument to do so.
As said above multiple times by me and others, firearms is not the topic of this thread, so, no, I do not want to argue on this topic on this forum.
On a day where I would have time to, and in a place where it would be relevant maybe, but not today and here.
The goal of my previous post was to (1) point out that an argument was twisted and (2) steer the discussion back to the topic, and as (2) is more important than (1), I will not contribute to derailing the thread further.
One could perhaps say that we have seen more killings take place in America by gun compared to people being killed by laptops or tablets on planes but yet we still decided to ban those on planes instead of banning guns in public.
The how we obtained information would be revealed argument is such garbage. How is that distinguishable from a lie? How do we ever trust anything as long as the best we get is 'trust us' when you've already shown that you can't be trusted? And I'm not saying you can't trust government, but you can't fully trust the security apparatus to be forthcoming, correct, or consistent and that takes a toll on credibility.
You can read Schneier's take on it the first discussion of the ban and its issues.
Here is another article on laptops vs. tablets from a while back. It ends with this zinger
However, he added, “banning every computer-related device on planes would be absurd.”
Maybe we should ban laptops on planes, but more likely where we're headed is banning carry-on luggage. As is pointed out, laptop is a difference without a distinction. If the issue is batteries, a laptop can be smaller than a tablet as pointed out in the article or it could be a modern piece of luggage with batteries for charging things. If it is volume, well then just about everything becomes a problem.
So, coming back to your post, taking peoples word for a restriction is absurd if it doesn't pass a basic smell test. A laptop ban smacks of inconsistency and undermines trust. Police walking around with machine guns in airports or at high profile sites is a show of force meant to make people feel safe. Both are security theater.
Stop arguing that point? Sure. I don't argue it, but that isn't going to stop us agitating to restrict the people and settings and types of guns that people can have or that we won't support changes or abolish the 2nd amendment.
[doublepost=1494925023][/doublepost]
Flat wrong. I've flown all over the world and the TSA is a special sort of nonsense. The only other place I travel that has similar security is the UK. Maybe its an English speaking thing?
A couple of items, shoe removal isn't generally a thing outside the US. I'm sure it is done somewhere, but I have trouble coming up with any examples in recent travel outside of Florida last year. Large amounts of liquid can't be taken through security, but with duty free in Europe you can buy liters of alcohol and as long as it is in a special plastic bag with the receipt it is allowed through multiple stops. As for putting things in a plastic bag, mostly mixed, but only the US is militant about it. I've often forgotten to put my toothpaste tube in the bag and nobody has ever complained. I've not been subject to millimetre wave scanning in Europe although they did have a machine in Kiev, but it wasn't for everyone. The only things that I can say are common is metal detectors and placing electronics in a bin by themselves.
Funny story, travelling with my young child I took a tin of liver pate through security. They complained that it was a metal container with food and that it wasn't children's food. I said, "there is a young child on the lid of this product and in my experience if a product is labelled with an image it usually contained the thing on the lid. So are you suggesting it contains children or is for children?" They wiped with one of the bomb detector pads and we were on our way.
Last edited:
So, rather than bitch and say that the security agencies have no clue what they are doing, what would you do to fix this problem? I am also a world traveler and can tell you that the TSA does not do anything that Frankfurt, Stanstead, Heathrow, or Incheon does. I, for one, have never had a problem with the TSA. I go in, follow instructions and make my way to my gate. Every now and then they spot check things. Not sure what the big deal is and why you think they are pointless. Clearly it is working as we haven't had an incident.
Again, I am glad that you are not a security expert.
Last edited:
Yes, agreed. My heart sinks when I see a thread segue into this topic and the frenzied spittle spewing reactions it inevitably seems to give rise to on the part of its many - sometimes rather myopic - defenders.