Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Brad Johnson on May 07, 2016, 11:07:06 PM
-
a.k.a. People who can't read jump to laughably ignorant conclusion.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/07/flight-delayed-when-math-mistaken-for-terrorism-by-passenger.html
I think differential equations are the work of de debbil, but damn...
Math equations can be complex but are still only a collection of numbers and common symbols. If you're so dumb you confuse mathmatics with Arabic script, please, stay home. The world will not mind.
Brad
-
That woman needs to be billed for the cost of the delay.
-
That woman needs to never again be allowed on the inside of a commercial aircraft.
-
Idiocracy in the flesh
-
Arabic script, Arabic numerals ... Same difference.
-
Yes, innumeracy is a bad thing. And the large & growing proportion of Americans who are functionally innumerate is a troubling trend.
I am saddened for our nation that most can not even recognize mathematical symbols, but I am not ready to condemn her given:
1. Swarthy-looking fellow.
2. Foreign-ness of calc/diff eq.
3. Wear of keffiyeh (by swarthy-looking dude with the scary squiggly numbers in the language of math).
One of these things without the others, no big whoop. Two of things are getting in the realm of improbable, like a swimsuit model who is also a chemistry major. Put three together and the you're approaching zebra territory, like a swimsuit model who is also a talmudic scholar or a splodey-dope.
The photo in the article looks like the prof is wearing a keffiyeh. If he is, well, bugger him with a pogo stick for acting all "troubled by her ignorance." Here are some other photos of folk wearing Keffiyeh:
https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&biw=1002&bih=672&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Keffiyeh&oq=Keffiyeh&gs_l=img.3..0l10.1823.1823.0.2024.1.1.0.0.0.0.133.133.0j1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.1.131.PeJWePJiFAU
Yes, it has become a fashion accessory for some lefties. But complaining about folk thinking you are a splodey-dope when you don splodey-dope-wear is as obnoxious and asinine as "urban youths" mewling about being treated like thugs when they dress like thugs. They consciously affected the appearance of a known dangerous sort and ought to own it when folk react to them like the dangerous sort.
If it is indeed a keffiyeh and not a scarf his mom knitted for him, this is an act of trolling.
-
Actually it looks nothing like a keffiyeh. It looks like a wool scarf. (FTR, One of the only useful things the mid East has given us in the last 1000 years is the Shemagh, and I wear mine a lot when I have to be outside in the heat.)
That picture comes from his U Penn page, and it's clearly a scarf. http://web-facstaff.sas.upenn.edu/~gmenzio/ I'm going to do a little ethnic profiling of my own and say that Guido Menzio is neither Muslim or Arab. So not only is the woman stupid for not knowing math, shes an idiot for not even being able to properly recognize the people she's bigoted against. I'd have more sympathy if she'd recognized him as an economist and didn't want him on the plane for that reason.
So no roo-ster, there's no redeeming this. She was a bigoted idiot that cost the airline and her fellow passengers hours and thousands of dollars because the accepted the KGB's ideal of Informing even if you are uniformed. I'm with the above posters and she should be held financially liable for making a false report with no basis in fact. As an example to other mouth breathers.
-
Actually it looks nothing like a keffiyeh. It looks like a wool scarf. (FTR, One of the only useful things the mid East has given us in the last 1000 years is the Shemagh, and I wear mine a lot when I have to be outside in the heat.)
That picture comes from his U Penn page, and it's clearly a scarf.
Guido's "neck wear of indeterminate provenance":
http://web-facstaff.sas.upenn.edu/~gmenzio/index_files/self4.jpg
Mass-produced keffiyeh:
http://previews.123rf.com/images/onlyfabrizio/onlyfabrizio0811/onlyfabrizio081100043/3922947-Palestinian-Keffiyeh-on-a-white-background-Stock-Photo-keffiyeh.jpg
Another, this time with fringe:
http://img.bizator.com/a/2005268483/w500/3-arapatka-shemagh-keffiyeh-arab-scarf-100-cotton-the-style-is-unisex.jpg
Keff as scarf:
http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/121055832402-0-1/s-l1000.jpg
Wool keffiyeh, this time with metrosexual asian men:
http://i01.i.aliimg.com/wsphoto/v0/2053584357_1/2014New-Fashion-Arab-Shemagh-font-b-Keffiyeh-b-font-Military-Tactical-Palestine-Light-Scarf-Shawl-For.jpg
Pretty damned close. Close enough for most folk who don't even know what to call it.
http://web-facstaff.sas.upenn.edu/~gmenzio/ I'm going to do a little ethnic profiling of my own and say that Guido Menzio is neither Muslim or Arab. So not only is the woman stupid for not knowing math, shes an idiot for not even being able to properly recognize the people she's bigoted against. I'd have more sympathy if she'd recognized him as an economist and didn't want him on the plane for that reason.
Yep, to many, swarthy folk look similar. Thing is, there is some non-trivial amount of arab & berber blood running through Italian veins. Moreso in Sicily and coastal Italy. So, were talking about folk with a Mediterranean aspect who do likely share some blood, especially if the economist's line traces to Sicily or any other coastal Italian settlement. I would suggest watching "True Romance" again for the historical context.
So no roo-ster, there's no redeeming this. She was a bigoted idiot that cost the airline and her fellow passengers hours and thousands of dollars because the accepted the KGB's ideal of Informing even if you are uniformed. I'm with the above posters and she should be held financially liable for making a false report with no basis in fact. As an example to other mouth breathers.
For my own part, I would have preferred if she had struck up a conversation with him and fished for information. A simple introduction and small talk could have settled it simply if she sussed out his name & occupation. And even the nature of his "interesting scarf." But, then, I am a rather large man and somewhat handy. I can muster up bonhomie when necessary. If it went sideways, I have the confidence of knowing I could more than likely subdue or kill him it it came to it. Especially when that close.
Instead she was the sort of woman for whom "Math is hard!" And is fearful enough that she did not have it in her to strike up a clarifying conversation with someone who gave off visual cues of being a dangerous sort. Perhaps women who are both ignorant of math and timorous ought to be denied the franchise? Require some sort of poll test? Need a chaperon when out of sight of their men-folk?
I am not impressed with her cognitive results. Calling her a bigot is ignorant in its own way and ignores visible evidence for the cheap thrill and cheap grace of accusing someone of bigotry. Wrongfully interpreting evidence is not a sign of prejudice on her own part. I would not want to punish her or others for getting it wrong lest we end up with folk who stay mum in the face of evidence of jihadi tells for fear of being called a bigot by dogmush and his sort. Oh, wait, we already have evidence of that from several jihadi acts, here & abroad.
-
Menzio for his part says he was “treated respectfully throughout,” though he remains baffled and frustrated by a “broken system that does not collect information efficiently.” He is troubled by the ignorance of his fellow passenger, as well as “A security protocol that is too rigid–in the sense that once the whistle is blown everything stops without checks–and relies on the input of people who may be completely clueless. ”
Rising xenophobia stoked by the presidential campaign, he suggested, may soon make things worse for people who happen to look a little other-ish.
