Just because they attend MIT doesn't mean they are smart

[Stingray]

A circuit board and a lump of play-dough. It is my understanding (and thus the basis of my logic) that it was intended to look like a bomb.

She did not have anything intended to look like a bomb. Did you actually see the pictures? It was a breadboard with some LEDs arranged in the shape of a star (her name). Nobody who has ever played with electronics before would think that it looked anything like a bomb.

That said, I can understand her being questioned. She shouldn't have worn the shirt, but I've known plenty of absent-minded people. She probably didn't even consider that anyone could be so stupid as to think that looked like a bomb. OMG! Wires and lights! Help us all!

The fact that she was given criminal charges here is I think criminal in itself. This was clearly a silly mistake, and everyone should have laughed it off after they realized what was going on. Instead, security decided to possibly ruin this girl's life to make themselves look important.

 

[FredGarvin]

Well, there's no dispute that it was an incredibly stupid thing to do. I did see video of the shirt. It was a large, rectangular PCB with a 9V battery hanging off the side. Honestly, I could care less if the LEDs spelled out "I love puppies". It did not look friendly from the video I saw. The way I see it, the security did act accordingly, especially considering two factors:

1) She is a sophomore in college. That is perfect mind warping/brainwashing age for idealists , loyalists, whatever you want to call them, to be recruited into any kind of organization.

2) This was at Logan...where two of the 9/11 aircraft departed from. Do you think that pussyfooting around with security is anywhere in their vocabulary now? Heck no. If I were to go into Logan today I would be on edge myself.

I think this story goes to our nation's incredibly short attention span and the 'abuse' of our freedoms. Does anyone here really think this moron would have worn that shirt 6 months after 9/11 or even a year after? No. I don't think so. So why would it be ok to do it now? People need to stop passing through life without thinking about what they are doing.

 

[russ_watters]

Some clarifications:

-The article says she was carrying the lump of clay (in her hands), not that it was part of the device. I don't know if the police saw it or not.

-The video I saw on cnn was of too poor quality to get a clear look a the board (possibly a glare). So all I see is a board with some protruding wires and a 9v battery. If you guys say it has her name on it, I'll take your word for it.

-The info booth worker asked her what it was and she did not respond - she just turned and walked away.

My position remains unchanged.

 

[DaveC426913]

She did not have anything intended to look like a bomb. Did you actually see the pictures? It was a breadboard with some LEDs arranged in the shape of a star (her name). Nobody who has ever played with electronics before would think that it looked anything like a bomb.

That said, I can understand her being questioned. She shouldn't have worn the shirt, but I've known plenty of absent-minded people. She probably didn't even consider that anyone could be so stupid as to think that looked like a bomb. OMG! Wires and lights! Help us all!

The fact that she was given criminal charges here is I think criminal in itself. This was clearly a silly mistake, and everyone should have laughed it off after they realized what was going on. Instead, security decided to possibly ruin this girl's life to make themselves look important.

You think she wore that shirt accidentally? And was innocently carrying a lump of clay in her hands?

No way.

 

[Stingray]

I think this story goes to our nation's incredibly short attention span and the 'abuse' of our freedoms. Does anyone here really think this moron would have worn that shirt 6 months after 9/11 or even a year after? No. I don't think so. So why would it be ok to do it now? People need to stop passing through life without thinking about what they are doing.

So, we should live in constant fear for the rest of our lives because of the actions of a few people six years ago? Boston is not Baghdad. There haven't been bombs going off all the time (or ever, really). I think your attitude is a very disturbing one.

Regarding the gate agent, maybe she didn't hear or understand her. May she didn't want to bother talking to someone who was not a member of security. Regardless, it was a little suspicious. As I said before, I can understand this girl being approached. It is maybe even reasonable that they drew their guns. But it is absolutely silly that the girl was charged with anything.

You think she wore that shirt accidentally? And was innocently carrying a lump of clay in her hands?

No way.

