Invasion of privacy at Airports now?

[BradG]

I respect that crack at it AnsettA330, you have at least given me a direct answer. I think it's a touch vague though.

As for why I defend privacy; I believe in freedom. Freedom of speech, association, privacy and the press. I believe in today's world, it is important to defend your freedoms against governments that seem intent on taking away more and more of it each day. Remember, once a civil liberty is lost, it is very rarely gained back without armed revolution.

Of course criminality is much more than terrorists, but do you want to be searched and ID checked randomly, just on the off chance the police might catch a few criminals here and there they otherwise might not have? You'd also only be catching people with outstanding warrants. Laws already exist that allow police to do such things if they have at least reasonable suspicion that you have or you are about to commit a crime. Just randomly checking people is invasive of their privacy and probably a huge waste of time and resources.

I have no issues with real security measures that achieve something; metal detectors will pick up a weapon, body scanners would see a weapon or drugs, sniffer dogs can identify explosives or drugs, but randomly asking for someones ID at an airport will do what? I dunno..., that's my question.

[Graeme H]

I begin to realise now Brad, this is one of your gotcha discussions, didn't you start a similar one on some forum or other about Police just revenue raising because people were going over the speed limits?, and how that should be allowed because as we all know no one dies in road accidents these days.

Your idea of personal freedoms and ours, and I think I'm talking for most of the members here as no one else has come across to your point of view, differs, so just live with it, or select the country you feel offers the most personal freedom, let me offer you one possibility you could immigrate to the Hutt River Province, they have no airport, so your freedom is saved, yeah.

or can you tell us all which country you believe offers you the most personal freedoms, 20 words or less of course

[tor lives]

I begin to realise now Brad, this is one of your gotcha discussions, didn't you start a similar one on some forum or other about Police just revenue raising because people were going over the speed limits?, and how that should be allowed because as we all know no one dies in road accidents these days.

Your idea of personal freedoms and ours, and I think I'm talking for most of the members here as no one else has come across to your point of view, differs, so just live with it, or select the country you feel offers the most personal freedom, let me offer you one possibility you could immigrate to the Hutt River Province, they have no airport, so your freedom is saved, yeah.

or can you tell us all which country you believe offers you the most personal freedoms, 20 words or less of course

Well said!!!!!.....I must have that "like" button installed .
Brad let me put it to you bluntly.....when you are in my Airport and I am concerned about an element or aspect of your conduct and behaviour, and any potential threat it may represent......consider your personal freedoms null and void. As said elsewhere, aviation is NOT a liberal democracy. Guess who the magistrate will believe .
TOR

[BradG]

I don't know what a 'gotcha' discussion is. I really am wondering what this new law will do and I am an advocate of more freedom, not less. Actually my other thread was, if I remember, about how speed limits are being continually lowered and tolerances for being over the limit were being reduced to unreasonable standards by police; in come cases the tolerance was less than the error margin in speedometers of older cars in particular. I also made the argument for increased speed limits while discussing how the implementation of speed limits in the outback actually led to more fatalities than unlimited roads and how lowering a speed limit because some idiot teen did 160 and killed themselves does nothing but inconvenience honest drivers.

Clearly our ideas of freedom are different. I don't want to live in a police state, where some of you are really advocating it in the name of safety. Scary.....

[BradG]

I begin to realise now Brad, this is one of your gotcha discussions, didn't you start a similar one on some forum or other about Police just revenue raising because people were going over the speed limits?, and how that should be allowed because as we all know no one dies in road accidents these days.

Your idea of personal freedoms and ours, and I think I'm talking for most of the members here as no one else has come across to your point of view, differs, so just live with it, or select the country you feel offers the most personal freedom, let me offer you one possibility you could immigrate to the Hutt River Province, they have no airport, so your freedom is saved, yeah.

or can you tell us all which country you believe offers you the most personal freedoms, 20 words or less of course

Well said!!!!!.....I must have that "like" button installed .
Brad let me put it to you bluntly.....when you are in my Airport and I am concerned about an element or aspect of your conduct and behaviour, and any potential threat it may represent......consider your personal freedoms null and void. As said elsewhere, aviation is NOT a liberal democracy. Guess who the magistrate will believe .
TOR

As I keep saying, there were already laws in place to deal with suspiciously acting people. We're not talking about them, we are talking about someone just sitting in the airport, reading the paper and drinking a coffee.

[Adam the Akrodude]

I respect that crack at it AnsettA330, you have at least given me a direct answer. I think it's a touch vague though.

As for why I defend privacy; I believe in freedom. Freedom of speech, association, privacy and the press. I believe in today's world, it is important to defend your freedoms against governments that seem intent on taking away more and more of it each day. Remember, once a civil liberty is lost, it is very rarely gained back without armed revolution.

Of course criminality is much more than terrorists, but do you want to be searched and ID checked randomly, just on the off chance the police might catch a few criminals here and there they otherwise might not have? You'd also only be catching people with outstanding warrants. Laws already exist that allow police to do such things if they have at least reasonable suspicion that you have or you are about to commit a crime. Just randomly checking people is invasive of their privacy and probably a huge waste of time and resources.