I agree with the guy's comment about a system that shuts everything down as soon as someone yells "terrorist". That works for safety issues in chemical plants, but we can fire people who are this stupid. It doesn't work for the general public. There needs to be some flexibility at the flight crew level to evaluate the situation.
I disagree with that last. I don't know for sure if this was related to xenophobia. Fear of getting blown up midair is not really xenophobia. It is just self-preservation.
-
BS roo_ster.
It's not one, and doesn't look like one. and he doesn't look Arab. Berber blood not withstanding. There is no visual evidence. Here's a thought, if you don't know what Arabic script looks like, and you don't know what Arabic garb looks like, and you don't know what an Arab looks like, you're not qualified to say the person sitting next to you might be an Arab scribbling in Arabic.
I would not want to punish her or others for getting it wrong lest we end up with folk who stay mum in the face of evidence of jihadi tells for fear of being called a bigot by dogmush and his sort.
No but I'd like to get back to the part where people STFU in the face of absolutly no evidence of jihad at all for fear of being responsible to for the outcome of their actions. This women had zero credible evidence, and she cost the people on the plane and the airline time and money that is not easily replaceable. Had she yelled "Fire!" on that plane with no evidence she'd be facing criminal charges, we wouldn't be saying "Well she's not a fire fighter, so she can't be expected to know what smoke is. Better safe then sorry." Had she locked down a Wal-Mart over a CCW, this forum would be eviscerating (metaphorically) her as a myopic, hoplophobic idiot.. But she yelled "terrorist" with the same level of accuracy and evidence. Only those whose conformation bias this fits think this is OK.
-
I feel I should mention, as roo_ster and I bicker over knitting, that there is ONE picture of that guy wearing a scarf, taken outside, in (one assumes) Pennsylvania and posted to his UPenn page. Every other picture Google spits out of the gentleman in question shows him sans neckwear of any type. His [remarkably unlocked down] Facebook page only shows one regrettable navy blue hipster scarf. So even if this one scarf looked Muslim (it doesn't) he likely wasn't wearing it on an aircraft. Roo-ster's strawman falls even flatter.
-
I don't do math and I'm in the "MATH IS HARD" camp, but I can recognize it when I see it.
but regardless of all that, this is the money line:
Menzio told the paper he was troubled by the women’s ignorance as well as “a security protocol that is too rigid—in the sense the once the whistle is blown everything stops without checks—and relies on the input of people who may be completely clueless.”
All it should have taken was a couple of the cabin attendants to look at the "Arabic script", say "We'll actually that is some mathematical formula's, Ma'am. The flight goes on."
I think part of it is no one wants to be accountable, which I get when it comes to stuff blowing up, but still, some basic common sense would go a long way to keep some of this nonsense in check.
-
Just for the sake of argument, what if it wasn't innocent calculus formulas.
What could he possibly write on a tablet that was an immediate threat to the plane? "The pen is mightier than the sword"? Ideas can be dangerous? ;/
It doesn't matter whether she could recognize the math. She's a bigot. The crew should have recognized that and offered to let her change seats, or get off the plane and forfeit her ticket. I fault them a lot more than I do her.
-
BS roo_ster.
It's not one, and doesn't look like one. and he doesn't look Arab. Berber blood not withstanding. There is no visual evidence. Here's a thought, if you don't know what Arabic script looks like, and you don't know what Arabic garb looks like, and you don't know what an Arab looks like, you're not qualified to say the person sitting next to you might be an Arab scribbling in Arabic.
No but I'd like to get back to the part where people STFU in the face of absolutly no evidence of jihad at all for fear of being responsible to for the outcome of their actions. This women had zero credible evidence, and she cost the people on the plane and the airline time and money that is not easily replaceable. Had she yelled "Fire!" on that plane with no evidence she'd be facing criminal charges, we wouldn't be saying "Well she's not a fire fighter, so she can't be expected to know what smoke is. Better safe then sorry." Had she locked down a Wal-Mart over a CCW, this forum would be eviscerating (metaphorically) her as a myopic, hoplophobic idiot.. But she yelled "terrorist" with the same level of accuracy and evidence. Only those whose conformation bias this fits think this is OK.
Patterns are patterns and dogmush is a fine example of the sort of folk who would outlaw--or at least levy fines against--pattern recognition and those who do not assess the evidence at hand to his satisfaction. In this case, a literal fabric pattern. And dogmush must have limited experience with folk of Mediterranean extraction and their range of common phenotypes. Tip: not every arab looks like a caricature of Yassir Arafat.
dogmush, it doesn't help when you:
1. Lie about what she did. She did not yell "terrorist!"
2. Make up completely noninterchangeable hypothetical situations. Again, no yelling involved, so yelling "Fire" is not applicable. Also, there was more than a single bit of evidence such as seeing the outline of a gun against a tight t-shirt.
Turns out she did engage him in conversation. He was not forthcoming and willing to engage in sociable small-talk with a woman. That's another bit of data for the gal to process. Too bad she did not recognize his foreign accent as Italian.
Let us look again at what the gal of admittedly limited experience and cognitive talent had to work with:
0. Possible article of clothing indicating MENA origin/sympathies.
1. Phenotype in range of MENA origin.
2. Unwilling to engage in small talk with a woman.
3. Foreign accent.
4. Writing in unintelligible script that reminded the gal of arabic.
Again, I wish she had more familiarity with mathematics, as the (to her) unintelligible script seems to be the one bit of evidence (among several) that caused her concern enough to voice them quietly to airline personnel. I also wish she had more experience with foreigners speaking English such that she might catch an Italian accent.
Still, to call her a bigot or insist she be fined is asinine, given the circumstances. Which is why there will be no fine, as airline personnel and LEOs take a more reasonable attitude toward reportage of existential threats than does dogmush. There were signs enough for the average LEO to give the guy a looking over and to engage in probing conversation. Which is what happened, as they determined that Guido was Italian, not MENA, and was working on math, not splodey-dope apologetics.
And if you read the various articles on this incident, you can sniff out dogmush's lovely attitude of, "STFU, ignorant bigot" permeating them. The articles emphasize the math bit in the title, but bury the other bits later in the article. dogmush's preference may not yet be codified in law, but you can be darn sure it is the line being pushed by the MSM. Why is that?
All it should have taken was a couple of the cabin attendants to look at the "Arabic script", say "We'll actually that is some mathematical formula's, Ma'am. The flight goes on."
I think part of it is no one wants to be accountable, which I get when it comes to stuff blowing up, but still, some basic common sense would go a long way to keep some of this nonsense in check.
I doubt there is much math required of stewards & stewardesses. They may be as ignorant as the passenger. And influenced to think "arabic" from the passenger's suggestion. I'd think they would be more likely to eliminate a false positive with conversation, if they could get some from him. They'd be more likely to spot an Italian accent than suss out any math.
