Jeremy Clarkson on Airport Immgration Delays

[bobAlike]

Wouldn't profiling by nationality be better than by skin colour?

Less subjective too.

This was more my point, i think it was RedArmi who made reference to a Jamaican traveller. As i understand it Jamaican flights/passangers are the most likely to be carrying drugs, i remember seeing this in a documentary a while back. If i am border control i am probably going to be checking people from Jamaica.

+1

Having briefly worked in a ladies prison which a large proportion of the inmates were drug mules, the vast majority of those were Jamaican and the rest of them thought they were.

[tikay]

Page 3 of "The Times" today had this big banner headline.......

"Passport staff detain white people to avoid claims of bias"

Followed by this (extract).....


......John Vine, chief inspector of the UK Border Agency says in a report "this involved detaining white passengers purely to avoid potential race discrimination complaints when there was an intention to question black passengers".

Joseph Heller, God rest his soul, could have written a book about that sort of thing.

[smashedagain]

Wouldn't profiling by nationality be better than by skin colour?

Less subjective too.

This was more my point, i think it was RedArmi who made reference to a Jamaican traveller. As i understand it Jamaican flights/passangers are the most likely to be carrying drugs, i remember seeing this in a documentary a while back. If i am border control i am probably going to be checking people from Jamaica.

+1

Having briefly worked in a ladies prison which a large proportion of the inmates were drug mules, the vast majority of those were Jamaican and the rest of them thought they were.

Wicked

[RED-DOG]

Gypsies get stopped and searched more often that regular folk, which means that more crime is detected amongst Gypsies than regular folk, which means that Gypsies get stopped and searched more often than regular folk....

It's not quite that simple, but you can see my point.

[MANTIS01]

Sure but the objective of any law abiding society is to detect crime. If the stopping and searching of Gypsies is successfully detecting crime then society is achieving that objective. But that's good news for everybody including Gypsies. Detection and eradication of crime in the society we all share is something we all should welcome. I think a lot of very serious issues like racism are diluted by sensitivity and other agendas that don't actually tackle the heart of the matter. If when stopped Gypsies are handled with less respect than other folk then that is racism. But if when more Gypsies are respectfully stopped more crime is detected then the act of stopping more Gypsies is justifiable isn't it? If no more crime is detected when more Gypsies are stopped then frequently stopping Gypsies would be pointless. It is solely dependant upon the integrity of the purpose and the validity of the results. Because I'm romantic about equality I don't really understand this ethnicity of crime and why it matters so long as crime is being detected.

It's funny thou because black guys I know complain about being stopped and searched more often than regular folk and Asian guys I know complain about being stopped and searched more often than regular folk. Makes you wonder who the regular folk are in 2012 Britain. Red do you get stopped and searched frequently or are you regular folk?

In the airport example the objective is to stop illegal immigration and to prevent planes getting blown up. That is a matter of concern for us all. So if it is true enough that stopping more people from Syria detects more terrorists then more people from Syria should be stopped. Yet we see the authorities are having to divert limited resources away from a profile group to pacify liberals who demand equality. That is bad news for everybody including the vast majority of innocent folk from Syria about to get on the plane. Let's be clear this is not ideal but if you only have limited resources what are you to do if you can't profile? If less crime is detected or more planes are blown up because of some equality strategy that's bad for everyone I think.

[MintTrav]

In the airport example the objective is to stop illegal immigration and to prevent planes getting blown up.

Two separate issues are getting mixed on this thread. With regard to planes being blown up, the main objective of airport security is to make the public feel better; make them believe that they are safer because something is being done, so that they continue to fly. We would be better to spend some of the money wasted on airport security educating the public that the risk of terrorism on a plane is miniscule.

[neeko]

In the airport example the objective is to stop illegal immigration and to prevent planes getting blown up.

Two separate issues are getting mixed on this thread. With regard to planes being blown up, the main objective of airport security is to make the public feel better; make them believe that they are safer because something is being done, so that they continue to fly. We would be better to spend some of the money wasted on airport security educating the public that the risk of terrorism on a plane is miniscule.

+1

[kinboshi]

In the airport example the objective is to stop illegal immigration and to prevent planes getting blown up.

Two separate issues are getting mixed on this thread. With regard to planes being blown up, the main objective of airport security is to make the public feel better; make them believe that they are safer because something is being done, so that they continue to fly. We would be better to spend some of the money wasted on airport security educating the public that the risk of terrorism on a plane is miniscule.

+1

This this and this. Most of the airport security measures that have been introduced more recently are a facade. Not sure they're meant to reassure the public or perpetuate the fear of terrorism.

