But... she didn't have a fake banana. She had what looked like a fake bomb.
edit: Equate it with painting that banana black and holding it like a gun. Or using a toy gun.
Really? You don't think it actually looked like a REAL circuit board rather then a fake bomb?
According to the article she also had play-doh which would be what they actually thought the bomb was. It's just stupid to excuse someone that quickly when it isn't anywhere near as clear as you are making it out to be. This is also very different from the Boston thing considering those were clearly not bombs.
Ah, so, the LiteBrights were clearly not bombs, but the thing that was clearly a circut board and a hand full of play-doh not connected to any wires or anything was certainly ambiguious enough to warrent the full SWAT treatment, huh?
I'll make sure to remind my neice of that the next time she comes to visit... wouldn't want her to wear flashing lights and have any modeling clay.
Like I said, I'm not upset at the airport response, although it has been pointed out very clearly that if it was a bomb, chances are a lot of people would have died as a result of that response, but rather at how dense our society is becoming with regards to real vs. fake threats.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
But... she didn't have a fake banana. She had what looked like a fake bomb.
edit: Equate it with painting that banana black and holding it like a gun. Or using a toy gun.
Oh good fucking lord.
She had what looked like the stereotypical perception of what a fake bomb might look like, based on popular ignorance. As we've shown here, a can of Folger's looks equally like a fake bomb. Nothing, save some fake dynamite sticks and a fake counter, perhaps, "looks like a fake bomb." Because everything looks like a fake bomb.
Just because you've never taken a circuits course doesn't suddenly make a breadboard a fake bomb.
Besides, I'd bet money that most bombs use PCB instead. It would sure suck if one of your jumpers popped out of your breadboard right as you were going to blow up the infidels.
EDIT: And yeah, Xaquin, it's the charges that really piss me off. Yeah, charge me with a crime because I didn't realize people were stupid. Sure.
If the can of folgers were strapped to her chest I bet she'd have gotten the same treatment hehe
I'm sure it was the fact that something was strapped to her chest that caught the first bout of attention. The object being a lit circuit board certainly didn't help her. If ANYONE has ANYTHING out of the ordinary strapped to their chest in an airport (of all places) they are going to garner attention.
But... she didn't have a fake banana. She had what looked like a fake bomb.
edit: Equate it with painting that banana black and holding it like a gun. Or using a toy gun.
Oh good fucking lord.
She had what looked like the stereotypical perception of what a fake bomb might look like, based on popular ignorance. As we've shown here, a can of Folger's looks equally like a fake bomb. Nothing, save some fake dynamite sticks and a fake counter, perhaps, "looks like a fake bomb." Because everything looks like a fake bomb.
Just because you've never taken a circuits course doesn't suddenly make a breadboard a fake bomb.
Besides, I'd bet money that most bombs use PCB instead. It would sure suck if one of your jumpers popped out of your breadboard right as you were going to blow up the infidels.
EDIT: And yeah, Xaquin, it's the charges that really piss me off. Yeah, charge me with a crime because I didn't realize people were stupid. Sure.
If the can of folgers were strapped to her chest I bet she'd have gotten the same treatment hehe
I'm sure it was the fact that something was strapped to her chest that caught the first bout of attention. The object being a lit circuit board certainly didn't help her. If ANYONE has ANYTHING out of the ordinary strapped to their chest in an airport (of all places) they are going to garner attention.
Not if it's one of those new baby bombs.
They look like babies. But they're bombs.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Hey no reason to get so worked up mc. I don't care if you don't think it looked like a bomb. She had a circuit board on her chest and was holding play-doh. I realize you're amazing and all that but claiming that doesn't come close to being a bomb is stupid. Plus, you even say in your response that it looks like a stereotypical bomb. Well, does it look like a bomb or doesn't it?
It looks like what dumbasses who watch too much 24 might think a bomb would look like. And really, even that is a stretch...it didn't look much like a "TV bomb" either. And, having seen many actual improvised explosive devices, I can say her breadboard actually absolutely nothing like a bomb.
Basically, it only looked like a bomb if you're stupid. Are you stupid?
I guess now is as good a time as any to mention that while I do think the girl was incredible dense/possibly stupid and that the guards did the right thing, that unless she was trying to provoke something that she shouldn't be charged with anything.