But, yeah, I bet there is a rather rigid procedure for dealing with these sorts of things.
-
Rooster, there isn't a lot of math required of a dog groomer either, but I can identify a page full of mathematical equations when I see one. I may not know how to solve them or even how to understand them, but I can recognize it for what it is.
Furthermore, maybe it's just because I've spent wayyyyy too much time around such types of geeks/nerds, but expecting someone who's scribbling complex mathematical formula's to be "chatty" is just expecting too much. ;/
The woman was an idiot. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, and I think this stupid could use a prize.
-
Again, I wish she had more familiarity with mathematics, as the (to her) unintelligible script seems to be the one bit of evidence (among several) that caused her concern enough to voice them quietly to airline personnel. I also wish she had more experience with foreigners speaking English such that she might catch an Italian accent.
If he had been writing "Death to America" poetry instead of differential equations, where is the immediate danger requiring any action at all?
-
Patterns are patterns and dogmush is a fine example of the sort of folk who would outlaw--or at least levy fines against--pattern recognition and those who do not assess the evidence at hand to his satisfaction. In this case, a literal fabric pattern. And dogmush must have limited experience with folk of Mediterranean extraction and their range of common phenotypes. Tip: not every arab looks like a caricature of Yassir Arafat.
Again, you're inventing facts out of whole cloth.
Rebuttal in the first: I have quite a bit of experience with folks of MENA (and the north side of the med as well) decent. Cumulatively I have spent several years of my life living in, and working with the people of, those regions. Rebuttal in the second. Once again, as someone who has seen several hundred of them and owns two or three, that "literal fabric pattern" is not, and does not look like a Keffiyeh. Rebuttal in the third: Even if the scarf on his home page was a Keffiyeh (and it's not) the woman next to him WOULD NOT HAVE SEEN IT. Because there's no evidence that he was wearing it on that flight, or indeed wears any scarf on a regular basis.
As an aside, I have actually used the results of various pattern recognition systems to do exactly what this lady failed to do (asses a threat) and while they work well they are as susceptible as any other system to the Garbage In-Garbage Out principle. So far from outlawing them, I like them quite a bit.
dogmush, it doesn't help when you:
1. Lie about what she did. She did not yell "terrorist!"
2. Make up completely noninterchangeable hypothetical situations. Again, no yelling involved, so yelling "Fire" is not applicable. Also, there was more than a single bit of evidence such as seeing the outline of a gun against a tight t-shirt.
She raised a false alarm about a situation that did not, and there was no evidence of, exist. That false alarm caused damages to people. Whether she yelled or passed a note is irrelevant. She, through carelessness or malice, cause damages to people, and she should be responsible for those damages. But fine, if you'd like to be pedantic, let me update my simile: If she had used a universities text based alert system to claim a dorm was on fire when it was not, she would be held responsible.
Turns out she did engage him in conversation. He was not forthcoming and willing to engage in sociable small-talk with a woman. That's another bit of data for the gal to process. Too bad she did not recognize his foreign accent as Italian.
Not wanting to interrupt one's work to talk with a nosy woman on a plane is no more a sign of terrorism then anything else this guy did. She precipitated the whole situation by seeing things that she wanted to, filtered through her own, flawed, preconceptions and leapt to a conclusion unsupportable to rational people.
One can only conclude you think she was being reasonable because you share those preconceptions.
-
This is the Rachel Ray scarf controversy all over again...
Seriously, is any black and white piece of cloth a sign of a terrorist now? That is both insane and inane.
-
Well there was that one guy that wore a black and white Houndstooth* scarf, and was indeed bent on world domination.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_mc8nhvQTMx1r8gqkho2_r1_500.jpg&hash=15d8f93ea4237375392d6558c6a72dc21d5f837e)
* I knew I'd remember the name of that pattern.
Seriously, for those that didn't click through, THIS is the scary terrorist scarf:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.emol.cl%2Femol50%2FFotos%2F2016%2F05%2F07%2Ffile_20160507162001.jpg&hash=3479d82d61ed04ef4e7bb8fbe44bc0650e551bba)
Which there is no evidence he was even wearing on the plane.
So if we're keeping track: Not the right material, not the right shape, and not the right pattern. But yep, scary and worth costing people thousands of dollars over.
Thumbs up to roo_ster! You keep reporting your suspicions to the NKVD. What's the worst that could happen?
-
Why is the focus on the woman? She was in a situation where others have had very bad experiences with middle eastern men.
Right or wrong her hackles went up. Ask just about any cop and they will tell you to trust your gut even in situations when you can't fully explain what's wrong.
The fail is was how the responsible authorities overreacted and blew out of proportion a paranoid passengers fears.
Bigot? No, just overcautious and afraid.
More immigration = less overall social trust
-
Why is the focus on the woman? She was in a situation where others have had very bad experiences with middle eastern men.
Right or wrong her hackles went up. Ask just about any cop and they will tell you to trust your gut even in situations when you can't fully explain what's wrong.
The fail is was how the responsible authorities overreacted and blew out of proportion a paranoid passengers fears.
Bigot? No, just overcautious and afraid.
More immigration = less overall social trust
Some good points here. While I've never found my gut to be particularly accurate, "trust your gut" is advice I've often seen here, and elsewhere in the gunosphere.
-
Yes, innumeracy is a bad thing. And the large & growing proportion of Americans who are functionally innumerate is a troubling trend.
I am saddened for our nation that most can not even recognize mathematical symbols, but I am not ready to condemn her given:
1. Swarthy-looking fellow.
2. Foreign-ness of calc/diff eq.
3. Wear of keffiyeh (by swarthy-looking dude with the scary squiggly numbers in the language of math).
One of these things without the others, no big whoop. Two of things are getting in the realm of improbable, like a swimsuit model who is also a chemistry major. Put three together and the you're approaching zebra territory, like a swimsuit model who is also a talmudic scholar or a splodey-dope.
The photo in the article looks like the prof is wearing a keffiyeh. If he is, well, bugger him with a pogo stick for acting all "troubled by her ignorance." Here are some other photos of folk wearing Keffiyeh:
https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&biw=1002&bih=672&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Keffiyeh&oq=Keffiyeh&gs_l=img.3..0l10.1823.1823.0.2024.1.1.0.0.0.0.133.133.0j1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.1.131.PeJWePJiFAU
Yes, it has become a fashion accessory for some lefties. But complaining about folk thinking you are a splodey-dope when you don splodey-dope-wear is as obnoxious and asinine as "urban youths" mewling about being treated like thugs when they dress like thugs. They consciously affected the appearance of a known dangerous sort and ought to own it when folk react to them like the dangerous sort.
If it is indeed a keffiyeh and not a scarf his mom knitted for him, this is an act of trolling.
Pffft. Even if he were wearing a man dress and writing on a notepad in Arabic, she's still an idiot. Since when is writing in any language threatening....except for when that language is threatening?
Were he actually making threats, then she'd have a leg to stand on, and so would you. No, she was just being ignorant. Blaming that on him wearing a scarf is ignorance, too.
