Just because they attend MIT doesn't mean they are smart

  • Thread starter Moonbear
  • Start date
  • #51
Stingray
Science Advisor
671
1
-She could wear it every day all day, guess what. You DONT wear that at an airport at this day and age, period.
Yeah, modern airports are paranoid. I agree that she should have thought of that, but her misjudgement is not a criminal act in any way (or shouldn't be).

-A cops job is NOT to know what a breadboard is or what kind of circuit is on the breadboard. This is an unreasonable assumption on your part.

-There was a guy who tried to blow up an airplane with C4 in his shoes a while back, remember? C4 looks like playdough and is exploded via electric signal, aka her 'circuit'.
Actually, it is their job to have some discretion. Airport security is supposed to be trained in these things to some degree. I don't expect much, but for the third time, I'm not really arguing about the initial response anyway. I'm saying that it is ridiculous that she was given criminal charges. There was obviously no ill intent here.

Also, almost every single person on a plane is carrying on at least one "circuit." Detonators could easily be hidden in just about anything. According to you, circuits are most dangerous when they're out in the open with exposed flashing lights. I guess they score extra points when on a geeky girl who's been sitting around for awhile. Does that really make any sense to you?
 
  • #52
794
1
A lot of republicans have a lot of money/investments in military/'war' ---they'd love/'may not mind' to see a 'police' state here in the US---(they'd make a lot MORE money)
 
  • #53
Stingray
Science Advisor
671
1
You will be just as dead in an airport as you will in a plane.
My point was that people don't think as much about their appearance when just picking someone up.

Clearly, her defense plan was plausible deniability - i.e. exactly what you just said.

I'm all for personal freedom as well, but come, this is goading.
Yeah, sure. Why exactly would anyone want to cause a scene like this? If she was really goading, she did a poor job of it.

I've carried things in my luggage that looked a heck of a lot more bomb-like than this, and nobody bothered me. I guess if someone decided to react, reporters could have written a story which sounded pretty incriminating. Unfortunately, my freedom is restricted by having to worry about these things now. That's a slightly different issue than arose here, but I think they're closely related.
 
  • #54
794
1
well, I guess (they could have thought), she could have been bin Laden in disguise

-------------------------------

They could hire those Blackwater guys to watch the airports, too, I guess

----------------------------------

and there could be WMD's in Iraq still, too, I guess


-----------------------------------

and I could win the lotto this weekend, too, I guess

-------------------------------------

hey, cyrus, if you don't think this is about personal freedoms, how soon are you moving to Iraq?
 
Last edited:
  • #55
2,985
15
The freedom to wear stupid things around your neck, the freedom to enter or leave a airport without your life being threatened by ignorant thugs with guns.


Not sure why that needs explaining. You think living in fear of the police is the way it should be?
(1) You dont have any freedom to wear stupid things around your neck if it is a possible threat to the public. I cant wear a gun on a neck chain, can I?

(2) My life isnt threatened by ignorant thugs with guns at the airport, ever. And Im middle eastern.

(3) This isnt a police state, nor does this issue have anything to do with it being a police state.
 
  • #56
2,985
15
Actually, it is their job to have some discretion. Airport security is supposed to be trained in these things to some degree. I don't expect much, but for the third time, I'm not really arguing about the initial response anyway. I'm saying that it is ridiculous that she was given criminal charges. There was obviously no ill intent here.
Just because there was no intent does not mean it is excusable.

Also, almost every single person on a plane is carrying on at least one "circuit." Detonators could easily be hidden in just about anything. According to you, circuits are most dangerous when they're out in the open with exposed flashing lights. I guess they score extra points when on a geeky girl who's been sitting around for awhile. Does that really make any sense to you?
I dont care if every single person has a circuit, whats that got to do with *anything*? They dont have what appears to be a makeshift explosive device with a possible explosive material in their hand.
 