[MANTIS01]

Can't really speak for anybody else but I'll take the security over the education please.

[ManuelsMum]

In the airport example the objective is to stop illegal immigration and to prevent planes getting blown up.

Two separate issues are getting mixed on this thread. With regard to planes being blown up, the main objective of airport security is to make the public feel better; make them believe that they are safer because something is being done, so that they continue to fly. We would be better to spend some of the money wasted on airport security educating the public that the risk of terrorism on a plane is miniscule.

+1

This this and this. Most of the airport security measures that have been introduced more recently are a facade. Not sure they're meant to reassure the public or perpetuate the fear of terrorism.

Yep. Limitation of liquid volumes....farce (split and recombine liquid explosives on board)
Metal detectors....farce (bombs/detonators don't need no metals)
No sharp objects/knives....farce (you can fashion a threatening weapon by melting a plastic fork)

They had all this in place and then let underpantbomber boy on a transatlantic flight, he was already on watch lists and his dad had formally expressed concerns. It's all just a giant bloody farce. I'm still waiting for a jihadist to be found with an RSQ on him, it's that farcical.

[the sicilian]

Wouldn't profiling by nationality be better than by skin colour?

Less subjective too.

This was more my point, i think it was RedArmi who made reference to a Jamaican traveller. As i understand it Jamaican flights/passangers are the most likely to be carrying drugs, i remember seeing this in a documentary a while back. If i am border control i am probably going to be checking people from Jamaica.

Seeing as smoking marijuana is an intrinsic part of the Rasta and jamaican belief system i dont think its unreasonable to target Jamaican flights for drugs..

[Woodsey]

Wouldn't profiling by nationality be better than by skin colour?

Less subjective too.

This was more my point, i think it was RedArmi who made reference to a Jamaican traveller. As i understand it Jamaican flights/passangers are the most likely to be carrying drugs, i remember seeing this in a documentary a while back. If i am border control i am probably going to be checking people from Jamaica.

Seeing as smoking marijuana is an intrinsic part of the Rasta and jamaican belief system i dont think its unreasonable to target Jamaican flights for drugs..

Be careful mate, you might upset the liberals amongst us 

[the sicilian]

LoL

tbh you can't say anything these days referring to anyone non white without being branded instantly as a goose stepping racist no matter how relevant or sensible the point...its quite insulting to the intelligence really..

point is i wouldn't care if you were white black or sky blue pink..if your on a flight from Jamaica I'm gonna check you for drugs

[Woodsey]

LoL

tbh you can't say anything these days referring to anyone non white without being branded instantly as a goose stepping racist no matter how relevant or sensible the point...its quite insulting to the intelligence really..

point is i wouldn't care if you were white black or sky blue pink..if your on a flight from Jamaica I'm gonna check you for drugs

I'm beyond pandering to the liberals who start crying racist or whatever about these sorts of issues. If checking one group more or less than another group is reasonable based on what the stats show or even what is just plain common sense, then so be it. Anyone complaining about it will get pretty short thrift from me I'm afraid.

[ManuelsMum]

Sure but the objective of any law abiding society is to detect crime. If the stopping and searching of Gypsies is successfully detecting crime then society is achieving that objective. But that's good news for everybody including Gypsies. Detection and eradication of crime in the society we all share is something we all should welcome. I think a lot of very serious issues like racism are diluted by sensitivity and other agendas that don't actually tackle the heart of the matter. If when stopped Gypsies are handled with less respect than other folk then that is racism. But if when more Gypsies are respectfully stopped more crime is detected then the act of stopping more Gypsies is justifiable isn't it? If no more crime is detected when more Gypsies are stopped then frequently stopping Gypsies would be pointless. It is solely dependant upon the integrity of the purpose and the validity of the results. Because I'm romantic about equality I don't really understand this ethnicity of crime and why it matters so long as crime is being detected.

Wholly disagree. We live in a multicultural-multiethnic-multireligiousbackground society. There are plenty of crimes that are either motivated by (eg) racial hatred or where such hatred plays a significant part. Some people are assaulted/shunned/etc because they are gypsy/black/gay/catholic/protestant/muslim and the perpetrator believes that this gypsy/black etc quality in them makes them a worse person/worthy of hatred/more prone to crime. If the authorities are seen to preferentially arrest members of these groups then it can reinforce or promote these erroneous and dangerous prejudices. This can lead to a societal breakdown with consequences more serious than the crime which you were initially seeking to address.

The more that people feel part of a group, the less likely they are to commit crimes against that group. Your message seeks to promote the treatment of Gypsies as a separate group. Good luck with that.