Comments on: No in-flight entertainment for security reasons?

By: Stormy Peters: Do they think our enemies are stupid? | Full-Linux.com

Stormy Peters: Do they think our enemies are stupid? | Full-Linux.com — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:03:14 +0000

[...] to Lucky and confirmed by many people online: many international United aircraft have their in-flight [...]

By: AS

AS — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:27:20 +0000

@sjs – can you please elaborate on your comment “racial (and certainly not religious) profiling is *NOT* unconstitutional per se.”

The First Amendment provides for freedom of religion and was one of the main reasons the pilgrims came to America.

The Fourteenth Amendment provides for Equal Protection, effectively to reinforce the point that ‘all men are created equal’.

Taken together, these two clauses in the Constitution would mean that individuals are free to have any religion (or to not have one at all) and that they are to be provided equal rights by Federal (and State) governments. Religious profiling certainly seems to countervene these rights. The government does not have the right to interfere with their freedom of movement (which is also provided for, via the Fourth Amendment) on this basis.

I didn’t go to law school, but maybe you could tell us why this is invalid?

By: sjs

sjs — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:33:03 +0000

Hate to tell you guys this, but racial (and certainly not religious) profiling is *NOT* unconstitutional per se. Better head back to law school…

By: Pat

Pat — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:43:43 +0000

And Channel 9 was on for my flight from HNL-SFO. I thanked the Captain personally, twice.

By: iadtowhere

iadtowhere — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:30:21 +0000

I know you were worried about Channel 9 but I’m on United 327 Lax to Iad right now and Channel 9 is still on!

By: AS

AS — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:48:21 +0000

@Ralph – not sure if you are trying to split hairs, but you suggested that young, muslim males be singled out. Maybe that’s not racial, but religious profiling (and also unconstitutional).

The practical problem with all of this is that it is a severe waste of resources. You can’t single people out for what they look like. Selecting someone for screening based on what they look like (for example, a young, muslim male), is not smart security. It targets a vast majority of innocent people, and others will easily slip through the cracks. We’ll always be one step behind, and that’s why appearance-based profiling just doesn’t work (and it’s unconstitutional). It’s reactive, and its a waste of resources, just like the random selection of kids and the elderly to meet screening quotas.

Screening resources should not be targeting people based on appearance, they must target based on suspicious behavior. That does work. It focuses resources on the right things and people. But it requires a lot of extra training and supervision. Israel is said to use ex-counterintelligence resources for profiling and air security. I don’t know TSA’s hiring guidelines but I imagine it’s a high-school education, not much more.

As we both seem to agree, TSA is not sophisticated enough to put anything like what is required in place. TSA is also apparently unwilling to provide the transparency and accountability required to support an effective security program. Instead, we get TSA security theater, with visible wasted resources at airport, secret rules and arbitrary enforcement, and very little confidence that we are safer because of it.

By: Pat

Pat — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:38:45 +0000

Pleased to report that there is no insanity at HNL today. It seemed to be the standard security procedure and none at the gate. I was even allowed to board early to stow my medical equipment in the closet AND the FA told me to stow the wheelie in the overhead bin =:O

By: JOSH

JOSH — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:11:48 +0000

To add one more thing:

I THINK THEY WILL NOT ALLOWED US TO TAKE PHOTO ONBOARD ANYMORE.

By: Ralph

Ralph — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 22:55:56 +0000

@AS I don’t recall using the word “racial” in my opinion about profiling. Muslim/Islam is not a race – it is a faith, behavior, choice. And yes, the TSA is too incompetent to implement it anyway. But even the AP notes: “The Obama administration promised … to review security procedures at airports and the government’s system for checking SUSPICIOUS TRAVELERS [emphasis added] after….”
Behavior profiling, selecting certain people for additional screening (do granny and the 6-year-old really need a pat-down?), is not racial profiling. It’s smart security. It’s targeting “suspicious travelers,” as good security should.
Oh, I forgot, we’re talking about TSA and the government.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:54:06 +0000

I agree with HunterSFO.