Good Old Neon Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 if you do anything strange and/or suspicious in an airport you are by definition guilty of something It Quote Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 If that chick had worn that stupidity in any other country besides this one, she would have been shot first and arrested later. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Though I agree little Miss. Unique Sweater was woefully misguided, I think she has already learned her lesson in this case. I see no reason to take away a year of her life, a year she will never, ever, get back Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 It Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Do you really believe that, or are you just being a contrarian? Look. I know teenagers can be dumb - (sorry, kids) I was one once - and getting into a school like MIT is no guarantee of intelligence. But I cannot fathom how anyone could not think they might cause a ruckus walking into an airport with something like that around her neck. And how do you explain the playdough? Even if her intent was totally innocent, which I will never believe, she should do a year or so in the pen. Maybe she'll learn something about common sense. i'm not being contrarian. though i'm not committed to the idea that she's innocent, i think her story checks out. it seems plausible to me that she made that sweatshirt for career day and was unfortunately wearing it when waiting for her friend's arrival. it also seems unlikely to me that it was performance art because there has been no indication that she made any attempt for attention at the airport other than to ask about the arrival at the information desk. way too subtle for your average loony or rebel student. also, people see things as they want to. if this student was making a simple light up display, it doesn't seem stupid of her to not consider her display as anything but decoration. as someone who probably works quite a bit with simple batteries, wires and circuit boards, why would her mind go to 'bomb'? if i saw her wearing it at MIT during career day, i think its function would quickly become apparent. once i heard about the scare and saw the device, my first reaction was "oh yeah, she must be crazy" until i read what it really was. it's just as easy for someone to say it's common sense that the "fake bomb" would get her arrested as it would be for her to say it's common sense that a battery lighting up a circuit board is not a bomb. common sense isn't so common, anyway. there aren't prisons large enough if that's the criteria. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 So-called art and reality do not mix well together. This makes me think of this. I'm beginning to feel like nothing mixes too well with reality nowadays. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I'm beginning to feel like nothing mixes too well with reality nowadays.calm down Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 calm down Calmer than you dude Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 If that chick had worn that stupidity in any other country besides this one, she would have been shot first and arrested later. i'd say most westernized countries would follow similar protocol, i bet the UK would've done it sans automatic weapons even. can we all agree that it's a good thing people aren't shot on site when it's unclear if they're even a threat? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 i'd say most westernized countries would follow similar protocol, i bet the UK would've done it sans automatic weapons even. can we all agree that it's a good thing people aren't shot on site when its unclear if their even a threat?In most public places, yes. However, in countries where terrorism has been carried out with airplanes as the weapon (Britain and Israel come immediately to mind), the protocol of politeness in airports does not exist. Airports are police states. To think of it any other way is foolhardy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Don't forget suicide bombers -- more than a few of which have been women. However, I also agree that 100+ community service is plenty in this case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I think her punishment should be having to ride around on a few buses in the Gaza strip by herself in her cute little sweater. If her sweater really doesn't look suspicious or like a bomb, fine, she'll be ok. Otherwise... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 i'd say most westernized countries would follow similar protocol, i bet the UK would've done it sans automatic weapons even. can we all agree that it's a good thing people aren't shot on site when it's unclear if they're even a threat?It was in England that a South Asian non-terrorist student was shot to death on a subway by plainclothes policemen for doing nothing more than walking out of a house and getting on a train. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 It was in England that a South Asian non-terrorist student was shot to death on a subway by plainclothes policemen for doing nothing more than walking out of a house and getting on a train. yes, but was it with automatic weapons? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Kinsley Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 So, it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I'd say he has a right to say what he wants. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 It is my understanding that police in Britain have access to all sorts of weapons, but the average, everyday PC doesn't carry them routinely. And if you think the MIT kid's story checks out, I have a nice bridge I would like to sell you. It links the East Side of Manhattan with Long Island. Lot of potential for traffic. PM me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 So, it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Kinsley Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Seriously, the gay comparison is just ridiculous. Come to think of it, I think I know what's going on here... ikol, you're a genius! This little bit you're doing where you come up with a phony screen name and mock liberals by pretending to be the most ridiculous one you can be - brilliant! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 (Actually ikol is a genius!) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 It is my understanding that police in Britain have access to all sorts of weapons, but the average, everyday PC doesn't carry them routinely. And if you think the MIT kid's story checks out, I have a nice bridge I would like to sell you. It links the East Side of Manhattan with Long Island. Lot of potential for traffic. PM me. I must look like a complete fool to presume someone innocent when the only evidence of a hoax is that it sortof looks like it could be a bomb. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I must look like a complete fool to presume someone innocent when the only evidence of a hoax is that it sortof looks like it could be a bomb.Airports are police states. To think of it any other way is foolhardy.Um. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I'd say he has a right to say what he wants.Right on. Even if he doesn't believe it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 He seems alright to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tongue-tied Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Um. What's the problem? She was arrested outside of the airport, I suspect she'll be tried outside of the airport too. I expect zero-tolerance at the airport, and it makes perfect sense that the police responded the way they did. but she may not have broken any laws. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.