Yes. She was there to pick up her boyfriend, not to board a plane. She was wearing whatever she was wearing. Friends on other sites have said that it's part of her normal wardrobe. She wore that all the time, and probably didn't think about it. Having gone to Caltech as an undergrad (which I assume is similar to MIT), I don't find that very strange.

She's a EE student with artsy inclinations. Clay is fun. Maybe that's how she passes the time while waiting around. Some people do things like that.

Also, if she'd wanted to construct something that looked "threatening," that's very easy to do. She has plenty of training for it. What she made looks absolutely innocuous to anyone with the slightest bit of electronics experience. That alone is enough to say it was not a fake bomb.

 

[Cyrus]

No offense, you are naive Stingray.

 

[Stingray]

No offense, you are naive Stingray.

You think she's a threat? Explain.

 

[Integral]

Integral, weren't you in the Navy? Have you not seen what rules of engagment look like? Lethal force requries a perceived imminent threat of serious bodily harm. Pointing a gun or tampering with an explosive device most certianly qualifies - the bomb does not have to go off and the gun does not have to be fired.

Here's a sample ROE:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_engagement

That is all good and fine, for a police state. So I guess most here think we should move more in that direction?

Yes, I was in the Navy, and I recall Spain in the early 70's where there was a policeman on every corner with a submachine gun. That is life in a police state, you live in fear of the police.

Is that really what the US is about?

Must I live considering every action I take as to how it will be reacted to by the man on the corner with a gun?

Sure glad I am not 20 looking forward to the future of this nation.

 

[Integral]

No offense, you are naive Stingray.

Call me naive too.

We have long since shown that given the freedom to legislate we legislated away freedom. I am appalled at how little value so many here place on our personal freedoms.

In the past it seemed that they were being eroded away, now it looks as if it has gone beyond that to a full flash flood.

This argument is as old as the Nation, I am Jeffersonian, I believe the single most important concept of the American way is personal freedoms. Yes they are more important then a false perception of public safety.

 

[Cyrus]

You think she's a threat? Explain.

You are making too many assumptions. She wears it all the time, its a simple bread board anyone with any experience in electronics would know this, etc.

-She could wear it every day all day, guess what. You DONT wear that at an airport at this day and age, period.

-A cops job is NOT to know what a breadboard is or what kind of circuit is on the breadboard. This is an unreasonable assumption on your part.

-There was a guy who tried to blow up an airplane with C4 in his shoes a while back, remember? C4 looks like playdough and is exploded via electric signal, aka her 'circuit'.


http://www.fireandsafety.eku.edu/VFRE-99/Recognition/High/C4-1.jpg

 

[Cyrus]

Call me naive too.

We have long since shown that given the freedom to legislate we legislated away freedom. I am appalled at how little value so many here place on our personal freedoms.

In the past it seemed that they were being eroded away, now it looks as if it has gone beyond that to a full flash flood.

This argument is as old as the Nation, I am Jeffersonian, I believe the single most important concept of the American way is personal freedoms. Yes they are more important then a false perception of public safety.

This issue has NOTHING to do with personal freedoms, at ALL. Please tell me what freedom is being given up?

 

[rewebster]

I wonder what would have happened to her if she was at that Kerry speech down in Florida?

 

[DaveC426913]

Yes. She was there to pick up her boyfriend, not to board a plane.

You will be just as dead in an airport as you will in a plane.

She was wearing whatever she was wearing. Friends on other sites have said that it's part of her normal wardrobe. She wore that all the time, and probably didn't think about it. Having gone to Caltech as an undergrad (which I assume is similar to MIT), I don't find that very strange.

She's a EE student with artsy inclinations. Clay is fun. Maybe that's how she passes the time while waiting around. Some people do things like that.

Also, if she'd wanted to construct something that looked "threatening," that's very easy to do. She has plenty of training for it. What she made looks absolutely innocuous to anyone with the slightest bit of electronics experience. That alone is enough to say it was not a fake bomb.

Clearly, her defense plan was plausible deniability - i.e. exactly what you just said.


I'm all for personal freedom as well, but come, this is goading.

