During this Republican primary campaign we've heard a lot about flip-flopping as though changing your mind when new facts appear or you realize your first position had some flaw, was always a bad thing.. I was one of the first who, on principle and apparent common sense, objected to subjecting "old women" and children to searches at the airport. Although I rarely fly, I felt that was stupid. An old lady a terrorist?
Even though "old women and children" may not ordinarily be suspected of being possible terrorists, there is always the possibility that one may act or be forced to act under duress. Who among you might agree to do something if a terrorist were holding hostage your mother, wife, husband or other person dear to you? We've all seen the movies where a bank president robs his own bank while the "bad guys" are back at the house with his wife and kids.
In the end, not for me, but for those who do fly, it is best if every person undergo some scrutiny no matter how implausible it seems that they could be terrorists or acting for a terrorist. In matters as dangerous as these, it is "better to be safe than sorry".
Even though "old women and children" may not ordinarily be suspected of being possible terrorists, there is always the possibility that one may act or be forced to act under duress. Who among you might agree to do something if a terrorist were holding hostage your mother, wife, husband or other person dear to you? We've all seen the movies where a bank president robs his own bank while the "bad guys" are back at the house with his wife and kids.
In the end, not for me, but for those who do fly, it is best if every person undergo some scrutiny no matter how implausible it seems that they could be terrorists or acting for a terrorist. In matters as dangerous as these, it is "better to be safe than sorry".
No comments:
Post a Comment