Nov 142010
http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html
Read this. If you ever plan on flying again, read this. And hope that this may help change things.
Basically, a guy is facing a $10,000 civil suit for refusing to be sexually assaulted.
25 Responses to ““if you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested.””
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I haven’t been on an airliner in years so excuse my density.If you remember the movie “Total Recall” with Arnold Schwartzenegger they
have in there an X-ray machine that if in reality existed this would end a
lot of this BS….or do they?
The Total Recall X-Ray was powerful enough to show you the skeletons with clarity. Which would be a dandy way to give a whole lot of people cancer.
There’s a simpler approach: metal detectors and chemical sniffers (looking for toxins & explosives), and letting people with concealed carry licences travel with approved firearms and ammo. As we’ve seen since 9/11, if someone tries to do something unpleasant on a flight, the other passengers will unleash a beatdown upon him. Let them do so. Let’s take some reasonable precautions… and then foster a culture of self defense, not cowardice.
I know from personal experience that a Kabar knife can merrily sail right through screening… both X-Ray and even a TSA drone pawing through the suitcase. And any terrorist with more than two brain cells can come up with things to bring on board to cause trouble that’ll pass right through whatever screening you want to come up with. So most of the screening precautions are something of a waste anyway. Flying is enough of a pain that I’d sooner drive 1000 miles than fly it, and I’m hardly alone there… so its in the airlines interests to see that the TSA crap gets curtailed.
Why didn’t he just go through the backscatter machine?
Don’t even get me started on what sort of a guy thinks women touching his clothed legs is sexual assault. Would he have preferred to have a _man_ do it?
God help him if he ever runs into a female proctologist. 😀
One guy said on the comments section that he drove his daughter to
Georgia instead….cavity search maybe if you know what I mean.
> Why didn’t he just go through the backscatter machine?
Because that *shows* your junk in all it’s tiny little glory to the TSA drones… and to anyone they choose to email it to as well. Plus, it’s yet another dose of X-Rays to move you on your way to cancer.
On the other hand:
> cavity search maybe if you know what I mean.
I’d hate to see anyone this hyper about their dick getting fitted for a pair of pants and having the salesman or woman measure their inseam.
“Rape! Rape!” 😀
One can easily buy a pair of pants without getting pawed by some bureaucrat.
Well done, that man. Shame on everyone who thinks all the money spent on the TSA has accomplished anything other than insulting the dignity of everyone who wants to move about in a supposedly free country.
Jim
Well if it ever happens to me I will strip naked on the spot. Same end result without the radiation and no guys groping junk. 🙂 It’ll be a treat for the ladies too! LOLz!!!
I dread the day that a terrorist plot is unveiled or attempted against passenger rail travel in Canada or the USA; having to go through airport like security at a train station would be the end of civilized public transportation in North American.
I wonder who’d be the first to scream the next time a plane is hijacked?
Oh, and I have to laugh. Why your concern Admin about cancer? You’ve been proposing nuclear power aircraft, nuclear power rockets, nuclear power this and that for years. Strange you’d be so concerned about cancer from an airport x-ray machine when you’d willing to expose millions to potential cancer risk with your nuclear powered toys.
I have a suspicion that nuclear power rockets and nuclear power in general is a lot more useful to humanity than most of today’s airport security measures.
> I wonder who’d be the first to scream the next time a plane is hijacked?
Hopefully the next passenger over, who’d then proceed to beat the hijacker to death.
As for nukes and cancer: sure, nukes built by socialists suck ass. But nukes built by capitalists have a remarkably good safety record. It’s the *lack* of an active nuclear program that has led to a continued dependance upon fossil fuels such as coal for electrical power, thus spoiling the environment due to both mining and burning. Clearly, anti-nuke activists hate the environment and have worked to destroy it.
In any event, my greater concern is privacy. Cancer is just (literally) adding injury to insult.
I look forward, in a morbid sort of way, to the day that a terrorist auto-detonates in the TSA security queue. Several hundred potential kufr victims in that target-rich environment.
I don’t know about Canadian Rail, but I’ve been on a Amtrak train from Grand Forks to Washington DC and back, And that’s not something I’d describe as “civilized”. 🙂
The passengers and train crew were fine, but the tracks weren’t, and trying to eat in the dining car was like trying to eat during the first stage burn of a Saturn V, as the dinner plate migrated all over the table from the vibrations.
Anyway, the guy is in deep shit now, as the government is going to match his $10,000 lawsuit with a $10,000 fine:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/john-tyner-refuses-tsa-search-don-t-touch-my-junk
The thing I can’t understand is the crew that will loudly complain that this is all a severe intrusion on his constitutional rights, and will also loudly complain if a terrorist gets through airport security and brings a airliner down because they weren’t properly checked out by airport security.
Fukin’ whiny crybabies.
Would someone please give them their rattle back, and shove it right down their throats to make the little bastards shut up?
Admin, I wasn’t aware that radiation came in political flavours. Capitalist built nuclear reactors have had accidents over the years and one wonders how a nuclear powered aircraft or spaceship designed by capitalists would be any safer to be near when it crashes than one designed by those evil Socialists. Oh and then we should remember al those lovely Capitalist built and exploded nuclear weapons which have helped contaminate the planet since WWII – of course the Socialists ones were just as bad but hey, lets not exempt that radiation just ’cause its nice Capitalist radiation.
