| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > > > I am actually interested to hear why you have changed
> > > > > you mind on airport/line security.
> > > >
> > > > I don't believe I *have* changed my mind about it.
> > >
> > > Really. Who psoted this then:
> > >
> > > ==+==
> > > I want to get the federal government
> > > _completely_ out of every area where it's made
> > > such a mess -- health care, education, law
> > > enforcement, welfare, foreign aid, corporate
> > > welfare, highway boondoggles, farm subsidies. Not
> > > only are these programs unconstitutional, they do
> > > tremendous damage to our lives.
> > > ==+==
> >
> > Presumably it was me, but whether it was or not (I forget and you gave no
> > link so I can't check without searching) I agree with it.
> >
> > Nothing inconsistent there with my stance on airline security or airport
> > security either. The airlines ought to be responsible for security on board
> > airliners and ought to be held accountable (strictly) if and when they blow
> > it. The airport owners (which in most cases are government but SHOULD be
> > private) should be responsible for security in airports and ought to be held
> > strictly accountable if and when they blow it.
> >
> > Was there a point you were trying to make?
>
> You are wriggling. What about the cases where the airport is private, you
> think they should set their own levels of security?
Yes.
> Do you oppose the plan to place government “air marshals” in planes?
Yes.
> Do you think private security guards would be better?
Yes. Or armed passengers if the airline so chooses.
> Should the government set the security standard in this way?
No.
But it should also not shield airlines from lawsuits for negligence and
wrongful death if the airlines don't put sufficent standards and safeguards
in place. The bailout bill lets the airlines off the hook.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: The big lie
|
| (...) I'm still resolving that part of the issue for myself, but it puts me in mind of the other side of the coin: Since the airlines are primarily private corporations, and the aircraft are their property, they are well within their rights (correct (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | bailout (was Re: The big lie)
|
| (...) I really do worry about the support the airlines are getting. I know the last few weeks have been tough for them, but the fact is that that the 4 flights which were lost on the 11th were flying from good slots but yet they were no where near (...) (23 years ago, 29-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: The big lie
|
| (...) "Good morning Mr Mohamed Atta, you can certainly board the flight with your large licensed gun. We have reserved your seat right up front next to the cockpit. By the way, why is your passport made out of asbestos?" Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 29-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The big lie
|
| (...) You are wriggling. What about the cases where the airport is private, you think they should set their own levels of security? Do you oppose the plan to place government “air marshals” in planes? Do you think private security guards would be (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
74 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
