|
|
Post by tygerarmy on Apr 21, 2011 10:26:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Apr 21, 2011 10:29:11 GMT -5
Well, at least they dropped the charges.
|
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Apr 21, 2011 10:58:00 GMT -5
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is largely why I won't be flying into the US anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Apr 21, 2011 11:10:25 GMT -5
Well, at least we knew he had no bombs on him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Apr 21, 2011 11:18:17 GMT -5
On the one hand, present TSA procedures are incredibly questionable in their constitutionality and need challenging.
On the other hand, this kid sounds like a raging douche of "Don't Taze Me Bro" proportions. The kind of college kid who will stand up for how right he is regardless of whether or not he is doing so in the appropriate fashion in the right time and place.
|
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Apr 21, 2011 11:37:34 GMT -5
On the one hand, present TSA procedures are incredibly questionable in their constitutionality and need challenging. On the other hand, this kid sounds like a raging douche of "Don't Taze Me Bro" proportions. The kind of college kid who will stand up for how right he is regardless of whether or not he is doing so in the appropriate fashion in the right time and place. If not for the people who will stand up about how right they are regardless of time and place, then who? You could say the same about pretty much anyone today regarded as a civil rights trail blazer. |
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Apr 21, 2011 11:44:59 GMT -5
There's a difference between sitting peacefully at lunch counter and showily stripping to your underpants in the middle of a crowded airport. The dude went there planning to make an absolute spectacle of himself and cause a headache for the all the people behind him in line, most of whom are just as unhappy about the present state of affairs as he is.. Likewise, the TSA agents you meet at the security check point have about as much control over policy they have to follow as the cashier at Target does and making their life unpleasant will cause about as much change in that policy as screaming at the cashier does.
|
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Apr 21, 2011 12:03:05 GMT -5
There's a difference between sitting peacefully at lunch counter and showily stripping to your underpants in the middle of a crowded airport. The dude went there planning to make an absolute spectacle of himself and cause a headache for the all the people behind him in line, most of whom are just as unhappy about the present state of affairs as he is.. Likewise, the TSA agents you meet at the security check point have about as much control over policy they have to follow as the cashier at Target does and making their life unpleasant will cause about as much change in that policy as screaming at the cashier does. I dunno... enough people started doing this sort of thing in airport security lines and you might get the issue addressed more quickly than with polite letters to the editor. I'm thinking Ghandi-esq passive resistance may be the right way to go on this one. |
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Apr 21, 2011 12:09:17 GMT -5
I'm thinking Ghandi-esq passive resistance may be the right way to go on this one. But this wasn't passive resistance. This was incredibly active resistance. This was protest designed to make the protester as famous as the cause he is trying to advance. Which is annoying as hell. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Apr 21, 2011 12:17:26 GMT -5
Good god that article is badly written.
|
|
|
|
Post by caseagainstfaith on Apr 21, 2011 12:27:15 GMT -5
I'm thinking Ghandi-esq passive resistance may be the right way to go on this one. But this wasn't passive resistance. This was incredibly active resistance. This was protest designed to make the protester as famous as the cause he is trying to advance. Which is annoying as hell. I think he was there not so much even as a political stunt but from the way the article is written anyway you could easily think he was just in it to try and get a quick 250,000 dollar pay off by suing them. |
|
|
|
Post by dakotabob on Apr 21, 2011 12:34:40 GMT -5
Don't grope me, bro!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Apr 21, 2011 13:23:09 GMT -5
On the one hand, present TSA procedures are incredibly questionable in their constitutionality and need challenging. On the other hand, this kid sounds like a raging douche of "Don't Taze Me Bro" proportions. The kind of college kid who will stand up for how right he is regardless of whether or not he is doing so in the appropriate fashion in the right time and place. Sometimes inappropriate is necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Apr 21, 2011 13:37:50 GMT -5
Sometimes inappropriate is necessary. I would be intensely shocked if this kid's sole or even primary motivation was protest or advancing the cause. He's chasing headlines for himself, and making those with reasonable objections to current TSA procedures look like assholes by association. The kid who gaze us "Don't Taze Me Bro" was asking questions about the 2004 election and Bush presidency that many reasonable people would want to hear the answered to. Doesn't make him less of a douchenozzle. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 21, 2011 18:10:58 GMT -5
"Don't Taze Me Bro!" got tazed because he was physically resisting restraint and being an utter prick. This guy? He was holding a peaceful protest and there's no law against being in your underwear. He voluntarily submitted to a strip search.
Unfortunately, the people who have no control over a situation may sometimes have to undergo mild discomfort. It's not like the guy tried to do anything to specifically target the TSA agent.
And why does it fucking matter what his motivation was? So fucking what if he wants attention or an "easy" $250,000? If his actions can get rid of the completely needless TSA "security" procedures, why should it be of any importance if he was doing it for fame or money? Sometimes the motivation takes a back seat to the ends.
|
|