I think at most she should get some community service or a fine. Tying up the authorities for no reason shouldn't go completely unpunished...
They tied themselves up. I can understand the authorities responding...of only because there's the risk that the stupid people (see above) in the airport might think it looks like a bomb (it doesn't, unless you're stupid). So some form of response was probably best. But without some pretty clear evidence of intent, I don't think charges, let alone a conviction (even with just community service) is warranted.
mcdermott on
0
Options
Der Waffle MousBlame this on the misfortune of your birth.New Yark, New Yark.Registered Userregular
But... she didn't have a fake banana. She had what looked like a fake bomb.
edit: Equate it with painting that banana black and holding it like a gun. Or using a toy gun.
Oh good fucking lord.
She had what looked like the stereotypical perception of what a fake bomb might look like, based on popular ignorance. As we've shown here, a can of Folger's looks equally like a fake bomb. Nothing, save some fake dynamite sticks and a fake counter, perhaps, "looks like a fake bomb." Because everything looks like a fake bomb.
Just because you've never taken a circuits course doesn't suddenly make a breadboard a fake bomb.
Besides, I'd bet money that most bombs use PCB instead. It would sure suck if one of your jumpers popped out of your breadboard right as you were going to blow up the infidels.
EDIT: And yeah, Xaquin, it's the charges that really piss me off. Yeah, charge me with a crime because I didn't realize people were stupid. Sure.
If the can of folgers were strapped to her chest I bet she'd have gotten the same treatment hehe
I'm sure it was the fact that something was strapped to her chest that caught the first bout of attention. The object being a lit circuit board certainly didn't help her. If ANYONE has ANYTHING out of the ordinary strapped to their chest in an airport (of all places) they are going to garner attention.
You might say that they're trying to call attention to it.
Like I said, I'm not upset at the airport response, although it has been pointed out very clearly that if it was a bomb, chances are a lot of people would have died as a result of that response, but rather at how dense our society is becoming with regards to real vs. fake threats.
This. Very much this. We've been at Yellow Alert for far too long, people are getting really stupid.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
But... she didn't have a fake banana. She had what looked like a fake bomb.
edit: Equate it with painting that banana black and holding it like a gun. Or using a toy gun.
Oh good fucking lord.
She had what looked like the stereotypical perception of what a fake bomb might look like, based on popular ignorance. As we've shown here, a can of Folger's looks equally like a fake bomb. Nothing, save some fake dynamite sticks and a fake counter, perhaps, "looks like a fake bomb." Because everything looks like a fake bomb.
Just because you've never taken a circuits course doesn't suddenly make a breadboard a fake bomb.
Besides, I'd bet money that most bombs use PCB instead. It would sure suck if one of your jumpers popped out of your breadboard right as you were going to blow up the infidels.
EDIT: And yeah, Xaquin, it's the charges that really piss me off. Yeah, charge me with a crime because I didn't realize people were stupid. Sure.
If the can of folgers were strapped to her chest I bet she'd have gotten the same treatment hehe
I'm sure it was the fact that something was strapped to her chest that caught the first bout of attention. The object being a lit circuit board certainly didn't help her. If ANYONE has ANYTHING out of the ordinary strapped to their chest in an airport (of all places) they are going to garner attention.
Mischaracterizing her, buying into the media spin, and all of the other shit here is not permissible and just despicable.
Is anyone here really buying into the media spin, though? I think we can all agree that it was a pretty stupid thing to do, a serious lapse in judgement, at best. Sure, we're having some fun at her expense, but I don't think any of us is really being mean-spirited about it, or actually believing all the retarded bullshit from the article. At least, I know I don't. But it's fun to make fun of MITers, because Caltech is the one true paragon of science.
They tied themselves up. I can understand the authorities responding...of only because there's the risk that the stupid people (see above) in the airport might think it looks like a bomb (it doesn't, unless you're stupid). So some form of response was probably best. But without some pretty clear evidence of intent, I don't think charges, let alone a conviction (even with just community service) is warranted.
you can't say things don't look like bombs. If it was a fad like those light up shoes (which are checked anyway) and lots of people were wearing circuit boards with a couple wires leading to a battery on their shirts then maybe they wouldn't/shouldn't pay attention. If you see thousands and thousands of people a day and none of them are wearing the mentioned circuitboard/battery broach and all of a sudden you see one (keep in mind that you are being paid to find suspicious looking devices) shouldn't you do something. Take precautions etc.
