A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Asia
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"No Fly List" - is a net to supress voice???



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old September 10th, 2004, 01:52 AM
Frank F. Matthews
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt wrote:

"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message
...

Matt wrote:

"Miguel Cruz" wrote:

To my reading it ought to be happening before the fact. That's why we


have

all that stuff with warrants and judges.

So how to police get away with arresting people and holding them until


their

arraignment? By your logic they must have the arraignment in front of a
judge before they are arrested. But that is not how it's done because


the

courts decided police can hold suspects for 48 hours (I think that's


right)

and still meet the due process requirements.


The police are subject to a fairly high standard - they have to


demonstrate

concrete reason to believe the person they arrest committed a crime.


Failure

to adhere to that and a whole host of other standards jeopardizes the case
and the person may be set free even if guilty.

It doesn't work that way with the no-fly list at all. People are put on
there for unknown reasons, and frequently, for reasons that are clearly
bogus (like the old nuns who were put on there for protesting Bush). Once


on

the list, people have no way to determine how they got on it, or reliably


to

get themselves off.

miguel



I agree, there should be a way to get off of the list, and there should be
valid reason for getting put on the list in the first place. But you don't
throw out the whole list because of mistakes, you fix it. Just like you
don't disband a police department because of a bad arrest.

Matt


You are all forgetting that there is no such thing as a list of persons.
What there is is a list of names and a matching algorithm. If the
funky matching algorithm matches a name on the list you are dumped. The
problem is that they keep making you prove that you aren't the person
who they are interested in. It is ridiculous that they cannot manage a
list of persons with a match who have been cleared as safe despite
matching. Extremely inefficient.

  #92  
Old September 10th, 2004, 01:52 AM
Frank F. Matthews
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt wrote:

"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message
...

Matt wrote:

"Miguel Cruz" wrote:

To my reading it ought to be happening before the fact. That's why we


have

all that stuff with warrants and judges.

So how to police get away with arresting people and holding them until


their

arraignment? By your logic they must have the arraignment in front of a
judge before they are arrested. But that is not how it's done because


the

courts decided police can hold suspects for 48 hours (I think that's


right)

and still meet the due process requirements.


The police are subject to a fairly high standard - they have to


demonstrate

concrete reason to believe the person they arrest committed a crime.


Failure

to adhere to that and a whole host of other standards jeopardizes the case
and the person may be set free even if guilty.

It doesn't work that way with the no-fly list at all. People are put on
there for unknown reasons, and frequently, for reasons that are clearly
bogus (like the old nuns who were put on there for protesting Bush). Once


on

the list, people have no way to determine how they got on it, or reliably


to

get themselves off.

miguel



I agree, there should be a way to get off of the list, and there should be
valid reason for getting put on the list in the first place. But you don't
throw out the whole list because of mistakes, you fix it. Just like you
don't disband a police department because of a bad arrest.

Matt


You are all forgetting that there is no such thing as a list of persons.
What there is is a list of names and a matching algorithm. If the
funky matching algorithm matches a name on the list you are dumped. The
problem is that they keep making you prove that you aren't the person
who they are interested in. It is ridiculous that they cannot manage a
list of persons with a match who have been cleared as safe despite
matching. Extremely inefficient.

  #93  
Old September 10th, 2004, 01:52 AM
Frank F. Matthews
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt wrote:

"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message
...

Matt wrote:

"Miguel Cruz" wrote:

To my reading it ought to be happening before the fact. That's why we


have

all that stuff with warrants and judges.

So how to police get away with arresting people and holding them until


their

arraignment? By your logic they must have the arraignment in front of a
judge before they are arrested. But that is not how it's done because


the

courts decided police can hold suspects for 48 hours (I think that's


right)

and still meet the due process requirements.


The police are subject to a fairly high standard - they have to


demonstrate

concrete reason to believe the person they arrest committed a crime.


Failure

to adhere to that and a whole host of other standards jeopardizes the case
and the person may be set free even if guilty.

It doesn't work that way with the no-fly list at all. People are put on
there for unknown reasons, and frequently, for reasons that are clearly
bogus (like the old nuns who were put on there for protesting Bush). Once


on

the list, people have no way to determine how they got on it, or reliably


to

get themselves off.

miguel



I agree, there should be a way to get off of the list, and there should be
valid reason for getting put on the list in the first place. But you don't
throw out the whole list because of mistakes, you fix it. Just like you
don't disband a police department because of a bad arrest.

