I can't answer that question since I didn't actually make that assumption, I was responding to it.

Why would you assume any part of the phone is suspect? People carry phones, including discharged ones all the time. there is nothing the least bit suspect about a phone, even one that is discharged.

Frankly, a bomb can be hidden anywhere, including inside your anus, so clearly anyone with an anus needs their inspected visually. In fact, any scar on a persons body could be where a bomb was inserted surgically....so full body searches must be conducted on everyone, and all scars opened up or medically imaged to show that there is no device inside....anytime a device is found, it must be disassembled to prove it really is a medical device, and not simply marked "pace maker" and placed next to someones heart.

Not sure why people keep brinigng this up. Saying this is saying that it is the passengers responsibility to carry a charged device; when no such responsibility exists elsewhere; and there is no real justification for. Whether or not it would be easy to comply is not relevant, many people will, for one reason or another, forget, regardless of how easy you think it may have been for them to comply without any knowledge or consideration of their life up to that point.

Well its apparently not entirely broken, probably just out of calibration.

You are correct, it was a response to the suggestion in the previous post, not the story. The TSA is threatening extra screening, not simple battery confiscation, as the previous post had suggested.

> Does the TSA expect that most of their enemies are as dumb as they are

No, they expect the public will not listen to their enemies about how stupid it all is. They are not worried about their enemies because they already won and the public will fund whatever staffing levels they can justify.

To think that the TSAs real enemies are terrorists is laughable, they are a theater troupe doing security plays. Their enemy is the guy calling them out for being actors.

Right because having your fucking phone die at the airport isn't inconvenient enough; you clearly are not having a bad enough day that you can't easily call people when you reach your destination, or get notices about flight delays on your way to the airport....no.... you need to lose your battery too! Another $50 on your trip asshole for doing something boneheaded that only ever was a problem for you before now.

Certainly there are so vanishingly few legitimate reasons a persons phone would be discharged.... that there wont be too many false positives with this....never. I am sure they will mostly only inconvinence terrorists, and not, so many people as to justify maybe....a full time position or two at each airport.

Oh totally but honestly the problem is just that.... expectations. People come to expect cars stop, hell I saw someone walk out into the crosswalk as I, in my car, was already crossing it....she was face down in her smart phone....you should have seen the look on her face when she suddenly looked up and saw that she almost walked right into the side of a moving car.

Frankly, when I took drivers ed, the instructor was an off duty cop who had gone on an exchange program to Russia. He was telling us that their law worked differently.... cars take a lot more energy to stop than pedestrians and have a much longer stopping distance, so they have right of way. I kind of like that.

Doubtful but it wouldn't really help. Funny thing about the "accepting cash" thing is, that the law only specifies cash must be accepted for debt. So if you owed money as a debt, and they refused to accept cash, and subsequently tried to bring you to court for payment, their refusal can be used to nullify the debt.
(whether this applies to situations where money is owed to the state is unclear, I assume it would work like it does for anyone else but, it might not)

So a store, for example, could operate without using cash at all, but, a resteraunt couldn't because they would be required to accept cash for payment of the debt created by rendering the service. Since no service is being rendered until after payment.... its unclear that they are under any requirement by that.... however there may be other regulations, I am not familiar with what they might be.

> Then you add a random person walking across the street by J walking. There is just an other wildcard. And these people get hit and there were some deaths.

You know, I J walk ALL THE TIME and I think it gets a really bad rap because of people who j walk inconsiderately. I see plenty of people who just mosey across the street like they don't care.

If you pay attention and can even muster the effort to break into a jog for the 5 seconds it takes to get to the other side, its not hard to j walk without taking much risk or making anyone slow down (which I would argue are one and the same....since the risk really is that they wont see you and slow down).

Other than highways with much higher speeds, I have never seen a road that doesn't, in one way or another, afford plenty of opportunities to cross to anyone willing to wait a minute and pay attention....or at least, any able bodied person; obviously I am not talking about the elderly, infirmed, or those dragging infants along.

You know what....I don't care. Good for them. If they are....actually running. As long as they actually make it within a second of it turning, who gives a shit?

The ones that piss me off are the ones who start WALKING while the timer is on, or who ignore it entirely. We have an intersection with both a light and a stop sign (at a rotary no less), where since cars are stopping anyway, pedestrians regularly just walk out in front of them like it is unsignaled, seldom do they even feel the need to walk briskly.

But at least if they fucking move their ass it isn't so bad.

It was pretty clearly neither. If there had been a bribe, then there would be no arrest or report, and that cop would have a hard time explaining his bloody nose (my friend apparently elbowed him on the way down). If it had been a filing fee, the full amount would be on the report of what he had, and then it would be paid after.

Instead, the money just "dissapeared" between him being arrested and the report being filed. Funny thing with cash, how bills dissapear from stacks seemingly....of their own volition.

I am pretty sure that if he paid a bribe for anything, he would have just told me that. Honestly, he wasn't that smart. He still isn't that smart almost 20 years later, but at least now when he gets into trouble its for the right reasons fighting his psycho ex and her psycho mother for custody....which the courts gave him.... knowing how stupid he is, and how hard it is for a man to win custody, you can imagine what a situation that is.

When he told me about it, I didn't believe him until I saw the report of what he had on him at the time of arrest. Sure enough, it said 850.

Yet, as soon as I saw GP, I started scrolling down looking to see if somebody already posted it.

Actually, I liked this one. It took me a second but, honestly, I think he makes a great, if somewhat tounge in cheek point. I can see more evidence of people's fancy breakfast than I care to count, a significant portion of the population has high definition cameras that do a great job, even in the hands of novices.... and nobody caught a picture of Nessy or Big foot yet?

I don't see what is so fishy about that. He was also a school teacher, you would assume the salary he makes at that was paltry compared to the money he has from Apple, why would he even show up for work if he doesn't need the money?

Pretty sure he puts on his pants in the morning like the rest of us, don't see whats so out of character about acting like a normal human being; especially when he has a reputation of being a down to earth guy rather than some playboy moneylover. If you had told me Steve Jobs had done this, I would be shocked. This doesn't really surprize me from the woz.

Its not exactly unusual either for a person to be frugal out of habbit rather than need, especially if it is a lifelong habbit. Using myself as an example, I will stand there comparing products over price and weight at the grocery store to save a few cents I can easily afford, but I seldom remember to turn off lights and save electricity.

Is it entirely rational? No, its just habbit.

So that story was a few years back, a few even before that, I had a friend at my house who was a pot dealer. Now when I say friend, I mean, he pulled out his wad and asked me to count it for him while his hands were busy. Which, is of course, the only reasons I know this story is fact, I counted his wad with my own two hands and eyes.... it was exactly $1000 in $20 bills. Exactly, and ALL 20s.

After he left my house, he managed to get arrested. The exact details of how this happened are not as important. The key facts are that it was night, the place he was heading was the absolute nearest place to my house where one could spend any money, and he never made it even that far.

Now where this gets interesting is.... the police report actually said he had $850. Not $840 or $860 but, in fact, $850, an amount that one cannot make with $20 bills....meaning that they did, in fact, make change.