TSA - the other side of the coin
-
Gregory.Gadow wrote:
The trials at Nuremburg showed how well that defense works.
Hardly a good comparison, Gregory! :~
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Hardly a good comparison, Gregory!
With regards to scope, you are most certainly correct. With regards to using "I'm only following orders" as an excuse to commit mass violations of people's rights, I think the comparison is valid.
-
TSA workers face verbal abuse from travelers[^] From the article:
In Indianapolis, for example, a TSO was punched by a passenger who didn’t like the new screening process
I guess you gotta feel for the TSOs here, I bet most of them are not particularly gladdened at the thought of having to feel up people's genitals all day long.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
One of the bases of body search policies is that something incriminating must be seen before the right to search is granted, as the "something incriminating" implies a status of "may not be innocent", which is legally quite a long way away from "innocent". If my employer ordered me to physically assault an innocent person, I would refuse, and he wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I can't help thinking of all the fine Germans who manned the concentration camps. "I was told to do it" is no excuse for a real man. If just one of them stood up and said "No.", the policy would vanish within days.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Gregory.Gadow wrote:
The trials at Nuremburg showed how well that defense works.
Hardly a good comparison, Gregory! :~
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Hardly a good comparison, Gregory!
It is actually a very precise comparison. Forcing innocent people to suffer indignities or unjust treatment because "my boss told me to" is completely unacceptable behaviour -- especially if it is in the cause of "national security". It really is for things like this that all of us lost family members in the war.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I would have responded with the exact same line. Why do people always complain it's not a perfect analogy? Of course there's a difference between patting somebody's genitals and gassing men, women and children; nobody claimed they are the same, otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. If the two things were identical, there wouldn't be a need for an analogy. Why do they say it's like comparing apples and oranges? Would you rather compare an apple and... another apple?
Cheers, विक्रम (Have gone past my troika - 4 CCCs!) "We have already been through this, I am not going to repeat myself." - fat_boy, in a global warming thread :doh:
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Hardly a good comparison, Gregory!
With regards to scope, you are most certainly correct. With regards to using "I'm only following orders" as an excuse to commit mass violations of people's rights, I think the comparison is valid.
Gregory.Gadow wrote:
With regards to using "I'm only following orders" as an excuse to commit mass violations of people's rights, I think the comparison is valid.
It's more likely, "I am only doing this so I can keep my job and make sure my family does not end up homeless". What's truly bizarre is how people are 1 voting me merely because I said I feel sorry for those lower level TSA employees who have to do this despite not wanting to. Just shows how people think here. :~
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
-
One of the bases of body search policies is that something incriminating must be seen before the right to search is granted, as the "something incriminating" implies a status of "may not be innocent", which is legally quite a long way away from "innocent". If my employer ordered me to physically assault an innocent person, I would refuse, and he wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I can't help thinking of all the fine Germans who manned the concentration camps. "I was told to do it" is no excuse for a real man. If just one of them stood up and said "No.", the policy would vanish within days.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark Wallace wrote:
If just one of them stood up and said "No.", the policy would vanish within days.
You've got to be kidding :-)
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
-
I responded to what I understood was your criticism of his analogy. I didn't vote you down though.
Cheers, विक्रम (Have gone past my troika - 4 CCCs!) "We have already been through this, I am not going to repeat myself." - fat_boy, in a global warming thread :doh:
-
I responded to what I understood was your criticism of his analogy. I didn't vote you down though.
Cheers, विक्रम (Have gone past my troika - 4 CCCs!) "We have already been through this, I am not going to repeat myself." - fat_boy, in a global warming thread :doh:
Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:
I didn't vote you down though.
People just don't appreciate it when you show sympathy for the enemy :-) Ironically, I am dead against the new TSA procedures myself, which is probably a moot point here!
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
-
Gregory.Gadow wrote:
With regards to using "I'm only following orders" as an excuse to commit mass violations of people's rights, I think the comparison is valid.
It's more likely, "I am only doing this so I can keep my job and make sure my family does not end up homeless". What's truly bizarre is how people are 1 voting me merely because I said I feel sorry for those lower level TSA employees who have to do this despite not wanting to. Just shows how people think here. :~
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
What's truly bizarre is how people are 1 voting me merely because I said I feel sorry for those lower level TSA employees who have to do this despite not wanting to. Just shows how people think here.
"I didn't want to lose my income" is a much weaker excuse than "I was just following orders." In the case of the TSA agents, they are free men and women: not conscripts, not slaves, not prisoners. There is no compulsion forcing them to willfully violate civil rights. And for what its worth, I'm not the one downvoting you either. I do not share your sympathy, but I see no reason to hate on people who are more charitable than me.
-
One of the bases of body search policies is that something incriminating must be seen before the right to search is granted, as the "something incriminating" implies a status of "may not be innocent", which is legally quite a long way away from "innocent". If my employer ordered me to physically assault an innocent person, I would refuse, and he wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I can't help thinking of all the fine Germans who manned the concentration camps. "I was told to do it" is no excuse for a real man. If just one of them stood up and said "No.", the policy would vanish within days.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark Wallace wrote:
If just one of them stood up and said "No.", the policy would vanish within days.
Unfortunately not. Given the current hard times in the United States, the TSA human resources department probably has five applications for every current employee, and at least three of those are bullies, perverts or people who would pimp their children if it meant a steady income. If just one of the current employees stood up and said "No," the employee would vanish within hours and be replaced within days. The problem is not that TSA employees are not protesting: they are, and pretty steadily. The problem is that there are too many people willing -- eager -- to do these searches that the protesters are just fired.