  • #57
2,985
15
well, I guess (they could have thought), she could have been bin Laden in disguise

-------------------------------

They could hire those Blackwater guys to watch the airports, too, I guess

----------------------------------

and there could be WMD's in Iraq still, too, I guess


-----------------------------------

and I could win the lotto this weekend, too, I guess

-------------------------------------

hey, cyrus, if you don't think this is about personal freedoms, how soon are you moving to Iraq?
Are you retarded? Whats the point of this post....
 
  • #58
794
1
The point is:

she was a person, maybe stupid, but not a threat and not arrogant --would you have shot her?

----------
and then worried about it later? (because you were the one with the gun)

---------------

don't start name calling
 
Last edited:
  • #59
2,985
15
Do you not know how to read what I post?

Go back and read post #30.
 
  • #60
Evo
Mentor
23,146
2,748
The point is:

she was a person, maybe stupid, but not a threat and not arrogant --would you have shot her?

----------
and then worried about it later? (because you were the one with the gun)
I don't see the point to this question since she wasn't shot.

---------------

don't start name calling
You insulted cyrus when you told him to move to Iraq.

Both of you stop.
 
  • #61
794
1
Do you not know how to read what I post?

Go back and read post #30.
Ohhhh--I get it now---we're supposed to read everything that you write as being funny or sarcastic---OK---OK---I get it now---


Not sure if you're serious or sarcastic, but we don't shoot people dead for inappropriate reactions. Even in airports.

Wait, you were being sarcastic.
just like dave is saying


----------evo--you're right again
 
  • #62
2,985
15
..........I have not tried to be funny at all during my posts in this thread. :confused:
 
  • #63
FredGarvin
Science Advisor
5,066
8
So, we should live in constant fear for the rest of our lives because of the actions of a few people six years ago? Boston is not Baghdad. There haven't been bombs going off all the time (or ever, really). I think your attitude is a very disturbing one.
Hi. I'm Mr. Strawman. Nice to meet you. Should we live in fear? No. Should we accept more responsibility for our own actions and spend more than one nanosecond thinking about how our actions can have consequences? Yes.

I never said Boston was Baghdad. Again, going way too far with a statement. What I did say that you can not possibly think that Logan airport, being the central staging point for 9/11 attackers, would not have some of the most uptight security on the planet now. Hell, just going to Detroit Metro I make darned sure that there is absolutely nothing I am doing or carrying...or anything...that could make me look suspicious in any way shape nor form. I'll chalk some up to her being an idiot teenager, but come on.

Should this girl have a criminal record after this? No. Should she be in trouble? Absolutely. I'd have her doing community service until she got her PhD. If something were to happen and she was shot, I'd be sorry that it happened, but I wouldn't hold it against the security people either. They are put in a horrible situation with having to act very quickly. I would never want to be put in the situation of having to make a choice of shooting someone.
 
  • #64
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
41,833
956
I have been urged by a friend to point out that "bad judgement" is not the same as "stupid"! (I graduated from MIT, the friend did not.)
 
  • #65
794
1
Mr. Strawman--a better phrasing than I---(speed typing a response is not one of my forte's, and sometimes short is not sweet)

and I should have put a smiley face/(emote?) behind the that kind of (Iraq) comment, I guess...(I've seen that done before)
 
Last edited:
  • #66
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,898
2,404
My point was that people don't think as much about their appearance when just picking someone up.
Circuit board on chest, lump of clay in her hand. She was not being thoughtless.


Yeah, sure. Why exactly would anyone want to cause a scene like this? If she was really goading, she did a poor job of it.
Why would you say that? She was accosted by security with automatic weapons. She did an excellent job of it.

I've carried things in my luggage that looked a heck of a lot more bomb-like than this,
Were you goading them with it?



BTW, I don't know if it's occurred to anyone, but what the security thinks is not the only issue here. I'll bet one of the scenarios that Security considers is what would happen if bystanders (or, say an information rep) saw and reacted to a circuit board and lump of clay. Valid threat or no, that could have caused a stampede, and people could very well have gotten hurt in the ensuing chaos. Security would have every right to react to this very real danger.
 

Related Threads on Just because they attend MIT doesn't mean they are smart

Replies
44
Views
5K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
2K
Top