Re: [privacy] U.S. Government to Ask Courts to Toss Phone

[coderman <coderman () gmail com>]

On 6/12/06, Brian Loe <knobdy () gmail com> wrote:
> ...
> The odds are slim to the point of these searches being, at best, a
> waste of time. At worst, naturally, they may be a distraction from the
> stereotypical guy wearing big shoes. If they hold to an "unbiased",
> every fourth passenger (or whatever)...

but you see what would happen if "they" decided that children under 12
or frail elderly over 80 were not to be searched, right?  the drug
mules are an interesting view into this situation (i can dig up a
paper if you're interested)

likewise, the 'SSSS' designation is fairly pointless since the bad guy
knows not to attempt to board if he gets one stamped on his ticket.

i don't know what the right solution is, but it's not a free pass for
children and the elderly (this would be abused) nor is it the 'SSSS'
based searches.

armed pilots behind reinforced cockpits and air marshals at least
provide some degree of actual protection.


> ... However, I did let my daughter go on a trip
> with a friend to Florida and we had to get a non-DL ID so that she
> could board the plane!!!! This isn't Vietnam, and my 12 year old
> daughter doesn't look a thing like a Muslim/extremist/terrorist.

did you have to or did they tell you it was required?  it's my
understanding that you still do not have to show ID to fly, though
this will get you the third degree search and you can expect them to
pressure you for ID and possibly even tell you it is required.

you don't _have_ to, though :)
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy