1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Shooting at LAX

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Nov 1, 2013.

  1. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    Actually, what is this is supposed to mean? One wacko opens fire, and it's supposed to represent exactly what seismic change?
     
  2. NoOneLikesUs

    NoOneLikesUs Active Member

    Yes, let's just simply write it off as lone nut and be done with it. Don't ask questions about his motivations. There is nothing to see here.
     
  3. playthrough

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

    It's like in Airplane (or was it the sequel?) where the militia easily gets through the screeners and then the old lady gets tackled.
     
  4. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    Yeah, but... why?

    The TSA isn't there to stop a crazy guy with a rifle. The TSA is there to prevent people from smuggling dangerous items onto a plane. There isn't any point to staging an armed attack there, any more than at a supermarket or a bowling alley.
     
  5. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Except that transportation hubs, particularly airports, have proven to be in terrorists' sights for, literally, decades now.
     
  6. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I suppose, but there isn't any reason to attack LAX over virtually any other spot in Los Angeles where crowds gather. From a terrorist perspective, I understand subway/rail attacks. LAX, not so much.

    I'm just rally, really wary of any response that boils down to "security at airports isn't tight enough." It's already absurd. I don't want to see it ratcheted up just because of one asshole ranting about the New World Order.
     
  7. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Yeah, if the question is, "to what ends," it's a good one.

    What could terrorist do, other than hold hostages? They could potentially get to/on a plane, but it's unlikely they'd ever let it take off.

    But, transportation hubs are potential targets, specifically because an incident at an airport terrorizes people, and disrupts our economy.

    Now, this guy is likely a kid who had a psychotic break. He's the right age, and the evidence is pointing that way.

    And, while I don't want airport security to be any more of a hassle, I just think it's a glaring admission that TSA agents aren't professional enough, and aren't trained (and maybe not capable of training) well enough to trust them with firearms.

    Then who the fuck are these people, and why are we entrusting them with any security role?
     
  8. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    They're the same fuckwits that held those jobs before 9-11 but now they're government employees, thus harder to fire.
     
  9. spikechiquet

    spikechiquet Well-Known Member

    That's what the government WANTS you to do. </AlexJonesrant>
     
  10. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    The TSA is there to keep people buying airline tickets.
     
  11. HejiraHenry

    HejiraHenry Well-Known Member

    Well, gosh, all this mud wrestling isn't at all interesting.

    I thought it interesting that among the first people tweeting about the trouble at LAX were Tory Belleci and Grant Imahara of the Mythbusters, who were waiting on a flight.
     
  12. Tarheel316

    Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

    Excellent point.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page