«12. . .110111112113114115116. . .270271»
We'll be serving Jalapeno poppers and playing RS. See ya there! =P
You should have thin mints and pizza too.
was actually thinking of peppermint patty tables and hot pocket cushions....
Now I'm hungry...
Post by Unnamed island state suppressed by 
Xyanth.
Have you ever wanted to get involved in some wimpy online parliament simulation roleplay, but don't know where to find one? Well NSGS (Nationstates General Senate) is the rp for you! In this unicameral version of the westminster system you will play as a senator in a fictional setting (in this case an island in the North Sea) where you fight for the legislation of your political philosophy to pass through the folketing!
I cannot explain that because you tried to put thoughts in my head that are not there. Let's see if I can straighten you out.
If those private establishments want to make body scanners a condition of entry to their premises that is well within their rights. My guess is that you have not been to many inner city nightclubs lately. Or Kennywood Amusement Park in Pittsburgh. It is my understanding that several Six Flags parks, Denver in particular, also use metal detectors when entering their premises.
This is really simple. If you don't like metal detectors or body scanners, take the bus. If you do not like the entry requirements on a private place of business, don't patronize the place.
This is kind of like me avoiding places that do not allow concealed carry by permit holders. I do not do so out of some moral outrage or to punish the establishments objecting to firearms. I do so because those are free fire zones for any whack job wanting to make a splash in the news. I'd rather be in an environment where the bad guy may encounter at least a little resistance.
The choice is free for you to make.
The thing about airports is that in the panic after 9/11 the government set up the incompetent (and often abusive) force that messes people about - and which is totally useless at dealing with terrorists (as many tests have shown - just about anything can be smuggled past the government people). I have thought, when standing in line with my boots and belt in a tray, "it would be easy to get round this system in such-and-such a way". But I have never pointed it out - as the boneheads in charge would most likely arrest me as a terrorist.
As for fighting to the death for freedom.
Errr - would it not be more straightforward to vote for someone who actually has a record of supporting smaller government?
Want a flat tax and an end to Federal Departments of Commerce (Corporate Welfare), Education (Common Core), Energy (more Corporate Welfare subsidies), and Housing and Urban Development (social engineering) - then vote for Ted Cruz. After all he has been attacked by the Republican establishment (not just the Dems) for years.
People who proclaim that they will fight to the death - and then can not even be bothered to go out to vote, are a bit annoying.
"But there is a never a candidate who will stand against the Republican (as well as Democrat) establishment - for smaller government".
Well there he is - go and support him. Or, if Ted is too brown for some people, support Rand Paul - who has a similar record of opposing big government.
Or just shut up about the "fight to the death" stuff. People who are not even prepared to vote for smaller government are hardly likely to be prepared to die fighting for it.
Amen. And amen, you nailed it. Before 9/11 I worked for a company that, among other things, ran security audits. Nothing pisses off the head of security more than to show him holes in his security. And abusive, absolutely. Cattle being herded from the truck to the slaughter are treated with more respect.
First: many of the examples I gave are public institutions, others that deal with the public are subject to constitutional regulations.
Second: I stated that you support body scanners there, which you do. I said nothing about there existence there. I know they are there, it doesn't mean I support them.
Third: which bus do I take to get from NY to Bermuda? I forget.
For the record I don't mind metal detectors. I mind body scanners. That is why I opt out every time.
Lmao. I think I straightened you out.
The real and actual issue here is not that metal detectors and body scanners exist, its that the government is requiring them in both public and private venues. The whole idea of it is inherently wrong.
Uhm... Not so much.
Really? Show me in where it says that a private institution is prohibited from running whatever entry requirements they choose? As for public institutions, whether or not I approve is irrelevant. The Supreme Court approved airport, and by default courthouse and other public building security searches. That makes it the law of the land.
What you said was,
Neither statement is true, nor are they mutually exclusive. Contrary to what a reasonable person would assume from what you wrote, your freedom to travel is not infringed by the searches at the airport. Airport searches are intrusive, inconvenient and sometimes abusive. There is also a great deal of doubt as to how much good the security really does. In fact I would rather piss on a spark plug than fly commercial these days. But the fact remains that you can still get on that airplane and fly anywhere you want.