I have no issues with real security measures that achieve something; metal detectors will pick up a weapon, body scanners would see a weapon or drugs, sniffer dogs can identify explosives or drugs, but randomly asking for someones ID at an airport will do what? I dunno..., that's my question.

No Brad, I'm not taking up your university challenge of 20 words or less. I don't think you're considering our rights to live in as safe and orderly environment as possible. For this to happen, then some "freedoms" have to be infringed upon. This is why none of us for example can go down to our local gun store and purchase a $200 Chinese SKS assault rifle and a truck load of ammo. You indeed have freedom of speech, so use it. If you feel so strongly about this, contact the media, write to your local MP as I have suggested.

The whole idea of ID checks is it adds another layer/skin to the security "onion". The check in area of Australian airports I think lacks a visible security presence. Visit other airports around the world and they have much greater and heavily armed security often sporting MP5s or whatever they are. Visit Paris, London, Istanbul, Singapore to name a few to see this. Of course our airports do have security hopefully close at hand, but to me it is not remotely as visible as I've seen at other airports around the world. I see your example of security at Ben Gurion airport was torpedoed well and truly!

I'm no security expert at all and neither are you. I'd suggest though that I am more travelled than you. I've been to some real shitholes on this globe as part of my work, saw the Religious Police confront a mate's wife in Dhahran when they zoomed over in a Humvee c/w M-60 to ask where her husband was (was 200 metres away at the time showing me the blown up remains of Khobar Towers apartment building), had a PLA soldier point a SKS/AK-47 towards my taxi because I was stupid enough to point my camera at some PLA building on way to Shanghai airport, so I've had some experience seeing how one's "freedoms" evaporate in other countries all in the name of "security". Our freedoms are immensely greater here than in many other countries I've visited. There is a fine balance our government must make to uphold freedoms and yet protect us all from those that would do us harm. Security personnel are trained to look for certain types of behavior. Allowing a ID check is one more tool that could in fact help identify would be crims or terrorists. What if security personnel have a name of a would be perp, but no photo? Or the reverse, they have a grainy security camera image of a suspected villian, but no ID? All this is adding to the DETERRENCE effect - making it that much harder for would be perp's - another layer to the "onion". I am no security expert, but these are just a couple of ideas I've plucked out of my brain. Your notion this is a step towards some kind of police state I think is ludicrous. What do you think will happen if someone at the airport feels that security personnel went too far with infringing their rights and privacy? They will be speed dialling Slater & Gordon or Shine Lawyers, etc. There will be compaints to airport and airline management (with feedback from them to government authorities), perhaps a law suit, a spot on the 7:30 Report or A Current Affair. You are taking one security measure and extrapolating it as a start of some police state. Sorry Brad, just can't see this happening. Apol's for taking more than 20 words.

[Ansett A330]

I think it's a touch vague though.

Life is vague even at the best of times Brad and it's vagueness and uncertainty that "Evil Doers" and Terrorists (and even evil City Councils like Brisbane City Council - don't even get me started on that!) capitalise on and use to do their worst so removing some of that can only help clarify a situation and lead to a safe resolution. Remember too that it's still a two way street and that "they" need to identify themselves and prove who"they" are when "they" are dealing with you and making what you seem to classify as "unreasonable demands" (and even the Police in a place like Romania make sure they do that because of all the Impersonators that proliferate there). And don't forget if they haven't done that and get halfway through dealing with you and then say they have been recording or videoing everything then you are totally in the right to get them to delete it and start again from the beginning. They have to advise you of all that "UP FRONT". The least we can do is show and prove who the hell we are otherwise they won't know us from a bar of soap and by all means if you want to argue with them and end up in the "big house" because you were the proverbial pain in the arse there will only be one game you'll be playing with a bar of soap!

[Ansett A330]

We're not talking about them, we are talking about someone just sitting in the airport, reading the paper and drinking a coffee.

We are actually. Absolute certainty that many of the 9/11, Seville, 7/11, Bali, etc, etc, "someone"s were doing exactly that on their Recce day/s before their "missions" and even on "The Day".

[Graeme H]

Brad, I realise you want to be the keyboard warrior for freedom of rights, and I can understand you have different point of view, but as I said, no one is going along with your ideas, so not sure what you want us to do, rally up and email our local pollies? march in the streets with our foil caps on?

This shit has been going on for a week now, I have just come in from doing some real work so have to get back to that, because I live in the real world.

As you don't offer any ideas at all, just the negative, I has been fun Brad, but you can have too much of a good thing, it's time to get over it.

[BradG]

Brad, I realise you want to be the keyboard warrior for freedom of rights, and I can understand you have different point of view, but as I said, no one is going along with your ideas, so not sure what you want us to do, rally up and email our local pollies? march in the streets with our foil caps on?

This shit has been going on for a week now, I have just come in from doing some real work so have to get back to that, because I live in the real world.

As you don't offer any ideas at all, just the negative, I has been fun Brad, but you can have too much of a good thing, it's time to get over it.

This is a discussion forum isn't it? I'm posting issues for discussion. At least one person here agrees with me, but no one is critical of him, I guess it's good to be in the in clique ay Damo lol.

I still pose the simple question; how will random ID checks make commuters safer? Hell I'm not sure there is any legal requirement to carry ID in this country, so there's that problem too.

Papers please.....