The whole point is to not know who the air marshals are or who is armed on a plane. The only ones that know are the stewardesses, the captain and any other armed person on the flight (for obvious reasons).
I'm aware that's the point, I'm just saying I've yet to see someone I could identify as armed on a plane. Disguising them makes it difficult to ID so they don't become the first target when they are actually on board and makes it difficult to determine if they are on board when they really aren't.
I'm just assuming here but with as many stories that you hear about passengers subduing an out of control passenger, not all flights have someone armed on them. I suppose they could be told to not move until imminent danger is present but where's that line drawn? How long do you let a guy flip shit before he's crossed it.
I dunno, my argument was never intended to focus specifically on airline security in the air. As I said before I was pointing out that other measures were taken which is what I think should happen in this instance as well.
I agree. But I just find it ironic that any efforts made to prevent crime are met by the left with righteous indignation and cries of civil liberties violations; think water boarding, police pat downs, invasive screening at airports, severe minimum mandatory prison sentences, voter ID laws, etc. We were so concerned with the "rights" of terrorists and enemy combatants, yet are so quick to throw ours away.
I'm really not sure why you went this route but since you did, I'll provide a reply.
As far as pat downs are concerned (as you mentioned in another post regarding NYC), I've heard only a bit about it. I actually think I heard it was ruled unconstitutional just the other day. Or at least parts of it. Prior to that I had about it and from what I saw, the data seems to back up the claims of racial profiling. Unless you have some data that says otherwise, I think it's a hard argument to make in saying that they were never profiling.
Invasive airport screenings. This topic is so all over the map depending on what news story is on the front page at any given moment and considering the fact that you are dealing with someone's personal privacy, I'm not sure it's reasonable to expect that everyone would be okay with some of the stuff. Personally, I don't give a shit. Get through the fucking line already, I've got places to be. I've never seen anyone make a big deal out of it and just last month I was given the special attention because I had two "Furminator" dog brushes in my backpack that I was taking home for some friends (Scored a good deal. Like $5 per Furminator and those fucking things can be $60 depending on size. Bought a bunch).
Minimum mandatory sentencing. I've never really heard someone go on a rant about any specific crime but I'm sure they exist. I honestly don't have any sort of familiarity with people who bitch about this so I can't really comment on anything specific. I will comment though on the likelihood that the arguments do not apply equally across the spectrum of possible crimes. I doubt the outcry for minimum sentencing in cases of pedophilia matches that of drug possession.
For that matter, I would guess that airport screenings are generally accepted by most everyone so long as a certain line is not crossed. Usually that's how things work and while I know that political dogmatists on both sides of the aisle like to try and use one example as representation for an entire topic for which there are issues along a continuum, I think it's entirely foolish to flat out say that all instances of airport screening complaints are unwarranted.
Waterboarding. I'm not really sure what there is to discuss. It's torture and outlawed both internationally and within the US.
I think if you looking for some sort of irony, it's likely best not to search for it in situations in which civil liberties (profiling) or basic human rights (waterboarding) are being violated. If you can find it airport screenings or mandatory sentences, have at it. I've yet to hear someone say they want no, and are unwilling to undergo any sort of, security checks prior to boarding a plan and I have yet to see anyone with a grasp on reality take up arms for pedophiles, rapists and murderers (specifically in terms of minimum sentencing). Then again, I don't dive deep into that shit so I'll accept some responsibility for being naive to an extent when it comes to aspects of these issues.