Three times, I have called the reaction justified, but the stance people take against her in this thread unjustified, or some premises of their reasoning invalid.
What happened was justified-- maybe not some specific details or levels of the response, but yes, it was justified. I said that three times. I said it in my first post here.
Mischaracterizing her, buying into the media spin, and all of the other shit here is not permissible and just despicable.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and the charges, accordingly, are despicable.
I was responding to the part where you painted the picture of her reasoning for wearing it.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a shirt that looked like it might have a bomb attached to it to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a bomb shirt to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
Yeah, but the consensus seems to be that anything can be a bomb shirt.
Imagine, for a moment, that someone wore one of those ATHF litebrite things on their chest, or made a shirt out of it. That doesn't make it a bomb shirt. And frankly, I don't think a circuit board necessarily does either.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
I was responding to the part where you painted the picture of her reasoning for wearing it.
But... that part where I painted the picture had nothing to do with the guards or the guards' response, as the post said, and I've said in many other posts, but about how people seem to think they are immune to these lapses and thereby better than her.
Like I said, I'm not upset at the airport response, although it has been pointed out very clearly that if it was a bomb, chances are a lot of people would have died as a result of that response, but rather at how dense our society is becoming with regards to real vs. fake threats.
This. Very much this. We've been at Yellow Alert for far too long, people are getting really stupid.
I dunno, the media isn't an accurate representation of public opinion. Just because the headline reads "ZOMGZ BOMBZ IN BOSTON!!!" doesn't mean that the majority of the public is going to agree. The news agencies are trying for splashy titles that will catch people's curiosity and make them buy the paper or watch their station. Yes, there definitely are incredibly dense people that will buy into the sensationalist phrasing of the article, but obviously a good number of people will realize how retarded it is to make a big deal out of this affair. I'm pretty sure anyone with an ounce of common sense will realize that this whole thing is being blown out of proportion.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
If officers draw their weapons on someone and that person turns out not to have a bomb, then that is a little bad.
If nothing gets done and it is a bomb, that's really really bad.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a bomb shirt to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
Yeah, but the consensus seems to be that anything can be a bomb shirt.
Is that the consensus?
It's been six years since 9/11 and this is the first bomb shirt story I've heard.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a shirt that looked like it might have a bomb attached to it to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
Then it's a good thing she didn't wear a shirt with a bomb picture, but wore a shirt with a circuit-board attached to show her pride regarding the MIT engineering team.
The biggest problem with these scares is that it diverts people from serious issues.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
how many shirts have you seen recently with a battery and circuitboard hanging out of them. I'm 27 years old and I've never seen one.
the closest thing I've ever seen is a christmas shirt where the tree lit up.
she wasn't gunned down and no one here has suggested that she should have been.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
If officers draw their weapons on someone and that person turns out not to have a bomb, then that is a little bad.
If nothing gets done and it is a bomb, that's really really bad.
This stuff about security training is bullshit.
If officers seem to be only capable of identifying bombs that look like they came off the 24 set, that's also really really not great.
Because that means actual real bombs will blow up often.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
how many shirts have you seen recently with a battery and circuitboard hanging out of them. I'm 27 years old and I've never seen one.
the closest thing I've ever seen is a christmas shirt where the tree lit up.
she wasn't gunned down and no one here has suggested that she should have been.
The article is all, "She's extremely lucky" and "should be thankful" that she isn't a bullet-ridden corpse, which is just stupid.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a shirt that looked like it might have a bomb attached to it to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
Then it's a good thing she didn't wear a shirt with a bomb picture, but wore a shirt with a circuit-board attached to show her pride regarding the MIT engineering team.
Oh, so just homemade electronics strapped to her shirt. I'm sure the police just should have assumed everything was chill.
Look, if there is a doubt in the minds of people it has to be treated like the real thing.
I'd say we should discourage people from creating this kind of panic.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a shirt that looked like it might have a bomb attached to it to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
Then it's a good thing she didn't wear a shirt with a bomb picture, but wore a shirt with a circuit-board attached to show her pride regarding the MIT engineering team.
The biggest problem with these scares is that it diverts people from serious issues.