Matt


You are all forgetting that there is no such thing as a list of persons.
What there is is a list of names and a matching algorithm. If the
funky matching algorithm matches a name on the list you are dumped. The
problem is that they keep making you prove that you aren't the person
who they are interested in. It is ridiculous that they cannot manage a
list of persons with a match who have been cleared as safe despite
matching. Extremely inefficient.

  #94  
Old September 10th, 2004, 03:44 AM
Matt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...


I agree, there should be a way to get off of the list, and there should

be
valid reason for getting put on the list in the first place. But you

don't
throw out the whole list because of mistakes, you fix it. Just like you
don't disband a police department because of a bad arrest.

Matt



You are all forgetting that there is no such thing as a list of persons.
What there is is a list of names and a matching algorithm. If the
funky matching algorithm matches a name on the list you are dumped. The
problem is that they keep making you prove that you aren't the person
who they are interested in. It is ridiculous that they cannot manage a
list of persons with a match who have been cleared as safe despite
matching. Extremely inefficient.


That's pretty much exactly what I've been saying so I agree completely.

The real question is not whether the current implementation of the list is a
good one, I think we all agree that it has some major flaws. The real
question is should there be a list in the first place? I personally don't
care if there is a no fly list as long as it doesn't unfairly target those
that have no reason to be on it in the first place. I'm willing to allow a
certain amount of leeway for the occasional misidentification, as long as
there is a way to correct the error. Such a list can never be 100% perfect,
and need not be held to that kind of a standard.

Matt



  #95  
Old September 10th, 2004, 03:44 AM
Matt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...


I agree, there should be a way to get off of the list, and there should

be
valid reason for getting put on the list in the first place. But you

don't
throw out the whole list because of mistakes, you fix it. Just like you
don't disband a police department because of a bad arrest.

Matt



You are all forgetting that there is no such thing as a list of persons.
What there is is a list of names and a matching algorithm. If the
funky matching algorithm matches a name on the list you are dumped. The
problem is that they keep making you prove that you aren't the person
who they are interested in. It is ridiculous that they cannot manage a
list of persons with a match who have been cleared as safe despite
matching. Extremely inefficient.


That's pretty much exactly what I've been saying so I agree completely.

The real question is not whether the current implementation of the list is a
good one, I think we all agree that it has some major flaws. The real
question is should there be a list in the first place? I personally don't
care if there is a no fly list as long as it doesn't unfairly target those
that have no reason to be on it in the first place. I'm willing to allow a
certain amount of leeway for the occasional misidentification, as long as
there is a way to correct the error. Such a list can never be 100% perfect,
and need not be held to that kind of a standard.

Matt



  #96  
Old September 10th, 2004, 03:44 AM
Matt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...


I agree, there should be a way to get off of the list, and there should

be
valid reason for getting put on the list in the first place. But you

don't
throw out the whole list because of mistakes, you fix it. Just like you
don't disband a police department because of a bad arrest.

Matt



You are all forgetting that there is no such thing as a list of persons.
What there is is a list of names and a matching algorithm. If the
funky matching algorithm matches a name on the list you are dumped. The
problem is that they keep making you prove that you aren't the person
who they are interested in. It is ridiculous that they cannot manage a
list of persons with a match who have been cleared as safe despite
matching. Extremely inefficient.


That's pretty much exactly what I've been saying so I agree completely.

The real question is not whether the current implementation of the list is a
good one, I think we all agree that it has some major flaws. The real
question is should there be a list in the first place? I personally don't
care if there is a no fly list as long as it doesn't unfairly target those
that have no reason to be on it in the first place. I'm willing to allow a
certain amount of leeway for the occasional misidentification, as long as
there is a way to correct the error. Such a list can never be 100% perfect,
and need not be held to that kind of a standard.

Matt



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"No Fly List" - is a net to supress voice??? Kari Sinhalavan Air travel 96 September 10th, 2004 03:44 AM
Secret no-fly list had Kennedy on it George Air travel 22 August 23rd, 2004 12:31 AM
Are You On Uncle Sam's No Fly List? jake Air travel 52 February 29th, 2004 04:01 PM
Are You On Uncle Sam's No Fly List? jake USA & Canada 52 February 29th, 2004 04:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.