Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [borderpoint] Re: border crossing experiences

Expand Messages
  • Dallen Timothy
    You re right, Goyta. There are laser sensors at some places and other sensors underground. Clearly laser sensors cannot be buried. ... From:
    Message 1 of 16 , Oct 3, 2009
      You're right, Goyta. There are laser sensors at some places and other sensors underground. Clearly 'laser' sensors cannot be buried.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: borderpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:borderpoint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Goyta' F. Villela Jr.
      Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 9:32 AM
      To: borderpoint@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [borderpoint] Re: border crossing experiences

      > 4) Yes, apparently the laser sensors are buried in places.

      Dallen, how can laser sensors be *buried*? I can understand buried vibration, weight or motion sensors, but lasers are simply coherent, single-colour light beams, and would be totally useless underground. Since there have to be a laser emitter and a separate sensor to detect if the beam has been broken by someone crossing it, both have to be at least slightly above ground.

      Are you sure they are really lasers?

      Regards,

      Goytá



      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Kevin Meynell
      Dallen, ... It s about proportionality though. Most people have some sort of demarcation of their property, but in better neighbourhoods and between good
      Message 2 of 16 , Oct 4, 2009
        Dallen,

        >Call it paranoia or whatever it might be, but I'm grateful for it.
        >If someone came into my home, killed a portion of my family, and
        >tried thereafter to continue doing it, you can guarantee I'd be
        >'paranoid' about it and would erect fences and check everyone coming in.

        It's about proportionality though. Most people have some sort of
        demarcation of their property, but in better neighbourhoods and
        between good neighbours, fences can be lower. Equally, every person
        walking past the property is not stopped and interrogated, and indeed
        you probably know the mailman and newspaper boy well enough to step
        onto your property to deliver the services you want.

        I regularly cross international borders in the course of my work, and
        much of the supposed security can be filed under 'being seen to be
        doing something' rather than having any practical value. That's not
        to say there should be no security, but it should not inconvenience
        or detain the vast majority of law-abiding people to the point of
        unreasonableness, and between friendly nations it's questionable
        whether it's needed at all.

        As Benjamin Franklin was misquoted - "Those who would give up
        essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve
        neither Liberty nor Safety". ;-)

        Regards,

        Kevin Meynell
      • Lowell G. McManus
        If the US authorities scrutinized young Yemeni men more thoroughly at airports and borders than they do kindly little Canadian grandmas, somebody would allege
        Message 3 of 16 , Oct 4, 2009
          If the US authorities scrutinized young Yemeni men more thoroughly at
          airports and borders than they do kindly little Canadian grandmas, somebody
          would allege "racial profiling." There would be a storm of unrest from the
          liberal media, followed by lawsuits and the government having to settle with
          the Yemenis for at least six figures. It's all political correctness run
          amuck. It's also very dangerous.

          Lowell G. McManus
          Eagle Pass, Texas, USA



          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Kevin Meynell" <knm@...>
          To: <borderpoint@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 5:42 PM
          Subject: RE: [borderpoint] border crossing experiences


          > Dallen,
          >
          >>Call it paranoia or whatever it might be, but I'm grateful for it.
          >>If someone came into my home, killed a portion of my family, and
          >>tried thereafter to continue doing it, you can guarantee I'd be
          >>'paranoid' about it and would erect fences and check everyone coming in.
          >
          > It's about proportionality though. Most people have some sort of
          > demarcation of their property, but in better neighbourhoods and
          > between good neighbours, fences can be lower. Equally, every person
          > walking past the property is not stopped and interrogated, and indeed
          > you probably know the mailman and newspaper boy well enough to step
          > onto your property to deliver the services you want.
          >
          > I regularly cross international borders in the course of my work, and
          > much of the supposed security can be filed under 'being seen to be
          > doing something' rather than having any practical value. That's not
          > to say there should be no security, but it should not inconvenience
          > or detain the vast majority of law-abiding people to the point of
          > unreasonableness, and between friendly nations it's questionable
          > whether it's needed at all.
          >
          > As Benjamin Franklin was misquoted - "Those who would give up
          > essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve
          > neither Liberty nor Safety". ;-)
          >
          > Regards,
          >
          > Kevin Meynell
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.