As the other poster quoted, you’d need to go through the scanners several thousands of times to get a does equivalent to a CAT scan. So, since when did you join the anti-nuclear tinfoil brigade? Personally, I’m not anti-Nuclear per se. I am anti-hypocrit and anti-idiot.
> I wasn’t aware that radiation came in political flavours.
Worst nuclear power plant disaster in American history led to no recognizable radiation leaks and no injuries. Worst in Commie history led to several dozen prompt deaths, likely thousands more over time, and entire region depopulated.
> nuclear weapons which have helped contaminate the planet since WWII
And just how contaminated *is* the planet from nuclear testing? The US has trashed a few islands in the South Pacific, and a region of Nevada that nobody was doign anythign with anyway. Hell, when we bitchslapped Imperial Japan with a couple of nukes, that hardly “contaminated” the place, as witnessed byt the fac thtat both cities were rapidly rebuilt and quickly became and remianed prosperous, going concerns.
Unlike Chernobyl.
>Worst nuclear power plant disaster in American history led to no recognizable radiation leaks and no injuries. Worst in Commie history led to several dozen prompt deaths, likely thousands more over time, and entire region depopulated.
Interesting how you’ve decided to isolate the problem only to “nuclear power plants” and only in America. Even in America, reactor release of radiation was a problem for decades however the reactors were used in nuclear weapons manufacture, not commercial power generation, now weren’t they? Then, outside of the US you’ve had nuclear disasters in the UK, western Europe, eastern Europe, the fUSSR, Japan and China. Virtually every nation that has operated a nuclear reactor has had accidents, some worse than others. All have added to the background radiation level.
> And just how contaminated *is* the planet from nuclear testing?
Perhaps you should do some research? Good graph here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Radiocarbon_bomb_spike.svg
Shows that before the imposition of the Partial Test Ban Treaty (oh, that Communist plot!) the background radiation level worldwide had basically DOUBLED because of nuclear testing. Since then, it has reduced now to some 20% above what it was when measurement started in 1955.
According this chart – http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Worldwide_nuclear_testing.svg
The US is without question the prolific of testers up until 1992.
>The US has trashed a few islands in the South Pacific, and a region of Nevada that nobody was doign anythign with anyway. Hell, when we bitchslapped Imperial Japan with a couple of nukes, that hardly “contaminated” the place, as witnessed byt the fac thtat both cities were rapidly rebuilt and quickly became and remianed prosperous, going concerns.
Unlike Chernobyl.
People still die in Hiroshima and Nagasaki at much higher rates of Cancer than other comparable cities in Japan. Your ignorance is why people like you shouldn’t be proponents for nuclear energy/weapons/spaceships/aircraft/ships/submarines/you name it. You seem to be flippant in the extreme.
> Interesting how you’ve decided to isolate the problem only to “nuclear power plants” …
What else is there currently? Haven’t seen any above ground nuclear explosions for a good long while, and I don’t expect I ever will, apart from Jihadis doing something drastic.
> Even in America, reactor release of radiation was a problem for decades
A minor one. A trifling one compared the the shitty reactors and systems in the USSR.
> the background radiation level worldwide had basically DOUBLED because of nuclear testing.
Wow. That’s kinda like doubling the rainfall in the heart of the Atacama. With advanced instruments, you can actually measure it!
> People still die in Hiroshima and Nagasaki at much higher rates of Cancer than other comparable cities in Japan.
Largely, as I understand it, due to the people who were actually there at the time dying of cancer, not because of increased radiation levels in *modern* Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
> You seem to be flippant in the extreme.
Damned straight, Skippy. People like yourself who argue against common-sense nuclear programs and against capitalism do not do some from a position of reason, logic or facts, but from a position of superstition. I feel no need to be polite in such circumstances, but to point at you dancing monkeys and laugh.
I don’t argue against common sense nuclear programmes. When you become the exponent of one and whats more, don’t contradict yourself all the time over the issue, please do buzz me. Now, is radiation safe or not? If it isn’t, then why keep posting on about how you’d like to see nuclear power utilised all over the place?
Oh, and you might be interested in this snippet about prolonged release of radiation by the Oakridge Nuclear Reactors. Weren’t aware of it, perhaps? http://www.psr.org/chapters/washington/hanford/hanford-history.html
Might be interesting if you have an open mind about how dangerous nuclear industry is.
It’s clear you’re incapable of making important distinctions. Yes, nuclear bomb plants released radiation. Yes, some nuclear powerplants in the US released *small* amounts of radiation. yes, you get nuked when you fly, or when you get a dental X-ray. The thing is, these are all minor risks stacked to very clear benefits, like the risks in any medical drug.
But TSA backscatter X-rays? They will put a vast number of people at individually tiny risks… for *no* benefit whatsoever.
I’ll take the radiation risks of a thousand Three Mile Islands over those of the airport X-rays any day… because those nuclear reactors will *serve* *a* *purpose.*
If you believe its all that safe, why don’t you move to Hanford to prove your point?
If radiation is unsafe, then its all unsafe. If you’re willing to let people in Hanford get irradiated, then why are you so overconcerned about an x-ray machine which has been pointed out would require millions of exposures to even approach that of a medical cat scan?
You appear completely unable to have any sense of proportion….
Since it’s obvious that you did not bother to read my last post, it’s becoming clear that you are probably a troll.