 

[rewebster]

I'm sure that's what the guardsmen said at Kent state too.

 

[Integral]

This issue has NOTHING to do with personal freedoms, at ALL. Please tell me what freedom is being given up?

The freedom to wear stupid things around your neck, the freedom to enter or leave a airport without your life being threatened by ignorant thugs with guns.


Not sure why that needs explaining. You think living in fear of the police is the way it should be?

 

[Stingray]

-She could wear it every day all day, guess what. You DONT wear that at an airport at this day and age, period.

Yeah, modern airports are paranoid. I agree that she should have thought of that, but her misjudgement is not a criminal act in any way (or shouldn't be).

-A cops job is NOT to know what a breadboard is or what kind of circuit is on the breadboard. This is an unreasonable assumption on your part.

-There was a guy who tried to blow up an airplane with C4 in his shoes a while back, remember? C4 looks like playdough and is exploded via electric signal, aka her 'circuit'.

Actually, it is their job to have some discretion. Airport security is supposed to be trained in these things to some degree. I don't expect much, but for the third time, I'm not really arguing about the initial response anyway. I'm saying that it is ridiculous that she was given criminal charges. There was obviously no ill intent here.

Also, almost every single person on a plane is carrying on at least one "circuit." Detonators could easily be hidden in just about anything. According to you, circuits are most dangerous when they're out in the open with exposed flashing lights. I guess they score extra points when on a geeky girl who's been sitting around for awhile. Does that really make any sense to you?

 

[rewebster]

A lot of republicans have a lot of money/investments in military/'war' ---they'd love/'may not mind' to see a 'police' state here in the US---(they'd make a lot MORE money)

 

[Stingray]

You will be just as dead in an airport as you will in a plane.

My point was that people don't think as much about their appearance when just picking someone up.

Clearly, her defense plan was plausible deniability - i.e. exactly what you just said.

I'm all for personal freedom as well, but come, this is goading.

Yeah, sure. Why exactly would anyone want to cause a scene like this? If she was really goading, she did a poor job of it.

I've carried things in my luggage that looked a heck of a lot more bomb-like than this, and nobody bothered me. I guess if someone decided to react, reporters could have written a story which sounded pretty incriminating. Unfortunately, my freedom is restricted by having to worry about these things now. That's a slightly different issue than arose here, but I think they're closely related.

 

[rewebster]

well, I guess (they could have thought), she could have been bin Laden in disguise

-------------------------------

They could hire those Blackwater guys to watch the airports, too, I guess

----------------------------------

and there could be WMD's in Iraq still, too, I guess


-----------------------------------

and I could win the lotto this weekend, too, I guess

-------------------------------------

hey, cyrus, if you don't think this is about personal freedoms, how soon are you moving to Iraq?

 

[Cyrus]

The freedom to wear stupid things around your neck, the freedom to enter or leave a airport without your life being threatened by ignorant thugs with guns.


Not sure why that needs explaining. You think living in fear of the police is the way it should be?

(1) You don't have any freedom to wear stupid things around your neck if it is a possible threat to the public. I can't wear a gun on a neck chain, can I?

(2) My life isn't threatened by ignorant thugs with guns at the airport, ever. And I am middle eastern.

(3) This isn't a police state, nor does this issue have anything to do with it being a police state.

 

[Cyrus]

Actually, it is their job to have some discretion. Airport security is supposed to be trained in these things to some degree. I don't expect much, but for the third time, I'm not really arguing about the initial response anyway. I'm saying that it is ridiculous that she was given criminal charges. There was obviously no ill intent here.

Just because there was no intent does not mean it is excusable.

Also, almost every single person on a plane is carrying on at least one "circuit." Detonators could easily be hidden in just about anything. According to you, circuits are most dangerous when they're out in the open with exposed flashing lights. I guess they score extra points when on a geeky girl who's been sitting around for awhile. Does that really make any sense to you?

I don't care if every single person has a circuit, what's that got to do with *anything*? They don't have what appears to be a makeshift explosive device with a possible explosive material in their hand.