-
Who in this situation is being paid to not be ignorant and make good judgements?
The flight crew and the authorities are the ones at blame here.
Simple qualifying questions about what her concerns were would have revealed that there was no cause for concern.
What has he said that has caused you alarm?
What has he done that has caused you alarm?
Are flight crews required to call the police for every concern or are they given a little bit of discretion?
You guys are just so ready to virtue signal that you aren't raaacist that you've missed the obvious.
Of course the government admitting thousands of Muslims from Syria and N Africa, hot beds of violence and terrorism, does nothing to increase social trust among disparate groups in the USA. Then again that may be the plan, as well as more Democrat voters.
The virtue signaling here on this issue is kind of sad.
-
Who in this situation is being paid to not be ignorant and make good judgements?
The flight crew and the authorities are the ones at blame here.
Simple qualifying questions about what her concerns were would have revealed that there was no cause for concern.
What has he said that has caused you alarm?
What has he done that has caused you alarm?
Are flight crews required to call the police for every concern or are they given a little bit of discretion?
You guys are just so ready to virtue signal that you aren't raaacist that you've missed the obvious.
Of course the government admitting thousands of Muslims from Syria and N Africa, hot beds of violence and terrorism, does nothing to increase social trust among disparate groups in the USA. Then again that may be the plan, as well as more Democrat voters.
The virtue signaling here on this issue is kind of sad.
Oh, they're idiots too, right along side her.
-
Just for the sake of argument, what if it wasn't innocent calculus formulas.
What could he possibly write on a tablet that was an immediate threat to the plane? "The pen is mightier than the sword"? Ideas can be dangerous? ;/
Yep.
I, for one, wish to sentence this female nomath to a semester of 300 level differential calculus and all prerequisites required thereto.
Sentence will be complete only upon achieving a cumulative GPA of 2.7 with no grade in any one section lower than 2.0
-
Yep.
I, for one, wish to sentence this female nomath to a semester of 300 level differential calculus and all prerequisites required thereto.
Sentence will be complete only upon achieving a cumulative GPA of 2.7 with no grade in any one section lower than 2.0
Since that isn't ever going to happen, just have her audit all the advanced math classes for a 6 months. Maybe after that, she will figure it out.
-
https://youtu.be/cRXNNqNfQBs
-
Since that isn't ever going to happen, just have her audit all the advanced math classes for a 6 months. Maybe after that, she will figure it out.
You're still punishing the wrong person. The flight crew screwed this one; she's just a harmless fool (idiot, bigot, whatever.) She didn't delay the plane for 2 hours, they did.
-
You're still punishing the wrong person. The flight crew screwed this one; she's just a harmless fool (idiot, bigot, whatever.) She didn't delay the plane for 2 hours, they did.
This. How hard would it be for them to track down a couple people who at least know what Arabic looks like to go glance over the guy's shoulder? Maybe even Google up a common greeting in Arabic and try it on him. Still wouldn't completely narrow it down, but ~80% chance of clarifying a false positive with less than a five minute delay.
-
This. How hard would it be for them to track down a couple people who at least know what Arabic looks like to go glance over the guy's shoulder? Maybe even Google up a common greeting in Arabic and try it on him. Still wouldn't completely narrow it down, but ~80% chance of clarifying a false positive with less than a five minute delay.
And what if it had been Arabic or if the guy had responded with alaikum salam? So what? You've proven the guy reads or understands Arabic. Should we call Jack Bauer?
This is akin to roo_ster reporting a white guy with a dark tan as a likely criminal because he mistakenly thinks the guy is black. Yes, the initial assumption is wrong, but more importantly even if the assumption were correct it wouldn't be remotely illegal.
-
And what if it had been Arabic or if the guy had responded with alaikum salam? So what? You've proven the guy reads or understands Arabic. Should we call Jack Bauer?
No, but if you can recognize the math and/or he gives a WTF look, you're well on the way to writing it off as a false alarm in a matter of seconds.
Sort of like determining if someone is pregnant; ensuring that they have a vagina doesn't positively answer the question, but it's a good starting point to keep from wasting more time.
-
You're still punishing the wrong person. The flight crew screwed this one; she's just a harmless fool (idiot, bigot, whatever.) She didn't delay the plane for 2 hours, they did.
She is the one who started it by being stupid.
As far as the flight crew, I would be curious what the flight crew is required to do in these cases. I bet they are required to report everything like this to someone higher before they even check it out. These are govt regulations and corporate CYA rules. The flight crew likely had no choice in the matter. It probably takes 2 hours just to go through all the steps of some security procedure even if there is no threat.
-
As far as the flight crew, I would be curious what the flight crew is required to do in these cases. I bet they are required to report everything like this to someone higher before they even check it out. These are govt regulations and corporate CYA rules. The flight crew likely had no choice in the matter. It probably takes 2 hours just to go through all the steps of some security procedure even if there is no threat.
This people. Once the report has been made, I'm willing to bet that the flight crew had no choice.
That being said, the inability to quickly resolve matters is probably hurting the chances of people who have heard of this stuff hesitating to report something that's more major for fear of flight delays and such.
-
No, but if you can recognize the math and/or he gives a WTF look, you're well on the way to writing it off as a false alarm in a matter of seconds.
You're still not getting it. You're trying to suggest ways you think would be superior to determine whether or not someone understands Arabic. On the other hand, I find the whole concept of investigating allegations of someone doing something entirely noncriminal to be bizarre. If someone sees a picture of shiny metal and ignorantly assumes that their seatmate's issue of Car and Driver is actually a copy of Guns and Ammo should we be looking for improved field tests to help authorities determine the distinction between a picture of an exhaust system and a picture of a firearm? Or should we recognize that it doesn't matter if it is in fact an issue of Guns and Ammo because reading a periodical is not illegal?
-
You're still not getting it. You're trying to suggest ways you think would be superior to determine whether or not someone understands Arabic. On the other hand, I find the whole concept of investigating allegations of someone doing something entirely noncriminal to be bizarre. If someone sees a picture of shiny metal and ignorantly assumes that their seatmate's issue of Car and Driver is actually a copy of Guns and Ammo should we be looking for improved field tests to help authorities determine the distinction between a picture of an exhaust system and a picture of a firearm? Or should we recognize that it doesn't matter if it is in fact an issue of Guns and Ammo because reading a periodical is not illegal?
I'm outlining step one of a very simple process of elimination:
Is it an Arabic terrorist attack plan?
1. Is it in Arabic?
If no, then it's not an Arabic terrorist attack plan. End the investigation.
It's more like trying to determine if the shady looking guy that just pulled something shiny out of his pocket at the quick stop counter is pulling a gun, a knife, a phone or one of those metal wallets. If he flips it open and pulls money out of it, or starts playing Angry Birds, you don't need to check the caliber and try to get a look at the chambers to see if it's loaded. It's not necessary, however, to immediately tell yourself that every shiny metal object pulled from a concealed location is harmless, just apply some common sense tests to each one.
