Are there any other precautions I could or should take?"

Yeah. Buy yourself a laptop and use _that_ to watch pr0n.

Sorry: "read an ebook".

Less than a grand for a laptop. Worth the hassle, imho.

Depends on the price diff.

A 10-15% diff in price would be worth the the time and gas.

YMMV.

Sure as a dog returns to it's vomit, that will happen. About 2 seconds after they figure out this isn't working for them.

"Marissa Taylor says the retail chains' worst nightmare are consumers who come in to take a look at merchandise in-store, but use smartphone apps to shop for cheaper prices online.

This is no different from how I shop for groceries: look at the ads in the Sunday paper, find the coupons, shop for X and one store, Y at another, Z at the third.

Welcome to the 21st century. Get used to it, Target.

Have you considered Avon?

Set your own hours. Income potential is up to you. Lots of brand recognition.

It's not geeky, or technical, but it's easy to excel, and you're looking for _income_ right?

Email me, I can put you in touch with my wife who is an Avon lady.

brian.dunbar at gmail dot com

Whose meaning? :)

Mine, duh. :)

Freedom seems to be a lot like pr0n. You know it when you see it, hard to define otherwise.

What I Want My Society To Be

Government has the job of providing a regulated market. Such regulations are very minimal - the very least that we can have and still have a functioning market. As much as possible is done by private organizations. As much as possible is governed locally.

That's it. The rest is details worked out by individuals acting in their own self-interest.

Erk. That's not good. How were they found out?

One fellow attempted to detonate the explosives in his shoes. The other the explosives in his underpants. The former didn't blow up so much as set his shoes on fire.

Which is, yes, laughable. These guys are clearly a) zealots and b) ignorant. But they were serious attempts to do a lot of damage and kill people, even if the execution left a lot to be desired.

Congress decided it was reasonable, so how is it a violation?

I think the Supreme Court, not Congress, is in charge of interpreting the law. But just because _they_ say something is right, does not make it forever inviolate. Once upon a time we thought chattel slavery was icky, but legally okay. Later we changed our minds about that.

Times and morals change. Maybe someday we'll decide to live up to the meaning of the Constitution and be a free people.

Don't (he smiled) get me started on the death penalty. I have only a few qualms about it in theory: in practice we seem to spend a lot of time killing people who are innocent, were talked into a confession, or were just plain inconvenient to authority.

It was a hippie philosopher, Leary or Thoreau or one of those guys, that said if you're not worried you're not paying attention.

Well, we're talking about TSA and airport screening. Do these bombing attempts have anything to do with that?

IIRC at least two of them involved guys walking explosives, or components of explosives, through the checkpoint.

What exactly is your specific argument against airport screenings?

They are ineffective at preventing people from doing harm to others with, or aboard airliners.
Incompetently implemented.
Violation of the fourth amendment.
Granting increased powers to the state.

If it was an effective deterrent there would not have been bombing attempts since 9/11. Also - is the deterrent worth the loss of civil liberties, the growth of yet another federal agency, increase in police powers? Some of us don't think so.

As well as the numerous reported incidents of people accidentally bringing contraband right through the checkpoints.

We know the former is not true.

I am not sure how one takes a person quietly into custody: do you mean that they do not have a public hearing, sequester them in jail without recourse to attorneys and deprive an accused person of their civil liberties?

The shoe check is because Richard Reid attempted to ignite explosives in his shoes on a plane December 12, 2001.

A quick reality check demonstrates your two possibilities are false: people have smuggled bombs and bomb making material on airplanes: the underwear bomber, the bombs discovered in cargo planes in 2010. There are also numerous reports of people inadvertently bringing banned materials on airplanes without being detected. Terrorists are still interested in mayhem, the strict procedures don't seem to be effective.

'TSA has never caught one' is shorthand for 'this program is not effective at it's stated goal, is a massive inconvenience to the people it is supposed to be serving, allows gross violations of civil rights, and is a waste of money and resources'. Citizens _should_ bash government programs like this.

Terrorists aren't complete morons.

This is true. Which is why TSA has never caught one.

Perhaps we should re-think this whole airport security thing.