Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You called the communities opinion pathetic, based on some erroneous what "ifs" you came up with. Lot's of people just gave you their point of view on why you're wrong and others just down voted you because you didn't back up anything you said with facts. Here's my take:

1) I don't care about anyone seeing me naked, I've been working out for years, four times a week to look like I look now and if could walk butt naked everywhere I would. That doesn't mean that it's alright to look at other people's naked bodies, and sure as hell doesn't make right the possibility of a predator looking at naked children.

2) Regarding the scanner's radiation in no way is a healthy thing, and in the absence of actual proof stating if it's really negligible or if it poses a serious health risk, everyone should consider it dangerous. You're basically saying that it's OK to walk through that tight dark alley in the middle of a bad neighborhood at midnight because there's no proof that anyone has been killed or mugged there. I'd rather avoid that kind of situation unless completely necessary thank you very much.

You wanted a rational discussion so I'm giving you a rational answer (I have no emotional issue with the topic at hand). I don't care about people touching me or seeing me naked, and I do care (albeit very little) about the potential health risks. I find your comment on how seeing someone's body through X-rays is not a big deal, but seeing someone's luggage through X-ray is a violation of privacy, preposterous and honestly laughable. Tell me what the big difference between looking into your luggage and looking at your naked body is that makes the latter so unimportant in comparison to the former.

You made a comment for the sake of disagreeing (instead of saying anything of any value for the discussion) and then made some utterly incompetent remarks all the while calling people immature and basically saying their opinions have no value because you believe we're all cattle in the herd of the Anti-TSA fad. While I don't agree there was a necessity for down-votes, you're comments did add no value whatsoever so the people where in a way correct to do so. Next time if you're going to disagree do it politely and state facts and opinions instead of trying to come of as the better person.



Thanks for the feedback, however I did not call the community's opinion pathetic, nor did I state a bunch of ifs. In fact I did not even use the word "if" that I could find, nor did I state conditionals in any other way. I did say there was a pathetic lack of rational discussion, and I was not referring to HN specifically, but instead the general public discourse.

I did not comment "for the sake of disagreeing," but rather because I strongly disagree with the prevailing group think going on. This policy was poorly presented to the public, but that does not excuse its butchering, nor the wholesale dismissal of the TSA.

I also think it's wrong to pile on a bunch of decent people working as TSA agents just because of a couple bad anecdotes that made the news. Further, I think the rationale behind the policy, ways to limit abuse, and the trade-offs should be the subject of discussion. Instead it's a bunch of "fuck the police" without consideration for those of us in favor of having secure airline flights.

I don't see how being searched for weapons and explosives before boarding an aircraft is a violation of privacy, and finding ways around a more thorough search does not mean a more thorough search shouldn't be implemented.

You are free to fly your own plane without such searches, or to drive, walk, take a train, etc - however if you get on a plane with other people you simply do not have a right to not be searched, any more than you do when entering a courthouse, having a private dinner with the President, or going to a nightclub. Those policies are implemented to counter real dangers and threats, and your right to privacy does not prevail here.

I just got off a flight from OAK-SEA without incident or encounter, a few helpful pointers, and plenty of courtesy.


I get that you didn't mean it as a put down, I was just expressing to you how it read for me (and probably for a lot of people). I didn't mean to come off as aggressive towards you specifically, I was more being aggressive towards the idea itself.

Now I don't see where the general disdain relates to the TSA agents themselves, with the exceptions of a few posts stating that people that work as TSA agents would resign as a result of this policies, and I agree with you in that they aren't the ones that should have to deal with out unhappiness with the policies.

It's not that people think that they have a right to not be searched, it's that people think they have a right to not be treated in a way that demeans them and that violates some of the basic human rights they posses. There is no expectation of privacy on an airport, and as such you should be searched for dangerous artifacts and weapons, but that doesn't mean that you should be stripped by a machine or 'fondled' and 'groped' without a reason. There is no expectation of privacy while walking down the street or getting into a bus, and as such, but that doesn't give the right to anyone to take naked xray pictures of your person or to touch you in way you not deem appropriate.

You might get plenty or courtesy on behalf of the TSA agents, and that's great; however the fight is not with the agents themselves, it's with the policies that demand people to submit to potentially damaging irradiation or to a search procedure that proves to be invasive and with which you don't feel comfortable with.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: