- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56769139
cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/23170564
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56769139
cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/23170564
How do you think they open the bags?
You don’t need a tsa approved lock to open an unlocked bag. Nor a bag that is locked in any other fashion. Which is why this is a contrived connection.
Do you unlock your bags before pushing them through the scanner? I only do it if they ask me to and that only happens directly in front of me. But sure, let’s assume bags were fully unlocked and unattended, it’s still a case of representatives of a government organization (aka the good guys) with full access to a backdoor showing that they’re not to be trusted, which is the entire point I’m trying to make.
I don’t lock them to begin with. And I certainly wouldn’t purchase a tsa approved lock. Regardless, I was not subject to a law requiring that the non-tsa lock I was using to have a backdoor added. Which is why this is a bad comparison all around.
You are subject to a law requiring the lock you use to have a TSA backdoor added if you travel anywhere the TSA has jurisdiction.
No. I’m not. I’ve never used that lock and I’m not required to.
Plus, the thieves in this case we’re arrested. The French government would not be. This is a terrible comparison, even more so as we move along.
Yes, you are, you can look this up in like 12 seconds. The TSA as a whole was also not arrested. If a random worker in the French government uses the backdoor to spy on people and they’re found out, I’m sure they’ll be arrested. It really feels like you’re just giving the analogy more strength with each comment.
You are not required to use a tsa lock. Take that 12 seconds.
Crickets.
You are required unless you want them to destroy your luggage. Do you get off on being pedantic?