DublinTexas
can edit posts
- Messages
- 352
You seem pretty sure there DublinTexas that it is all about getting people to shop more.
What are you basing your convictions on?
Ceist Beag said:My point is I don't fear being blown up on a plane - 9/11 has no impact on my personal opinion on the safety of flying - if I was to believe all these security checks are necessary I'd imagine I'd be a bit of a nervous wreck! I think it's all just window dressing to make it look like they're doing something to make us all feel nice and safe.
So why use it at all is the obvious question?Which is why its highly unlikely that your fingerprints will ever be used alone as an ID check.
aaargh!!! That's the whole point. If your fingerprints are compromised you can't change them. Incidental does your social security and bank account details change regularly? Because that was part of the compromised detailsBut so what? Peoples details change with time. Its just plain paranoia to worry about data that is 10 years old showing up somewhere.
So what are the chances of your details getting into the wrong hand? It's not just the government's data that is being compromised. It's already costing the UK economy [broken link removed]You missed the point of that entirely - what I meant is that statistically its unlikely my details will get into the wrong hands, nothing to do with Im fine Jack.
Wait a sec. You are supporting the measures being enforced at airports (such as removing your shoes, taking you belt off, moving you shampoo to 100ml jars, bringing you hair gel in 50ml containers, taking fingerprints, and I guess wouldn't have problems taking photos, etc..) to prevent against what? Something like 1 in 18 million chance of being on a flight that gets hijacked.Clearly you have a sense of paranoia ,
I have the freedom to stand naked in the rain in a field full of thistles and that makes me happy...
Was that you I saw yesterday Teabag?!
Do you want to expand on your vague reply?So Scotland is the safest place in the world then is it?
Wait a sec. You are supporting the measures being enforced at airports (such as removing your shoes, taking you belt off, moving you shampoo to 100ml jars, bringing you hair gel in 50ml containers, taking fingerprints, and I guess wouldn't have problems taking photos, etc..) to prevent against what? Something like 1 in 18 million chance of being on a flight that gets hijacked.
Who here is paranoid?
So why use it at all is the obvious question?
aaargh!!! That's the whole point. If your fingerprints are compromised you can't change them. Incidental does your social security and bank account details change regularly? Because that was part of the compromised details
So what are the chances of your details getting into the wrong hand? It's not just the government's data that is being compromised. It's already costing the UK economy stg1.7billion
Wait a sec. You are supporting the measures being enforced at airports (such as removing your shoes, taking you belt off, moving you shampoo to 100ml jars, bringing you hair gel in 50ml containers, taking fingerprints, and I guess wouldn't have problems taking photos, etc..) to prevent against what? Something like 1 in 18 million chance of being on a flight that gets hijacked.
Who here is paranoid?
Paranoia is mentioned a fair bit in posts above, but perhaps people aren't too worried about loosing elements of their freedom? People have always been willing to give up freedom for the illusion of security. Humans are quite partial to order and the notion of controlling their own destiny.Simply as a response to the original post I stated I dont care if I am fingerprinted at an airport - so what if I am? I dont suffer from enough paranoia to worry about it.
Paranoia is mentioned a fair bit in posts above, but perhaps people aren't too worried about loosing elements of their freedom? People have always been willing to give up freedom for the illusion of security. Humans are quite partial to order and the notion of controlling their own destiny.
From a personal standpoint, I don't like any erosion of my freedom, unless it is accompanied by a damn good reason, and done by people that I trust.
On the matter of the inconvenience of all these checks- the sooner I can afford my own plane the better!
You could just as easily argue as to how it takes away from your freedom when governments gather large amounts of data about you and allow private companies the use of that data.How does it take away from your freedom to submit to being fingerprinted at an airport?
You could just as easily argue as to how it takes away from your freedom when governments gather large amounts of data about you and allow private companies the use of that data.
Do you believe it would take away from your freedom if your DNA was stored on file (by any agency)?
I suppose it depends on how you define freedom. How do you define it?
That is an interesting point to raise when dealing with the topic in question. I guess when considering the issue we should do well to consider all our positions in this regard. When attempting to win a debate we can talk around in circles while mentioning and referring to nothing at all, or we can ask our opponent a continuing stream of questions in order to avoid stating our own position on the matter, perhaps with the hope that they will undermine their position with their answer.
How do you define freedom?
You can make your stand and we will sheepishly go about our business being treated like animals having to wait 15mins at airports and having to identify ourselves and other invasive horrors but at least we can go to new york! i won't be making excuses either because I'm still not exactly sure of what I'm supposed to be making excuses for?
Fair enough - in order to prove that you are not trying to debate round in circles, what is your definition of freedom? That will give us a place to start!MrMan I totally agree with that last bit - Im quite confused about all this upset at loss of freedom etc... I just cannot see how my freedom is being compromised by me giving my fingerprint in an airport. But when I ask anyone they just get all riled up and seem to think Im somehow trying to subversively debate them round in circles. Bizarre!
The stand comes early or late - fingerprints may or may not be a big deal. But if you don't take a stand at the start, how far do you allow these 'security' measures to go? Perhaps a short interrogation at the airport if you fit a certain description? Perhaps denial of permission to fly.You can make your stand and we will sheepishly go about our business being treated like animals having to wait 15mins at airports and having to identify ourselves and other invasive horrors but at least we can go to new york! i won't be making excuses either because I'm still not exactly sure of what I'm supposed to be making excuses for?
Fair enough - in order to prove that you are not trying to debate round in circles, what is your definition of freedom?
The stand comes early or late - fingerprints may or may not be a big deal. But if you don't take a stand at the start, how far do you allow these 'security' measures to go? Perhaps a short interrogation at the airport if you fit a certain description? Perhaps denial of permission to fly.
And with fingerprints, would you be happy to be questioned if your fingerprints brought you under suspicion? Or would you feel more justification was needed than fingerprints alone?
If we don't question these measures then they will be brought in with no thought and no safeguards. We must question these things in order to prove how vital they are. Or aren't. but by not questioning we are complacent.
According to that, not allowing my to travel without taking my fingerprints certainly reduces my freedom. I no longer have full domination over my public and private life. In other words, taking fingerprints at airports brings us one step closer to a totalitarian state.Political freedom is the absence of interference with the sovereignty of an individual by the use of coercion or aggression. The members of a free society would have full dominion over their public and private lives. The opposite of a free society would be a totalitarian state, which highly restricts political freedom in order to regulate almost every aspect of behavior. In this sense ‘freedom’ refers solely to the relation of men to other men, and the only infringement on it is coercion by men
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?