Another thing that no one can really count up is the number of events actually prevented because of the security at the airport. To tell the truth, we don't know if that number is zero or in the thousands. That is because it is hard to count things that didn't happen. We may never know one way or the other.
But based on the events ranging from the airliners going to Cuba in the 60's through Sept. 11th, it is clear that something needs to be done. The questions is how much and when.
There is no constitutional right to fly. You have the right of free travel, but no where in that document does it say you get to fly on demand.
But, since you asked, you take a bus to a port, then...
https://www.ncl.com/cruise-destinations/bermuda-cruises
https://thinkingofbermuda.com/bermuda-travel/new-york-bermuda/
http://directlinecruises.com/destinations/bermuda-cruises.htm
I respect your absolute right to do so. Alas, you may find yourself the recipient of extra scrutiny. I'm at the age that I don't really care if someone is looking down my pants. As someone that usually flies last minute one way, I usually get the executive treatment every time.
The government requires them at airports. The federal government does not require them anywhere else. Some states require them at the courthouses. Some county and state courts have done it on their own.
The idea is not wrong. If you are running a large NFL stadium, the last thing you want is a shooter on the premises. It is their property. Not only do the have the right to set conditions for entry, the liability for allowing a shooter on the premesis could close the park forever.
let me rephrase that. If a business like a sporting stadium or a private institution like a church wishes to maintain these measures, whether at the expense of seeming off-putting to their customers or patronage or not, it is completely and totally their right. The problem lies in the government thinking it is their right to make these decisions for businesses like the airlines, and inevitably everyone else. For a group of people to decide whats best for everyone else IS inherently wrong.
On another note, the rebuttals in this conversation have gotten a bit dull, so may we move on to a new topic?
For one person or a minority to decide what is right for the group is wrong too. Kind of like you deciding that airport security is unnecessary and should be abolished.
As much as people complain about airport security, if you ask them whether or not they want it there, the vast majority of fliers will say "yes."
But, I'll put the ball in your court. By the power vested in me by no one in particular, I place you and charge of all things with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities that go with the title. How do you propose to keep your airliners safe from hijackings, jihadi terrorists wanting to turn the planes into weapons, or those that want to leave the odd bomb laying around in them. Keep in mind your political future is going right down the crapper if so much as one airplane has a bad day at the hands of a terrorist.
I look forward to your solution so we can put all this behind us.
Perhaps instead of having my body violated and property abused and stolen by TSA operatives, i could simply take my 45 on board and when the bad guy makes his move, I eliminate with extreme prejudice. And from there spread this philosophy to everywhere else in the nation, such as schools, grocers, movie theaters, what have you. That way the main casualties we'll have are the terrorists themselves. Other people will die of course. People die. These things happen.
On an unrelated note, since when was profanity banned on NS, tried to type S. H. I. T., but it wouldn't let me lol
Technically no one can "steal" your body. I do agree with weapons being allowed on board the only problem is laws concerning other countries when talking international flights. And it's probably not the smartest idea to shoot a gun onboard incase you miss and punch a hole through a wall.
probably not, but you see my point, yes? Deterrence is one of the best policies we could possibly adopt as a society.
Ahh thank you, Any idea where i might find this list? Might get a laugh out of it.
What a lot of shyte.
Not being snarky or subtextual or rhetorical here, but how do you decide the topics of the issues Xyanth? Current events or something like that I'm guessing. Just curious.
Another thing. I would just like to say that I admire the conviction you write with. When im reading your responses i actually feel like you are speaking to me, and its really fantastic. Regardless of the difference or validity of our ideals, and the fact that ive never met you in person, I respect you and thank you for the place I have in this region.
Are communists allowed in this group? I just joined from the Universal Alliance after being asked to endorse a socialist.
«12. . .110111112113114115116. . .270271»
Advertisement