 

[Cyrus]

well, I guess (they could have thought), she could have been bin Laden in disguise

-------------------------------

They could hire those Blackwater guys to watch the airports, too, I guess

----------------------------------

and there could be WMD's in Iraq still, too, I guess


-----------------------------------

and I could win the lotto this weekend, too, I guess

-------------------------------------

hey, cyrus, if you don't think this is about personal freedoms, how soon are you moving to Iraq?

Are you retarded? Whats the point of this post...

 

[rewebster]

The point is:

she was a person, maybe stupid, but not a threat and not arrogant --would you have shot her?

----------
and then worried about it later? (because you were the one with the gun)

---------------

don't start name calling

 

[Cyrus]

Do you not know how to read what I post?

Go back and read post #30.

 

[Evo]

The point is:

she was a person, maybe stupid, but not a threat and not arrogant --would you have shot her?

----------
and then worried about it later? (because you were the one with the gun)

I don't see the point to this question since she wasn't shot.

---------------

don't start name calling

You insulted cyrus when you told him to move to Iraq.

Both of you stop.

 

[rewebster]

Do you not know how to read what I post?

Go back and read post #30.

Ohhhh--I get it now---we're supposed to read everything that you write as being funny or sarcastic---OK---OK---I get it now---

Not sure if you're serious or sarcastic, but we don't shoot people dead for inappropriate reactions. Even in airports.

Wait, you were being sarcastic.

just like dave is saying


----------evo--you're right again

 

[Cyrus]

...I have not tried to be funny at all during my posts in this thread.

 

[FredGarvin]

So, we should live in constant fear for the rest of our lives because of the actions of a few people six years ago? Boston is not Baghdad. There haven't been bombs going off all the time (or ever, really). I think your attitude is a very disturbing one.

Hi. I'm Mr. Strawman. Nice to meet you. Should we live in fear? No. Should we accept more responsibility for our own actions and spend more than one nanosecond thinking about how our actions can have consequences? Yes.

I never said Boston was Baghdad. Again, going way too far with a statement. What I did say that you can not possibly think that Logan airport, being the central staging point for 9/11 attackers, would not have some of the most uptight security on the planet now. Hell, just going to Detroit Metro I make darned sure that there is absolutely nothing I am doing or carrying...or anything...that could make me look suspicious in any way shape nor form. I'll chalk some up to her being an idiot teenager, but come on.

Should this girl have a criminal record after this? No. Should she be in trouble? Absolutely. I'd have her doing community service until she got her PhD. If something were to happen and she was shot, I'd be sorry that it happened, but I wouldn't hold it against the security people either. They are put in a horrible situation with having to act very quickly. I would never want to be put in the situation of having to make a choice of shooting someone.

 

[HallsofIvy]

I have been urged by a friend to point out that "bad judgement" is not the same as "stupid"! (I graduated from MIT, the friend did not.)

 

[rewebster]

Mr. Strawman--a better phrasing than I---(speed typing a response is not one of my forte's, and sometimes short is not sweet)

and I should have put a smiley face/(emote?) behind the that kind of (Iraq) comment, I guess...(I've seen that done before)

 

[DaveC426913]

My point was that people don't think as much about their appearance when just picking someone up.

Circuit board on chest, lump of clay in her hand. She was not being thoughtless.

Yeah, sure. Why exactly would anyone want to cause a scene like this? If she was really goading, she did a poor job of it.

Why would you say that? She was accosted by security with automatic weapons. She did an excellent job of it.

I've carried things in my luggage that looked a heck of a lot more bomb-like than this,

Were you goading them with it?



BTW, I don't know if it's occurred to anyone, but what the security thinks is not the only issue here. I'll bet one of the scenarios that Security considers is what would happen if bystanders (or, say an information rep) saw and reacted to a circuit board and lump of clay. Valid threat or no, that could have caused a stampede, and people could very well have gotten hurt in the ensuing chaos. Security would have every right to react to this very real danger.