Let's say you've got a veteran airline pilot who flies for the Army Reserve and is deputized to carry a gun as a Federal Flight Deck Officer. And this guy speaks up to point out flaws with aviation security.
Do we:
a) investigate the claims and thank him for his diligence;
b) fire the people who caused the problems he found;
or
c) send four air marshals and two sheriff's deputies to his house to confiscate his gun and his concealed-carry permit, and start civil proceedings against him?
Take a wild guess.
.
3 comments:
So you don't think he could have chosen a better outlet for his complaints? Like maybe a private channel to air his grievances instead of a public one at first?
No, I'm not defending what happened to him. Just suggesting that something may have been done to fix the problems, given all of his credentials, if he chose another way to express his dissatisfaction.
The entire TSA is a farce. Reporting the farce to the farce would not accomplish anything.
For his own well-being, he certainly could have chosen a better outlet. For the well-being of the country, there is no better outlet than pure sunshine when it comes to corruption and abuse of authority.
Varones hit it pretty squarely on the head.
Most people living under authoritarian regimes will keep quiet so as to not risk their own hides. Am I saying the U.S. is the same as the Germanys, Russias, and Chinas we've seen in the past? No.
But if you don't think we're moving in that direction, you're not watching closely.
This guy is not willing to stay quiet. Good luck to him.
Post a Comment