-
I'm outlining step one of a very simple process of elimination:
Is it an Arabic terrorist attack plan?
1. Is it in Arabic?
If no, then it's not an Arabic terrorist attack plan. End the investigation.
It's more like trying to determine if the shady looking guy that just pulled something shiny out of his pocket at the quick stop counter is pulling a gun, a knife, a phone or one of those metal wallets. If he flips it open and pulls money out of it, or starts playing Angry Birds, you don't need to check the caliber and try to get a look at the chambers to see if it's loaded. It's not necessary, however, to immediately tell yourself that every shiny metal object pulled from a concealed location is harmless, just apply some common sense tests to each one.
The Paris and Belgium attacks were coordinated in non-Arabic languages I believe.
-
Dude could literally be writing in arabic "I wish this plane would blow up" and I'd still be fine with it.
We have lost our way as a free people.
-
I have to wonder what the response would be if the lady saw the guy reading a gun magazine and raised concerns about him having a gun on the plane.
Chris
-
Dude could literally be writing in arabic "I wish this plane would blow up" and I'd still be fine with it.
I don't really care what people wish for. If he's listing off the ways he saw to get a bomb past the security checkpoint, or writing out his will I'd at least want to have someone watching him.
-
Dude could literally be writing in arabic "I wish this plane would blow up" and I'd still be fine with it.
We have lost our way as a free people.
THIS people.
The terrorists aren't stupid. We keep going apeshit about any form of dress that might vaguely be mistaken for Arabic and they'll simply make sure their men dress in standard western.
The vast majority of Muslims aren't terrorists, and we've expanded our hysteria to even include those who have nothing to do with them at all.
Keep in mind that most attacks against planes today have been by non-Arabs. Local converts, mostly. That's going by recent history. They still haven't reached the point of communist wannabes taking planes to Cuba back when I was a kid.
I have to wonder what the response would be if the lady saw the guy reading a gun magazine and raised concerns about him having a gun on the plane.
Probably about the same.
I don't really care what people wish for. If he's listing off the ways he saw to get a bomb past the security checkpoint, or writing out his will I'd at least want to have someone watching him.
Why? If he's cataloging the ways to get a bomb past security that he saw, that means that the bomb isn't on this flight, and your attention will probably just amount to harassing a legit security researcher. Like what happened at a Canadian University semi-recently. Guy was doing a report on anti-terrorism efforts for his college anti-terrorism class and that wasn't considered sufficient for the local po-po who had to close down the library for a bomb search(negative) and question him for several hours despite the dude being able to show registration for said class, the assignment, etc...
-
Why? If he's cataloging the ways to get a bomb past security that he saw, that means that the bomb isn't on this flight, and your attention will probably just amount to harassing a legit security researcher.
If he's doing legit security research, then what better help could he be given than an actual security response?
-
I'm outlining step one of a very simple process of elimination:
Is it an Arabic terrorist attack plan?
1. Is it in Arabic?
If no, then it's not an Arabic terrorist attack plan. End the investigation.
:rofl:
-
If a Christian immigrant from the Middle East is writing sonnets to his wife in Arabic how exactly would anyone on a plane around him know what he was writing? What is the likelihood that anyone on the plane reads Arabic? Why should the simple act of writing be a problem at all?
-
They still haven't reached the point of communist wannabes taking planes to Cuba back when I was a kid.
Of course, the Communists hijacking planes to Cuba were interested in having the plane land in Cuba so they could get off ...
-
If a Christian immigrant from the Middle East is writing sonnets to his wife in Arabic how exactly would anyone on a plane around him know what he was writing? What is the likelihood that anyone on the plane reads Arabic? Why should the simple act of writing be a problem at all?
Sorry Mech, the important thing is the language, not the danger.
-
Probably about the same.
I was referring more to the response on this board.
Chris
-
Weapons of Math Instruction
http://www.ms.uky.edu/~jrge/340/Weapons_of_Math_Instruction.html
-
I was referring more to the response on this board.
Chris
Sentenced to 3 gun coaching until she passes amateur qualifying, and NRA Range Officer training.
:P
-
This people. Once the report has been made, I'm willing to bet that the flight crew had no choice.
That being said, the inability to quickly resolve matters is probably hurting the chances of people who have heard of this stuff hesitating to report something that's more major for fear of flight delays and such.
If the flight crew had no choice then that is where the outrage should be directed. The *expletive deleted*ing bureaucracy is the problem, not some frightened woman whose brain has been ruined by our uneducation system and perverted government/mass media complex.
-
Dude could literally be writing in arabic "I wish this plane would blow up" and I'd still be fine with it.
We have lost our way as a free people.
I am starting to think lots of people around here wouldn't know freedom if it bit them.
-
She is the one who started it by being stupid.
As far as the flight crew, I would be curious what the flight crew is required to do in these cases. I bet they are required to report everything like this to someone higher before they even check it out. These are govt regulations and corporate CYA rules. The flight crew likely had no choice in the matter. It probably takes 2 hours just to go through all the steps of some security procedure even if there is no threat.
Guess I'll weigh in on this one.
I don't think I am required to contact a supervisor or security or make a report to the police. I am required to fill out a company-only report when things happen that may "cause the general public to ask questions or be concerned."
We have a lot of latitude about "controlling" the customers. I would be hesitant to call for a supervisor or police in this case, unless the woman was making a big stink about it. If she was causing a scene I probably would have moved the woman to a different seat, or removed the woman from the plane, once I figured out what was going on.
I would say she overreacted, and she did, but not too much, really. Every airport has signs and announcements saying, "If you see something, say something." The current culture is to report on anything suspicious without actually trying to apply logic and reason. The vast majority of passengers check their brains with their bags. They don't have any idea of how an airline runs, nor do they care. All they care about is getting from A to B on time and cheaply. Delays, security issues, maintenance issues, etc. just don't matter to them. They are very much like children and cattle; they must be constantly directed and told what to do. That lady was told "see something, say something" by the TSA, CNN, Fox news, society as a whole, so she spoke up. She was never told to apply logic to her surroundings and think before speaking.
Another part of the problem is the Flight Attendant. Some of them have very big egos/attitudes when it comes to dealing with customers. It could be that the woman told a FA who then told the Captain. Maybe the FA expressed her own concern about the Math Bomber. If she did, then the Captain would have no choice but to call in supervisors and police. Basically, one or two people can get anyone kicked off a plane just by being concerned.
-
I guess I better be careful writing cursive also since many of the younger generation can't read it.
-
Well there was that one guy that wore a black and white Houndstooth* scarf, and was indeed bent on world domination.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_mc8nhvQTMx1r8gqkho2_r1_500.jpg&hash=15d8f93ea4237375392d6558c6a72dc21d5f837e)
* I knew I'd remember the name of that pattern.