Wearing a circuitboard proclaiming your love for MIT is all fine and dandy. Just not at the airport where they can't afford stupid things like that.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
If officers draw their weapons on someone and that person turns out not to have a bomb, then that is a little bad.
If nothing gets done and it is a bomb, that's really really bad.
This stuff about security training is bullshit.
If officers seem to be only capable of identifying bombs that look like they came off the 24 set, that's also really really not great.
Because that means actual real bombs will blow up often.
So maybe people should just be allowed to walk around airports with homemade electronics that might be bombs on their chests.
Hell, why stop there. Let's have them board the planes. In fact, let's have them walk into the oval office.
"Gee John, should we let this guy with the wires sticking out of his jacket in to see the president?"
"Remember Bob, anything could look like a bomb, therefore we should let him in because otherwise we might be too paranoid."
As though being paranoid is somehow the worst thing that could happen.
I like how posters in this thread have said that a "bomb could look like anything," then use that to justify that "what she had looked like a bomb."
Way to go, retards.
Um... How is that retarded? Just because we have no definite way of visually identifying a bomb, does that mean we should just give up and ignore everything? She was displaying something that is commonly found in bombs (which is obviously not the same as "is only found in bombs" which some people seem to have a hard time understanding), and thus justified a security response. As Oboro said, the exact manner of the response might be a bit overboard, but that is something on which I will refrain from opining.
If security were better trained and might know how to tell a bomb from a generic light-blinking piece of electronic equipment they might not have gotten to the very verge of gunning down an innocent tech chick. I don't understand today's mentality. A girl should be gunned down for standing out, when she's not even in a situation by which any means her eccentricity could be perceived as threatening? Ridiculous, gung-ho bull.
If officers draw their weapons on someone and that person turns out not to have a bomb, then that is a little bad.
If nothing gets done and it is a bomb, that's really really bad.
This stuff about security training is bullshit.
I'm not very sure drawing a weapon on someone that turns out to have a bomb is a very good thing, either.
Posts
it bears an eerie similarity to this previous bomb:
Ah, so, the LiteBrights were clearly not bombs, but the thing that was clearly a circut board and a hand full of play-doh not connected to any wires or anything was certainly ambiguious enough to warrent the full SWAT treatment, huh?
I'll make sure to remind my neice of that the next time she comes to visit... wouldn't want her to wear flashing lights and have any modeling clay.
Like I said, I'm not upset at the airport response, although it has been pointed out very clearly that if it was a bomb, chances are a lot of people would have died as a result of that response, but rather at how dense our society is becoming with regards to real vs. fake threats.
If the can of folgers were strapped to her chest I bet she'd have gotten the same treatment hehe
I'm sure it was the fact that something was strapped to her chest that caught the first bout of attention. The object being a lit circuit board certainly didn't help her. If ANYONE has ANYTHING out of the ordinary strapped to their chest in an airport (of all places) they are going to garner attention.
Not if it's one of those new baby bombs.
They look like babies. But they're bombs.
It looks like what dumbasses who watch too much 24 might think a bomb would look like. And really, even that is a stretch...it didn't look much like a "TV bomb" either. And, having seen many actual improvised explosive devices, I can say her breadboard actually absolutely nothing like a bomb.
Basically, it only looked like a bomb if you're stupid. Are you stupid?
They tied themselves up. I can understand the authorities responding...of only because there's the risk that the stupid people (see above) in the airport might think it looks like a bomb (it doesn't, unless you're stupid). So some form of response was probably best. But without some pretty clear evidence of intent, I don't think charges, let alone a conviction (even with just community service) is warranted.
This. Very much this. We've been at Yellow Alert for far too long, people are getting really stupid.
That all goes back to intention, which essentially means criminalizing stupidity. Not that I'm completely opposed to it... but frankly, I've met a lot of incredibly smart people who haven't had a lick of common sense.
This MIT girl may be their poster-child, but she is not unique.
I've seen babies lay some pretty mean bombs
ayuk yuk yuk
Is anyone here really buying into the media spin, though? I think we can all agree that it was a pretty stupid thing to do, a serious lapse in judgement, at best. Sure, we're having some fun at her expense, but I don't think any of us is really being mean-spirited about it, or actually believing all the retarded bullshit from the article. At least, I know I don't. But it's fun to make fun of MITers, because Caltech is the one true paragon of science.
you can't say things don't look like bombs. If it was a fad like those light up shoes (which are checked anyway) and lots of people were wearing circuit boards with a couple wires leading to a battery on their shirts then maybe they wouldn't/shouldn't pay attention. If you see thousands and thousands of people a day and none of them are wearing the mentioned circuitboard/battery broach and all of a sudden you see one (keep in mind that you are being paid to find suspicious looking devices) shouldn't you do something. Take precautions etc.
