Yup, so the match is perfectly poised for nail-biting pair of 2nd innings.

Children have been used as mules/carriers of bombs in the past, so no justification to automatically exclude children from scanning. IF these body scanners work (I admit thats an IF!), then its absolutely disgraceful that campaigners would put child matters ahead of the safety of all air passengers, and it says a lot for the screwed up way our society thinks now.

Andy

I will rephrase – children, and many other innocent passengers, would generally be excluded, if the authorities had the guts to use profiling.

I agree with you about the reasons for society’s antipathy towards screening children but my point is a different one, but is linked to the same PC attitudes. Profiling is designed to focus on those more or most likely to be suspect, and therefore it singles out “vulnerable minorities” to use an over-coined phrase.

And that’s the crucial word, isn’t it? 😉

Paul

Oh, dear! I hope I am not drawing the inference you intend from your comment.:(

I think you’ll find that’s long time posters actually giving a toss about this forum and not wanting to see it go down the toilet rather than indulgence. :rolleyes:

Paul

Well, that’s good. But perhaps comment on my post, negative or positive, would be helpful. Isn’t a degree of self-moderation relevant both in itself and as a way of resolving one of the problems posted?

I’m with Frank on this one. Like him I could see where this thread was likely to go and what a can of worms it could open up.

And that’s the crucial word, isn’t it? There is a link here to a thread running in Commercial about moderation. Surely it is down to responsible posting and I assume we can grant the majority of us here with enough intelligence to know when we are overstepping the line.

We always say that. Let’s give the other lot a chance they can’t be any worse then when they get in they immediately prove that they can.

Well, not necessarily, but have you got a better idea? I would have thought that the last 12 years disproves your contention, anyway.

For me, at least, that is interesting and enlightening but raises a question, which I hope is not naive.

Moderation is required because posters step outside the Rules of Conduct, one way or another. Couldn’t we all be a bit more careful about what we write and so help to reduce the workload you allude to? After all many here are very old hands and must be very aware of what is kosher and what is not.

My earlier post has been swept aside by the intensity of the debate between 2 or 3 indulgent high profile users. But surely a degree of “self-moderation” has to play a part, doesn’t it? Or is that just how a relative newcomer sees it?

Appalled – but free speech, free society, tolerance etc, etc. If only it wasn’t all so one sided.