Seriously, for those that didn't click through, THIS is the scary terrorist scarf:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.emol.cl%2Femol50%2FFotos%2F2016%2F05%2F07%2Ffile_20160507162001.jpg&hash=3479d82d61ed04ef4e7bb8fbe44bc0650e551bba)
Which there is no evidence he was even wearing on the plane.
So if we're keeping track: Not the right material, not the right shape, and not the right pattern. But yep, scary and worth costing people thousands of dollars over.
Thumbs up to roo_ster! You keep reporting your suspicions to the NKVD. What's the worst that could happen?
Yup, that looks like a scarf. Color pattern still could be mistaken, say, by the same sort who are not able to discern calc/diffeq from arabic script.
Of course, you ignore the other bits of data Ms Mathishard had to work with:
Let us look again at what the gal of admittedly limited experience and cognitive talent had to work with:
0. Possible article of clothing indicating MENA origin/sympathies.
1. Phenotype in range of MENA origin.
2. Unwilling to engage in small talk with a woman.
3. Foreign accent.
4. Writing in unintelligible script that reminded the gal of arabic.
Recall, my position is that I thought it inappropriate to fine or jail Ms Mathishard for reporting her suspicions, as her suspicions seemed reasonable to her. I think I am on solid ground, there.
Really, unless we are going to insist women go about chaperoned by their menfolk, we are going to have to live with timorous women who run with their gut/intuition and have a lower tolerance for risk. [Saw that this weekend on the rugby pitch. Some of moms got bent out of shape at tackles that were in no way unsportsmanlike, but were a bit ugly. It took the menfolk to calm things down.]
What's the worst that could happen? Well, empirically it looks like a two hour delay and a quick interview by security-folk that settles the issue as a nothingburger.
-
I have to wonder what the response would be if the lady saw the guy reading a gun magazine and raised concerns about him having a gun on the plane.
Chris
Because that's practically the same thing.
-
Because that's practically the same thing.
To the lady in the OP, it may very well be. However, it would be our ox being gored instead of "swarthy foreigners".
Chris
-
Because that's practically the same thing.
Pretty much.
In both cases an entirely legal, moral, ethical and mundane activity is ignorantly reported by a pearl-clutching alarmist as an indicator of tangentially related illegal activity.
-
Pretty much.
In both cases an entirely legal, moral, ethical and mundane activity is ignorantly reported by a pearl-clutching alarmist as an indicator of tangentially related illegal activity.
Context and past performance matters, even to pearl-clutchers.
When was the last time a stereotypical gunnie or tactical beard with their copy of SWAT hijacked a plane in a spectacular, mass-murdering fashion? Yeah, never. OTOH, the wonderful-peace-loving adherents of Islam have a bit of a reputation in that regard.
To put a gunnie spin on it, think about folk OK with CCWs out in the wild generally, but not OK with CCW in church. A different context, a different set of expectations, a different set of emotional baggage.
-
Yup, that looks like a scarf. Color pattern still could be mistaken, say, by the same sort who are not able to discern calc/diffeq from arabic script.
Or busy Italians from Arabs with something to hide.
Menzio said there were other factors that may have led to a misunderstanding. The blond-haired 30-something woman asked if Syracuse was home for him, and he answered curtly. He avoided other questions. He seemed, according to the Post, "perhaps too laser-focused" on his notepad.
Of course, part of it is that, no matter how many people try to get it through her head, there's nothing wrong with people who don't want to chitchat. I've run into plenty of these arrogant busybodies who just can't comprehend that, to most of the world, there are more pressing matters than hearing about their opinion of a TV show, their bad hair day, their dog's illness, etc.
-
Context and past performance matters, even to pearl-clutchers.
When was the last time a stereotypical gunnie or tactical beard with their copy of SWAT hijacked a plane in a spectacular, mass-murdering fashion? Yeah, never. OTOH, the wonderful-peace-loving adherents of Islam have a bit of a reputation in that regard.
If Swarthy McMathmatics PhD. were doing something - anything really - that could be construed as dangerous or indicative that he was a threat then you might have had a point. But he wasn't, and I'm not sure how delaying every flight that might have an Arab or Muslim on it is going to help anything.
As for the likelihood of Tactical Ted blowing up the plane, that wasn't the scenario, was it?
-
Context and past performance matters, even to pearl-clutchers.
When was the last time a stereotypical gunnie or tactical beard with their copy of SWAT hijacked a plane in a spectacular, mass-murdering fashion? Yeah, never. OTOH, the wonderful-peace-loving adherents of Islam have a bit of a reputation in that regard.
They hijacked planes "in a spectacular, mass-murdering fashion" by writing on tablets? Do tell.
-
Really, unless we are going to insist women go about chaperoned by their menfolk, we are going to have to live with timorous women who run with their gut/intuition and have a lower tolerance for risk. [Saw that this weekend on the rugby pitch. Some of moms got bent out of shape at tackles that were in no way unsportsmanlike, but were a bit ugly. It took the menfolk to calm things down.]
Excuse you?
Step up and teach your daughters not to be timorous and maybe we can all get along. :mad:
Dumbasses are common in both genders, these days largely due to the pussification of society in general. Don't you dare make this into 'little woman are the problem'
-
If Swarthy McMathmatics PhD. were doing something - anything really - that could be construed as dangerous or indicative that he was a threat then you might have had a point. But he wasn't, and I'm not sure how delaying every flight that might have an Arab or Muslim on it is going to help anything.
As for the likelihood of Tactical Ted blowing up the plane, that wasn't the scenario, was it?
The point is that being scared of Muslims on your airplane has a certain historical justification. Being scared of a potential gun-owner; not so much.
-
Yup, that looks like a scarf. Color pattern still could be mistaken, say, by the same sort who are not able to discern calc/diffeq from arabic script.
Of course, you ignore the other bits of data Ms Mathishard had to work with:
Recall, my position is that I thought it inappropriate to fine or jail Ms Mathishard for reporting her suspicions, as her suspicions seemed reasonable to her. I think I am on solid ground, there.
Really, unless we are going to insist women go about chaperoned by their menfolk, we are going to have to live with timorous women who run with their gut/intuition and have a lower tolerance for risk. [Saw that this weekend on the rugby pitch. Some of moms got bent out of shape at tackles that were in no way unsportsmanlike, but were a bit ugly. It took the menfolk to calm things down.]
What's the worst that could happen? Well, empirically it looks like a two hour delay and a quick interview by security-folk that settles the issue as a nothingburger.
Maybe not fine her, but perhaps the other passengers could all slap her as they left the plane. Reporting real suspicions is great, but stupidity should have some pain/consequences to it.
-
The point is that being scared of Muslims on your airplane has a certain historical justification. Being scared of a potential gun-owner; not so much.
So we're back to delaying every flight that might have an Arab or Muslim on it, yes?
Also, if we're going to play that game, then fearing potential gun owners in day to day life based on the thousands of gun murders that happen every year is totally reasonable, right?
-
The point is that being scared of Muslims on your airplane has a certain historical justification. Being scared of a potential gun-owner; not so much.
