> > they hit the street in uniforms, cars, and
> > carrying a gun. The net for who you can kill with
> > impunity has been opened wide,
> > and all you have to do is invoke words like '9-11',
> > 'national security' and 'suspected terrorist'
> > and most critics will retreat into a reverential
> > silence and stop asking awkward questions of
> > authority.
>
>
>I do not know what world you live in, Paul, but I've
>traveled a bit around the world, and what I see is
>highly professional airline and security dealing
>usually courteiusly and always firmly with not always
>reasonable people. If anyone is panicking or blowing
>a gasket - it is the passengers.
Okay, I was talking about 2 groups here, the security apparatus that exists in every airport and elsewhere these days and the bunch of sheeple in the media who are cowed into submission by people like Bush et. al. who accuse anyone who questions them of being irresponsible or in league with terrorists. What world have you been living in since 9/11?
>Just to give you an example, on one of my more recent
>flight my travel companion was told by the flight
>attendant to move her carry on luggage to the overhead
>bin, because we were sitting in th eemergency exit
>row. She got pissed like a little child and started
>throwing fits - first arguing with the attendant, and
>then lying in the floor next to the exit. The
>attendants handled the situation very professionally
>(after all, they were British :)), and finaly my
>travel companion came to her senses, but that is not
>always the case. I've seen departures being delayed
>because some idiot refused to leave the bathroom, cops
>being called to calm irate passengers, or people being
>kicked out of trains for not having proper travel
>documents.
Okay, I've done my fair share of travelling inn North America, and some overseas let me tell you what happens to me, regularly. I sometimes travel with a camera bag with 3 cameras in it, 2 SLR's and a twin lens reflex. The TLR is about 40 years old and totally manual. I've come close to being strip searched more than once in U.S. airports because after being told repeatedly to 'turn it on' I cannot do so. I shoot color film in one camera, B+W in another. The B+W camera has a red filter over the lens, it improves contrast with this film. This filter makes some of the security people almost apoplectic, again more than once I've overheard whispered conversations about this camera and heard the words 'heat seeking' and 'infrared'.
I don't expect these security people to know the minutiae of modern photography, but I do expect them to be able to understand words like 'no battery' and 'filter' . In many cases the people hired are obviously low wage workers who barely speak english (I grew up bilingual and next to Quebec so spare me lectures about being Anglo-centric). That was part of my point, supposedly 9/11 was a turning point in airport and air travel security, a turning point staffed by the lowest bidder. Whooo-hoo capitalism!
Quite frankly I'm surprised something like, this hasn't happened before; dealing with a confused and potentially delusional person is difficult even for well paid professionals trained to do so. The situation Miami has all the all hallmarks of a situation of people way out of their depth going very bad very quickly.
>Most of the problems arise from the fact that some
>people act like spoiled brats when told to follow the
>rules and orders of the airline personnel. They do
>not understand that they implicitly consent to follow
>them when they buy the ticket and board the plane,
>just as they implicitly consent to sobriety tests when
>signing for a driver license.
This man would likely have trouble telling you who he was, let alone understanding something like implicit consent. You cannot compare this man with some fuck up. whiny, spoiled yuppy traveller. Lecturing about rules implicit or otherwise is a waste of time; he was incapable of following them, a point his wife was trying to make.
>So if someone is unable or unwilling to follow these
>rules, he can either refrain from flying or otherwise
>accept the consequences of his behavior that may vary
>from being fined, to being "deplaned" in some remote
>location (like St.Johns' in New Foundland if you are
>on on trans-atlantic flight), to being shot if you
>appear to pose a security threat. Most reasonable
>people accept and even demand that, because it makes
>air travel more secure. Only crackpots and loonies
>who are paranoid about their "rights" may feel
>constrained by that.
Guess I'm unreasonable then. I don't 'demand' we kill the deranged.
>One shoul dalways demand and enforce professional
>conduct by security and law enforcement personnel, but
>that should not be an excuse for unreasonable demands
>of omniscience and perfect judgment in every
>situation, let alone for juvenile bitching each time
>the rules are being enforced. And if someobody gets
>accidentally hurt in the process? Shit happens, we do
>not live in a perfect world. Live with it or do not
>leave your home.
He wasn't accidently hurt. He, and that poor bastard in London were killed. When the fuck did this society become the wild freaking west?
PC
>Wojtek
N Paul Childs 5967-157 Avenue Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5Y 2P3
e-fax 413-683-9725 _______________________________________________________ 'Gee thanks, your validation means oh, so much to me'.
-Art 'Bones' MacDesalavo