Airports, X-Rays, and Genital Fondling

[el_chode]

So any takes on the backscatter Xrays being installed from you all?

Personally I think they're downright unconstitutional, as are the resulting pat-downs given to those who decline.

A bit of info:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/the-full-body-backlash/

My story: We declined to be scanned in Honolulu on our honeymoon (the wife and I). They immediately closed down the entire line and made everyone behind us get frisked.

As a result, it'd make me happy if you all did a little civil disobedience (which it really isn't) and decline to be treated like a suspected terrorist next time you're at the Airport, and also declined a forced molestation by a TSA agent.

[Sticky Icky Green Stuff]

I'll never let an airport security guard molest me, check this article out:

http://www.alternet.org/rights/148849/scientists_warn_naked_body_scanners_may_cause_cancer/

those scanners totally give people cancer.  I'm glad I don't have to fly often, too much bullshit to deal with right now.  

[e_wind]

 our government is downright loosing its bananas. in the next couple years were gonna have people protesting and revolts like the vietnam war is happening all over again.

[Taterbug]

IMO.. I could give two shits, Scan me or fondle me,  as long as I have a safe flight and get some tasty peanuts.  I got nothin to hide, and if they want to see my junk I would pull it out and show it to them.

Those scanners would have come in real handy on 9/11. I would gladly get scanned even if it only saved one life.   I guess I fear a  terrorist attack  more than my own government with x-ray glasses.

[Tracy 3000]

IMO.. I could give two shits, Scan me or fondle me,  as long as I have a safe flight and get some tasty peanuts.  I got nothin to hide, and if they want to see my junk I would pull it out and show it to them.

Those scanners would have come in real handy on 9/11. I would gladly get scanned even if it only saved one life.   I guess I fear a  terrorist attack  more than my own government with x-ray glasses.

I got to agree with tater on this one (even though 75% of his responses to any question is: "Scan me or fondle me")

There will be another terrorist attack and people will complain that there's not enough security at airports. Then 6 months later will complain that there's too much security at airports. And back and forth and on and on

[ALady]

I got scanned on the way back from MPP, "fondled"  ;D on the way back from Nashville.

I should probably be outraged, but turns out I just don't care.

[el_chode]

Wait until we get an anal bomber. Will that make you care? Or a vag bomb?

[Sticky Icky Green Stuff]

Wait until we get an anal bomber. Will that make you care? Or a vag bomb?

a vag bomb would be disastrous.

[Soulshine]

I was fondled on my way home from Outside Lands a couple summers ago. All my friends had already gone thru security and they stood there in a group watching me and all we could do is laugh, laugh, laugh. The security chick prolly thought we were a sick fucking group and she'd be right.

[ALady]

I guess I need to clarify - I don't think a scanner or patdown at the airport is a huge infringement on my privacy.  Privacy is a myth anyway.

[Tracy 3000]

Wait until we get an anal bomber. Will that make you care? Or a vag bomb?

Vag Bomb

female punk band, right there

[Sticky Icky Green Stuff]

anybody else hope they start offering happy endings with your invasive search?  I haven't got any action in a while, time to go to the airport.

[TheBigChicken]

IMO.. I could give two shits, Scan me or fondle me,  as long as I have a safe flight and get some tasty peanuts.  I got nothin to hide, and if they want to see my junk I would pull it out and show it to them.

Those scanners would have come in real handy on 9/11. I would gladly get scanned even if it only saved one life.   I guess I fear a  terrorist attack  more than my own government with x-ray glasses.

I agree with Tater and Tracy. The people who whine about security are the FIRST to cry about a terrorist attack. If you feel like you have been abused, then file a complaint with the airport.....sheesh

[el_chode]

Hey, I've never been one to complain about security. I guess the flip side is that I don't buy that (a) the security is effective to begin with and (b) there's all that much of a threat domestically. If I were flying from Somalia to Yemen, different story.

But flying from Honolulu to Newark does not warrant my junk being put on display for the TSA or my wife to have her titties rubbed by some 8th grade drop out with a Gov't badge.

Also, you can't compare the new fondle to the old one. The new fondle is under the tits/cupping the balls.

[el_chode]

Also, the whole "privacy is a myth" is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you believe it is, then it is because the courts base your privacy on whether or not you expect it.

So I always expect it.

[Bigsky]

I think people are way to hung up on this...what's the alternative? Do you know how hard it is to keep airplanes safe. I would walk through security naked if it meant I would live another day. Get over yourselves...not much is private anymore.

...if you don't like the ride...don't travel.  :P

[el_chode]

I think people are way to hung up on this...what's the alternative? Do you know how hard it is to keep airplanes safe. I would walk through security naked if it meant I would live another day. Get over yourselves...not much is private anymore.

...if you don't like the ride...don't travel.  :P

The alternative is to come out and admit there is no evidence these procedures have any effect on making the skies safer and to regard those rights enumerated to us through the constitution are not alienated by a false sense of security.

Interstate commerce is one of those rights.

Saying we should not travel if we don't want to be strip searched makes about as much sense as saying you don't mind if the cops randomly rummage through your home because you've got nothing to hide.

Not to mention the additional costs of labor, time, and research going into this. We pay the salaries of the people who treat us all like suspected terrorists. You want to reduce the deficit? A great way to start is by not imposing irrational, unproven, and unreliable security measures.

[ALady]

At least the body scans/patdowns purport to have some kind of legitimate purpose - and I do think it's legitimate, though the odds of a terrorist attack are minimal on the whole.  Frankly I'd take that invasion of privacy over the dozens of others we encounter every day...smile, you're on camera!  ;D

[el_chode]

At least the body scans/patdowns purport to have some kind of legitimate purpose - and I do think it's legitimate, though the odds of a terrorist attack are minimal on the whole.  Frankly I'd take that invasion of privacy over the dozens of others we encounter every day...smile, you're on camera!  ;D

That camera I'm on isn't storing a picture of my awesomely huge Johnson. Plus, it's not simply a privacy issue (I don't think one would ever win if used to challenge the TSA)

Let me put it in another context: a terry stop for suspected criminals is less invasive.

[Ruckus]

This is such a loaded issue.  What bothers me most is how easily we got to this point where we can chuck the Constitution out the window where collective fear is high.

Also, to piggy back on the NPR links Blucas posted about the legislative origins of the Arizona immigration law, we are confronted with the blatant conflict of interest evident with Chertoff and Chertoff security group.  Again, this is just the way it works now and no matter how shameful it is, people just accept it.  There is a ton of money in selling these things.