People scared of gun owners point to every high-profile shooting as their justification.
Remember, to them there is no distinction between legal owner and armed criminal. There is only man with a gun.
-
So we're back to delaying every flight that might have an Arab or Muslim on it, yes?
Also, if we're going to play that game, then fearing potential gun owners in day to day life based on the thousands of gun murders that happen every year is totally reasonable, right?
Going back to comments I made earlier, how about a protocol for flight crews to follow that would weed out false alarms?
Why is it one (ignore passengers who fit the pattern)? or the other (inconvenience everyone and humiliate innocents)?
-
Why is it one (ignore passengers who fit the pattern)? or the other (inconvenience everyone and humiliate innocents)?
Why not do both! >:D
-
So we're back to delaying every flight that might have an Arab or Muslim on it, yes?
Also, if we're going to play that game, then fearing potential gun owners in day to day life based on the thousands of gun murders that happen every year is totally reasonable, right?
People scared of gun owners point to every high-profile shooting as their justification.
Remember, to them there is no distinction between legal owner and armed criminal. There is only man with a gun.
You both fail at drawing reasonable conclusions. Reminds me of a lady on an airplane, recently...
You both win at jumping to conclusions arriving at conclusions from a nearby parallel universe! Congratulations!
In recent history, Muslims have notoriously hijacked planes in the name of Islam. No one has hijacked a plane in the name of Gun-ism. Or at least not that anyone's aware of. Hence the mathophobic lady's overreaction was plausible (and not in the good sense of the term (look it up)). The same overreaction to a gun magazine would skip past the plausible, and into the fantasy-based.
-
Excuse you?
Step up and teach your daughters not to be timorous and maybe we can all get along. :mad:
Dumbasses are common in both genders, these days largely due to the pussification of society in general. Don't you dare make this into 'little woman are the problem'
"Little women" are not necessarily THE problem, but reality is what it is. Women are more timorous and risk averse than men, on average, and more likely to verbalize their fears. Even after a century's worth of feminization of the culture and deliberate emasculation by the cultural arbiters. That is one reason Ann Coulter thinks it was a bad idea to give women the vote, since they are more likely to vote for socialism out of risk aversion.
As for my own children, I take Aristotle's wisdom to heart, "One becomes brave by doing brave deeds," and encourage them to progressively bolder acts as they grow. That rugby tournament? Both my son and daughter participated.
-
Why is it one (ignore passengers who fit the pattern)? or the other (inconvenience everyone and humiliate innocents)?
The reason it is one or the other in this case is because the "pattern" (based on observations that were ignorantly wrong, but let's continue to ignore that for the moment) being defended by some APS members as reasonable concerns are so laughably broad as to be meaningless. The hijackers were all men, but we don't stop flights because someone looks like a guy. Interestingly, 14 of the 19 suspected hijackers had a Florida residence, which means that going by that attack a given Florida resident was something like 73 times more likely to be involved in the September 11th attack than a given Muslim.
To defend this case is to say that simply the presence of a suspected Muslim on a plane is sufficient cause to be concerned. That is patently ridiculous.
In recent history, Muslims have notoriously hijacked planes in the name of Islam. No one has hijacked a plane in the name of Gun-ism. Or at least not that anyone's aware of. Hence the mathophobic lady's overreaction was plausible (and not in the good sense of the term (look it up)). The same overreaction to a gun magazine would skip past the plausible, and into the fantasy-based.
You're conflating scenarios, friend. No one was saying she should be afraid that a guy with a gun magazine would hijack the plane, just that he might be more likely to illegally possess a gun on the flight.
I have to wonder what the response would be if the lady saw the guy reading a gun magazine and raised concerns about him having a gun on the plane.
Gun owners possessing guns on planes has happened at least once that I recall in the past year.
-
You're conflating scenarios, friend. No one was saying she should be afraid that a guy with a gun magazine would hijack the plane, just that he might be more likely to illegally possess a gun on the flight.Gun owners possessing guns on planes has happened at least once that I recall in the past year.
That works, too. Alerting security to a potential malum prohibitum due to reading material would be lots more dumber than alerting security to the presence of a possible hijacker (and we're still ignoring the ignorant wrong-ness of her observation).
-
"Little women" are not necessarily THE problem, but reality is what it is. Women are more timorous and risk averse than men, on average, and more likely to verbalize their fears. Even after a century's worth of feminization of the culture and deliberate emasculation by the cultural arbiters. That is one reason Ann Coulter thinks it was a bad idea to give women the vote, since they are more likely to vote for socialism out of risk aversion.
As for my own children, I take Aristotle's wisdom to heart, "One becomes brave by doing brave deeds," and encourage them to progressively bolder acts as they grow. That rugby tournament? Both my son and daughter participated.
;/ woman were never actually supported to take on real 'masculine' roles, only the window dressings of pants and jobs. If woman were actually that naturally timid and risk adverse, the human species would have ceased to exist a long time ago.
-
Coming late to the party, I'll just say that the woman was a fsking idiot and should be publicly humiliated. Now there's an idea. You can rat out people, but by god you won't do it anonymously. If you're right, you can be publicly lauded as a hero. Or in this case, publicly mocked and scorned by anyone with the half a brain she do obviously lacks.
-
;/ woman were never actually supported to take on real 'masculine' roles, only the window dressings of pants and jobs. If woman were actually that naturally timid and risk adverse, the human species would have ceased to exist a long time ago.
Are they too timid and risk-averse to take on masculine roles, w/o support?
-
Are they too timid and risk-averse to take on masculine roles, w/o support?
Well, you didn't become the scapegoat without support. So what did your parents do to you to mess you up so bad?
Or, I could say, don't be stupid. You know what I'm talking about, you just don't like it because it doesn't fit in your whole little "look at me, I should be allowed to the manly man to save little woman from herself" narrative. Rad fems on one side of the coin and jerks like you and rooster on the other and we wonder why gender is so screwed up in this country.
-
;/ woman were never actually supported to take on real 'masculine' roles, only the window dressings of pants and jobs. If woman were actually that naturally timid and risk adverse, the human species would have ceased to exist a long time ago.
Yeah not so much. I will stick with several millenia worth of observation of human nature and behavior, backed up with contemporary empirical evidence as my guide to reality.
-
Thread is fairly disappointing
-
Well, you didn't become the scapegoat without support. So what did your parents do to you to mess you up so bad?
Or, I could say, don't be stupid. You know what I'm talking about, you just don't like it because it doesn't fit in your whole little "look at me, I should be allowed to the manly man to save little woman from herself" narrative. Rad fems on one side of the coin and jerks like you and rooster on the other and we wonder why gender is so screwed up in this country.
I think there's some kind of rule about calling people jerks. But it's OK. I know women can get emotional. :P
I'm not sure how I became "the manly man who should be allowed to save the little woman." You'd have to explain that to my "jerk" mind. More :P
-
I'm not sure how I became "the manly man who should be allowed to save the little woman."
