Hacker News Reader

Comment by acabal | Hacker News Reader

A nice quote, but we've already given the TSA a lot. Now it's a fight to get it back. Hopefully it's not too late.

We're not fighting back. The point of the quote is that power comes from the people. If the people don't give the tyrant anything then the tyrant is powerless. As long as the Tyrant knows that if he shoots at us, we shoot back, he can demand and demand and we give nothing and thus he becomes moot.

Same with the TSA. We need a 100% national opt-out day. Not scanners. I mean same statement as the guy made. EVERYONE. The airlines will go nuts as most their passengers will be missing from the flights. Or something to that extent. Its not fighting back, its just refusal to give them power. And I bet we can ask for refunds. Nowhere on the ticket does it say that a delay in the airport due to constitutional rights violations warrants a no-refund.

Just like with 9/11 now is the same issue and we must handle it as Americans, like we did threats before it. Never surrender even an ounce of freedom, they will take our freedom from our cold dead hands only.

I have to quote Franklin on this one "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The TSA is obviously staffed by bureaucrats who are simply following bad rules. This should call for a restructuring of the organization, not a lash out against The TSA or (worse) The Government. Let's figure out what is wrong with the process, and how we can fix it. Enough being scared and pointing blame.

How about disbanding it as a waste of tax money, and as an unnecessary institution ill-suited to being part of a society dedicated to the idea of individual liberties?

If the TSA is disbanded, then how do you suggest handling airport security? Who is in charge of it and who is responsible?

Like everywhere else in the world?

In a civilized manner, friendly respectful and efficient?

Maybe by checks conducted by real professionals and not with the aim to have it as cheaply as possible and thus paying minimum wages to badly trained "agents" on a power trip?

Maybe in a way where you're not blackmailed into going through a machine, which effects are very unproven and in whoms installation the former director of the TSA has a financial interest? (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/0...) ?

Just a few bullet points for thought.

They're government workers; their salaries are probably not that bad.

There was plenty sufficient airport security 10 years ago. The airlines and airports were perfectly capable of handling it then just as they are now.

Far be it from me to defend the TSA (its behavior and policies are outrageous), but your comment is simply wrong. Before September 11th, private companies handled airport security. After September 11th, airlines and airports were heavily criticized for relying on inadequately trained, low-paid employees for something as essential as security. Everyone in the world agreed that a federal agency must step in to do a better job, and the TSA is the result.

>After September 11th, airlines and airports were heavily criticized for relying on inadequately trained, low-paid employees for something as essential as security

Pro-tip: The same poorly trained, low-paid employees are now federal TSA goons.

>Everyone in the world agreed that a federal agency must step in to do a better job, and the TSA is the result.

Clearly, everyone in the world was overreacting to 9/11, and made poor, rash decisions. I'm sure many libertarians felt that despite 9/11, they would feel much safer having airport security handled by airlines, and not a bureaucratic organization that has yet to catch any terrorists in the act, or foil any terrorist plots.

And now we criticize the TSA for using "inadequately trained, low-paid employees for something as essential as security."

That is simply nonsense, 10 years there was little practical security on domestic US flights. That was the soft underbelly that the 9/11 hijackers exploited. Security on international flights was also lacking compared to e.g. the UK.

The TSA is a hysterical over-reaction.

The only true improvement I've seen are the reinforced cockpit doors. Everything else is just a smokescreen.

Look at the rest of the world, they've been doing airport security in a reasonably civilised manner since the Palestinians and Cubans started hijacking back in the 60s(?)

The threat profile of "prevent a hijacking" and "prevent a bomb with no metallic content from bringing down a plane" are very different.

I don't see how the TSA (as constituted, see below) can do the latter without the scanners ... it's how they're approaching this, most especially the deliberately punitive enhanced groping if you opt out or if the scanner can't image you properly that's one facet of the problem.

At its base, by looking for weapons instead of terrorists ... well, we've decided that profiling is an ultimate evil and cannot be continenced. Unless we reverse that....

Airlines.

Airlines are the key.

I bet you that if someone setup website offering reasons not to fly, along with alternatives to flying - along with a catchy domain - and publicised the hell out of it in stories like these, the pressure from the airlines would become so great that the TSA would be gone (in its current form) within a month.

How about REAL security, like the Isreilies implemented? People get through the biggest of airports in 30 or so minutes, no invasive screenings, the worst you will get is a metal detector sweep and an xray of your belongings.

Israel has good security, better than we have, for longer, with less tech, and no liberties violated, and people get through the airport faster. Wait, its cheaper too. Shit with all the cards stacked in their favor we look like idiots not at least modeling security after them. Sure we can improve on it, lets catch up first then 1-up em.

US Marshals? Actual law enforcement, or some organization that has some standards for admittance?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com