I was responding to the part where you painted the picture of her reasoning for wearing it.
Wait wait wait.
Maybe I've just skimmed the facts of this case, but my impression is that she wore a shirt that looked like it might have a bomb attached to it to the airport.
Man, I don't care how unrealistic you think your bomb shirt looks - it's the fucking airport. That's the place they make you take off your fucking shoes because they are so frightened of explosives. You are a fucking idiot if you wear a bomb shirt to the airport. End of story.
Yeah, but the consensus seems to be that anything can be a bomb shirt.
Imagine, for a moment, that someone wore one of those ATHF litebrite things on their chest, or made a shirt out of it. That doesn't make it a bomb shirt. And frankly, I don't think a circuit board necessarily does either.
I dunno, the media isn't an accurate representation of public opinion. Just because the headline reads "ZOMGZ BOMBZ IN BOSTON!!!" doesn't mean that the majority of the public is going to agree. The news agencies are trying for splashy titles that will catch people's curiosity and make them buy the paper or watch their station. Yes, there definitely are incredibly dense people that will buy into the sensationalist phrasing of the article, but obviously a good number of people will realize how retarded it is to make a big deal out of this affair. I'm pretty sure anyone with an ounce of common sense will realize that this whole thing is being blown out of proportion.
You would think engineers and mathematicians could at least put two and two together, though.
If officers draw their weapons on someone and that person turns out not to have a bomb, then that is a little bad.
If nothing gets done and it is a bomb, that's really really bad.
This stuff about security training is bullshit.
Is that the consensus?
It's been six years since 9/11 and this is the first bomb shirt story I've heard.
The biggest problem with these scares is that it diverts people from serious issues.
how many shirts have you seen recently with a battery and circuitboard hanging out of them. I'm 27 years old and I've never seen one.
the closest thing I've ever seen is a christmas shirt where the tree lit up.
she wasn't gunned down and no one here has suggested that she should have been.
If officers seem to be only capable of identifying bombs that look like they came off the 24 set, that's also really really not great.
Because that means actual real bombs will blow up often.
Way to go, retards.
The article is all, "She's extremely lucky" and "should be thankful" that she isn't a bullet-ridden corpse, which is just stupid.
Oh, so just homemade electronics strapped to her shirt. I'm sure the police just should have assumed everything was chill.
Look, if there is a doubt in the minds of people it has to be treated like the real thing.
Wearing a circuitboard proclaiming your love for MIT is all fine and dandy. Just not at the airport where they can't afford stupid things like that.
Pic of the genius in question.
The hair should have been a giveaway regarding her mental ability. Or rather, lack thereof.
But she's facing 5 years in prison.
So maybe people should just be allowed to walk around airports with homemade electronics that might be bombs on their chests.
Hell, why stop there. Let's have them board the planes. In fact, let's have them walk into the oval office.
"Gee John, should we let this guy with the wires sticking out of his jacket in to see the president?"
"Remember Bob, anything could look like a bomb, therefore we should let him in because otherwise we might be too paranoid."
As though being paranoid is somehow the worst thing that could happen.
I'm rubber and you're glue what ever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you!
edit: 5 years is way too harsh.
it looks more like a bomb then any other shirt I've ever seen. Mostly I guess because it had an electronic device attached to it.
I disagree with the charges/potential sentence, but not with the arrest/rest of it too.
Um... How is that retarded? Just because we have no definite way of visually identifying a bomb, does that mean we should just give up and ignore everything? She was displaying something that is commonly found in bombs (which is obviously not the same as "is only found in bombs" which some people seem to have a hard time understanding), and thus justified a security response. As Oboro said, the exact manner of the response might be a bit overboard, but that is something on which I will refrain from opining.
Quick question: how many bombs have you seen outside of the movies?
The resemblance is startling.
Well that's obviously crap.
It doesn't change the fact that officers with drawn weapons treating her as though she might actually have a bomb is the correct way to handle this.