Why? It’s a fucking brilliant plan that I’m sure the NRA would endorse.
Unless you live in the ghetto, then yes. Your house’s own security systems have very little effect on the actual security you witness.
You undermine your arguments with horseshit comments like that.
Well taco, since one of your boys is now arguing that locking doors, acquiring and implementing security systems, and stationing an armed guard outside one’s home actually does nothing to make one safer, I guess arguing with many from this crew is a pretty useless, horseshit-filled endeavor.
The fact that nobody ever calls out anyone else on stuff like this, if they agree with their basic position, is very disappointing. I was hoping for a little more intellectual honesty here.
Maybe they would, young man, but I wouldn’t.
Ok, if you live on a deserted island, does the act of stationing an armed guard outside your hut make you safer?
Why not? It’s like an air marshalls on ALL of the planes where someone wants to carry a piece. Hell, since armed marshalls clearly rock at preventing non-hijacking terrorism, I would probably buy a walther especially for my next flight!
We should probably count ourselves lucky that the Air Marshals program wasn’t contracted out to Haliburton or Blackwater/XE…
At any rate, Smashy, it about proportionate response. Guys flips you off, you don’t break his finger. Hear some guy three blocks away bought a nasty, aggressive pit bull, you don’t start packing heat. The dramatic is not necessarily the important, far far more people died as a result of our response to 9/11. Many more die every day from malaria, etc… Is it because they are people who can’t afford air fare, that makes their lives less important, less compelling of dramatic response?
A sense of proportion shows wisdom. And I gather that much of the rest of the world would breath a sigh of relief if America would stop behaving like a hysterical diva with thermonuclear weapons.
Well, it would be good if you employed a little intellectual honesty of your own. “One of your boys?” What the fuck?
Also, I seem to be able to understand what he is driving at, even if you don’t.
Meanwhile, on more important matters:
Dude, you and me may have our differences, but that would be a sig line of great beauty.
You’ll have to illuminate me, El. He’s ranting on about some kind of desert island, etc., I can’t follow this stuff, I guess I don’t speak lefty well enough.
As for the ‘boys’ comment, my point is, the vast majority of posters on these threads all seem to come at issues from only one side (yeah, I know, I’m sure it’s the only possible side on which any thinking/intelligent person would be on…). On the UHC threads, it’s me and one or two other posters against dozens of ranting lunatics (well, not all, I particularly like the intelligent, if misguided, M4M’s thoughts). I can’t speak for the lurkers of course.
If there were eight home robberies in the United States last year, you’d have to be pretty goddamn paranoid to invest in a security system or an armed guard, wouldn’t you?
If there were eight home robberies in the United States last year, you’d have to be pretty goddamn paranoid to invest in a security system or an armed guard, wouldn’t you?
Er… quite easily. We count the number of bombs detected by luggage scanning. We count the number of attempted hijackings prevented by air marshals.
Now, I’m not a math whiz, or anything, but I used a calculator and came up with 0.
You are using the wrong algorithm, of course. Might want to re-read the post you were quoting.
I won’t give you the answer, I think you’ll feel better if you get there on your own.
Go ahead, I’ll wait.
Edit to add: Does my tone come across as cocky? I hope not…
I would hope not too, considering that you’re an idiot who is wrong about most everything he posts
You are asking how many hijackings and bombings were prevented by Bush Administration security measures. I am telling you the number of bombings and hijackings prevented by US airport security and air marshals since 2001 is zero.
If you want me to refine the count to include the number of bombings and hijackings prevented specifically by Bush Administration security measures, as opposed to all security measures, I will be happy to do so.
However, I think you may be disappointed to find out that dividing zero does not generally result in a larger number. In fact, I can confidently predict that any given set out of zero is likely to be… zero.
I think Smashy’s referring to those theoretical attempts that were never attempted because would-be attempters knew about the security measures. Sort of like the old joke (paraphrased because my memory sucks):
Q: Why is there a sign in your yard that says “No Elephants Allowed”?
A: To keep elephants away, of course.
Q: But there aren’t any elephants around!
A: See? It works!
Kind of like locks on doors on huts on deserted islands.
Just to be clear. We know that according to a link above they’re only flying on about 3% of domestic flights. Heck, lets make it 5% so if we just put them on all domestic flights the cost jumps to about 16b of the 43b budget. Now, we have to add all the international flights. I wish I had the kind of jack that can even consider 16b a small amount of money much less putting air marshals on every flight that lands in America. I know it’s a shocker but we live in a time where that money is needed for far more pressing problems than boot boy and crotch commando. Once we solve all of those though, hey, I’m right there on the overkill. Anything to mollify the easily frightened.
Well, maybe I’m prejudiced as well, maybe if somebody blew up a Greyhound Bus it might affect me more.
what about random decapitations?