Yeah, that really is weird. :rofl:
-
This is about a year old, but I just now watched it. Posted this because of the profiling issue:
http://www.hankstrange.com/driving-while-strange-easter-sunday-traffic-stop/
-
And the candidate thread for the Saturday night Mud Fight thread, misses its calling....
Paging Ben. Ben to the White Courtesy* phone.
'
*- Sadly, this appears to be a very rare commodity in this thread.
-
I apologize for my use of the word 'jerks' as it violates the code of conduct of this board.
And God forbid I get righteously 'emotional' because someone thinks woman should be disallowed the vote and watched over by their 'menfolk', including myself, just because some dipshit doesn't know mathematical equations from Arabic.
Really cute litmis test we have around here for manners.
-
This is about a year old, but I just now watched it. Posted this because of the profiling issue:
http://www.hankstrange.com/driving-while-strange-easter-sunday-traffic-stop/
What profiling issue?
Deep-tinted front door side windows are illegal in some states, for the specific reason that the police CAN'T see the driver through them. That's why cars come from the factory with deep-tinted rear and back door windows, but either no tint or light tint on the front doors windows. Making a traffic stop for windows that are too dark isn't profiling if the cop can't see the driver -- and in this video, the dash cam shows that the patrol unit never even pulled alongside the guy's car, they got closee nogh to see the window tint and initiated the stop based on that.
I only watched about the first third of it, then I got tired and bailed out. I do wonder, though, if the guy is some kind of activist, why he effectively granted the officers permission to search his vehicle. When he gave them permission to get the insurance card out of the vehicle and didn't even know where it was in the vehicle, that opened Pandora's box.
-
And God forbid I get righteously 'emotional' because someone thinks woman should be disallowed the vote and watched over by their 'menfolk', including myself, just because some dipshit doesn't know mathematical equations from Arabic.
Righteously emotional? You're going off the deep end. Somebody alluded to a gadfly's half-serious comments about disenfranchising women. That doesn't mean anyone here wants take your vote away. And I'm still trying to figure out the "you wanna be a manly man" bit. ???
You're right about the silly rules, of course.
-
What profiling issue?
If you watch the last half of the video, he has some interesting things to say, and much more information on the stop (depending on to what extent you trust him to tell the truth). Let me see if I can list the salient bits from memory.
1. There was some sort of annual gathering of a local (black) crime family going on, and other LEOs have supposedly told him that he was stopped as a part of an increased police presence that relies on a certain profile.
2. If he was stopped for tint (the tint of his windows, not the tint of his skin, har-har), it's interesting that they asked him to exit the vehicle, before even getting his documentation. One question I'd like to have answered is whether he was actually ticketed for the tint. He lives in the same state where he was stopped, so it doesn't look like an issue of his wandering into a more restrictive state.
3. Allowing them to go look for his insurance papers was a consequence of them having placed his gun in his car. I guess he could have done it some other way, but they don't seem to have found anything untoward in his car.
4. According to Strange, there were several other police cars on scene, and he believes they saw his face clearly, before pulling him over.
-
Deep-tinted front door side windows are illegal in some states, for the specific reason that the police CAN'T see the driver through them.
Having once bought a beater that had poorly applied dark tint on the front, it's also a legit safety issue. While it was fine in the daytime, at night it made a huge difference in the ability to read signs, and to spot poorly-lit objects in peripheral vision. About two hours after dark the first night, I snagged a trooper sitting in a parking lot and asked him to check it. It was only 2-3% darker than the limit. I bought some acetone, rags and scrapers and made a mess getting rid of all of it before finishing the drive home.
-
I would kinda like to know if his windows are particularly dark, or if that was the real reason for the stop.
I get the safety issue if a driver can't see through the window, but I don't get Hawkmoon's reason. Why do I have to make sure police can see my face?
-
I would kinda like to know if his windows are particularly dark, or if that was the real reason for the stop.
I get the safety issue if a driver can't see through the window, but I don't get Hawkmoon's reason. Why do I have to make sure police can see my face?
Because the law (in some states, not sure about yours) specifies a maximum degree of tint that can be applied to the front door side windows in a motor vehicle. You don't have to ensure that a cop can see your face, but you do have to ensure that your vehicle complies with the law.
In the first part of the video, the officer checks the window and tells Strange what the reading is on this window, and explains that it's much darker than what the law allows. He didn't ask for documentation until after the violation had been established by checking the tint with a meter.
-
He didn't ask for documentation until after the violation had been established by checking the tint with a meter.
I'm sort of curious which direction the meter checks, and what wavelength or range thereof. Seems like it would be possible to make something that's difficult to see through from the outside but would still pass the test.
-
I'm sort of curious which direction the meter checks, and what wavelength or range thereof. Seems like it would be possible to make something that's difficult to see through from the outside but would still pass the test.
They check from inside out, with a visible white light, I've seen them in use. The more chrome or mirrored tints can make it a lot harder to see in while staying legal in the legal % range. But they look more ghetto too.
I run 5% on my cars, all the way around because I live in FL and it's hot. I have on all my rides for like 17 years now. Screw em. That said, I've been pulled over for other things, and gone with the "polite, I know I done wrong" tactic and only one LEO ever questioned my tint. He was a Virginia State Trooper while I was TDY up here, and I played the "dumb E4 going back to FL next month" card and he let me go. I actually got pulled over in my Bronco in St Petersburg for following a friend too close in the wrong 'hood with my windows up, and after it was ascertained I wasn't stalking him fo a car jacking they didn't even ask about my tint.
From my experiences in FL, tint ticket/stops (I don't even know if it's a primary offence in FL) only come if you look like you're up to no good, or they pull you for something else and you act like a jackass so they start finding violations to pile on.
-
Because the law (in some states, not sure about yours) specifies a maximum degree of tint that can be applied to the front door side windows in a motor vehicle. You don't have to ensure that a cop can see your face, but you do have to ensure that your vehicle complies with the law.
In the first part of the video, the officer checks the window and tells Strange what the reading is on this window, and explains that it's much darker than what the law allows. He didn't ask for documentation until after the violation had been established by checking the tint with a meter.
You got me, then, because I skipped past that part of the video. I didn't know they had meters to check them with.
Is it standard procedure to have someone exit their car for a tint violation?
While the law is the law, you said the law is meant to allow police to see inside the vehicle. That's the part I'm not understanding. Why do the police need to see my face?
-
They check from inside out, with a visible white light, I've seen them in use. The more chrome or mirrored tints can make it a lot harder to see in while staying legal in the legal % range. But they look more ghetto too.
I've thought about something like that, though I'm more concerned with making it more difficult for someone to easily spot if I've left a laptop or something laying in the passenger seat. It's less convenient/discreet to scope out a car through the windshield, and an opaque sunshade when parked pretty much eliminates that angle anyway.
-
Gotta feel out your local constabulary.
Like I said, I just Limo Tint 'em and call it cool. You can't see inside from even in full sun.