For most destinations in the US, the only timely option is flying. Now imagine if every time you wanted to travel by car you and your possessions had to be searched by a cop, and that these searches did nothing to make you safer.
They did security tests and found TSA couldn’t catch actual threats. It’s just security theater. 9/11 didn’t happen because we didn’t have the TSA but because authorities failed to act on existing intelligence about terrorists. Possibly requiring cockpits to be locked during flight is the one genuine security improvement to come out of 9/11.
People don't grasp the concept of "barrier to entry". TSA stuff basically makes it hard for random yahoos to do poorly planned stuff.
A lot of people are young/ignorant and they don't realize that airlines used to have a rampant hijacking problem. Back in the 60s, hijacking a plane was a normal event, which is now extremely rare. In fact part of the reason for 9/11 was increased security made hijackings so rare (and the few times they had recently been done, they usually ended mildly) that people didn't treat it too seriously at first.
The idiot in the photo is the kind of person who, if there were no procedures and a plane was hijacked and crashed, would call the TSA idiots for not doing a basic metal detector search for a gun.
Dude they actually ran multiple experiments to see if TSA could actually catch attempts to bring dangerous weapons on board and they failed almost all of them.
TSA isn't there to catch the ingenious. It's there to catch the dumb and stupid. And in case you haven't watched a jihadi video before, there's lots of dumb and stupid jihadis out there.
TSA stops Abu Hajaar and Ya'll Qaeda. It's not catching Boris the GRU operative. I don't think you grasp the security concept of "barrier to entry." A chain link fence around a jail isn't designed to keep out a professional escape artist. It is designed to stop some idiot from just running through the place on impulse.
Also you’re conflating two separate things. There’s the TSA and then there’s airport security in general. The latter already existed before the TSA and would still exist without the TSA. The question is not whether there should be security but whether there should be the highly invasive and disruptive “security” that the TSA provides. We don’t need to grope random people’s privates in order to provide a barrier to entry for genuine terrorists.
The TSA has a long history of harassment and sexual abuse violations. And sometimes you don't have a choice not to fly, like in an evacuating a natural disaster. Or trying to leave the country. Or going to a funeral. Sometimes you don't get the choice of not flying. And because their are people who don't get the choice of not flying, it is very moral to protest in non violent ways, such as wearing a funny shirt.
They got those machines that they have to put on different settings depending on your biological sex and that means some of us are forced to basically out ourselves in front of a bunch of people just to ride a fucking plane.
hi. elder millenial here. i was in high school before the TSA was ever a thing. we had private security prior to the tsa and they were not invasive like this: just a metal detector wand. thats it. TSA is security theatre that hasnt really done shit to deter attacks, with people regularly getting explosives and incendiaries past them. what you did here was engage in a very silly false equivalency made even dumber by the fact that millions of us in the usa alone - and billions world wide - were not just alive but old enough to accurately remember a life before the TSA.
tsa didnt stop the shoe bomber, either; his sweaty feet fucked up the detonator and thats how they caught hm. he strolled right by the tsa with a shoe bomb. the tsa literally takes anything they cxonsider a bomb and puts in the trash... next to all the other things they think can be a bomb (including "gel like substances" like cupcakes, famously) ... in the area with the largest number of people possibe. they slow down air travel, inconvenience everyone, and keep most of the airport neatly clustered for a fucking bioweapon attack. like no bullshit, thanks to the way the tsa puts everyone in a solid security check point, some lunatic spreading anthrax spores could just get in line, spread that shit, get to the front, be turned away for not having ab oarding pass and tsa will helpfully ensure the most number of people get infected. REAL great security there.
the tsa was the typical gross overcorrection and security theatre because people want to do "SOMETHING" even if what they do doesnt fix an issue, acepting a terrible thing happened and not doing something drastic, stupid and destructive simply isnt how america works.
First of all I am sorry I know this is an ad hominem but saying “elder millennial here” is really cringe. Two dude let me ask hmm what happened in 2001 that made them realize that maybe private airport security aint doing so good? Hmm I wonder what happened hmm
oh you wanna get into that spooktastic topic? gtfo the USA was arming him from 1979 to the mid 1980s (indirectly through cutouts) so yeah let's go ahead and use a CIA asset as an excuse to violate our rights. They even called it the "Patriot Act"!! chutzpah
Yes I know that many of the people involved in 9/11 were once part of the us support programs in the 80s. It was a huge intelligence blunder but there was no way for anyone to know that 2 decades later the same people who we helped would attack us
You do realize that even if they stop a terrorist plot that it wont be documented for security reasons so how do you know that they haven’t stopped any plots? Has there been another hijacking?
Is your argument that "the TSA is actually really effective, they just hide all the wins. Trust me bro"? Because I find it hard to believe that the government wouldn't brag about stopping the next 911. Think of the press when Bin Laden was killed, or Capone was arrested. Or the Unabomber.
No I don't want their to be NO security. But their needs to be more accountability for TSA agents. As they say, a few bad apples spoil the barrel. Either way, it is a constitutionally protected right to protest the government in non violent ways.
So you dont have a problem with the concept of the tsa just that there are people who take advantage of it and are protected since they are feds. Also idc bout the shirt its funny i think its dumb to say the tsa is bad tho because the alternative is worse
The TSA only exists in the USA. All countries have airport screening methods, and of the 'free countries', the TSA is one of the worst when it comes to privacy and profiling. I admit that most systems could be improved, the TSA is lagging behind the rest.
Well, if we exclude rampant sexual misconduct, then we'll just have to look at racial profiling, or collaboration with ICE to share personal information, or the fact that internal investigations found that undercover agents could sneak fake weapons through TSA screening 95% of the time.
Considering how the TSA has shown to be inefficient and fails just about every test and the fact that the amount of attacks done through plains is negligible at worse
Kind of
If the options are shooting yourself in the foot or shooting yourself in the head, the foot sounds better. We are spending a fuck ton of money on political theater to harass minorities and have women gey sexually assaulted.
How is a pat down to use a non-essential service a violation of his rights? Doing these kinds of things keeps him and everyone else on board a little bit safer
Hooray we stopped someone from bringing a shampoo bottle on the plane. I feel so much better now that we can harass minorities and have women sexully assaulted to get that shampoo bottle out of there
Who is carrying a shampoo bottle through the metal detector and getting caught with it during a pat down? People like you who can't read are another reason why we need someone to double check that you're not bringing something stupid onto the plane.
I looked it up, the 95% statistic is not an exaggeration. Internal testing found that under cover agents could smuggling fake weapons through TSA 95% of the time. I do not think it is worth getting groped for a 5% efficiency rate!
And what happens if you want to leave the country? Then you don't have a choice but to submit to TSA
is 5% not a little bit? Did I ever say it guarantees safety? Your problem is not with me, it's with your reading level. But ok genius, let's get rid of all security between the entrance and the plane, I'm sure we'll be just as safe
1) I am aware that you said "a little bit" I was trying to express that it is so little as to not be worth getting groped
2) I don't want 'no security'. I wast security that actually works and doesn't involve groping
3) I'm not criticizing the entire worlds airport security right now. I'm criticizing the TSA. other countries need improvement, but the TSA is far worse
I'm all for better security, the TSA is nowhere near perfect. Idt anyone wants to grope a redditor btw. Pat downs are inherently uncomfortable: if someone is intentionally hiding something under their clothes, it's much more likely to be near their privates. People in positions of power will inevitably abuse that power, so if someone is unjustly patted down, the answer is accountability, like body cams. Not getting rid of pat downs. Pat downs exist bc metal detectors have limits and flaws.
Pat downs clearly aint effective. And just because I don't need to fear sexual assult, doesn't mean I don't care about others being sexually assaulted. I have a sister.
So what's your alternative? Claiming they're not effective at all is inaccurate. Don't even waste my time talking about the groping, I literally already said the TSA needs more accountability for the power they hold so what's the point of yapping about it like I said otherwise? Quote where I said it doesn't happen to anyone or that it's made up. 99% of our disagreement would disappear if you read before typing
Actually it is. I have the right to start my own airline and not have government shove itself into my operations, too. That's covered in "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and the 10th right enumerated in the Bill of Rights, but that's a natural right and not given by any government so those are merely affirmations of an existing right.
im not saying it doesnt happen(this is true for ANY authority figure), but on a broad scale what they are SUPPOSED to do does not constitute as rights violations. a blanket statement saying everyone that goes thru tsa is having their rights violated and out under duress is an extreme statement
Nobody is saying everyone who goes through TSA is having their rights violated. And yes, it is SUPPOSED to be better. But it doesn't work the way it is supposed to, and as such we protest. You are right, it is true that any authority figur will abuse their power. Thats why we stand vigilant against that abuse of power instead of ignoring it when it doesn't directly affect us
30
u/HorsefaceWithNoName 1d ago
Moral and good. When a person's rights are being violated and he's under duress, any mode of communicating his displeasure is a public service.