Airports, X-Rays, and Genital Fondling

[Tracy 3000]

well, for all the lame ass crap we have to put up with, it still doesn't suck to be a white man in America!  ;)

[Ruckus]

well, for all the lame ass crap we have to put up with, it still doesn't suck to be a white man in America!  ;)

Try telling that to Karl Malone

[el_chode]

well, for all the lame ass crap we have to put up with, it still doesn't suck to be a white man in America!  ;)

Try telling that to Karl Malone

Hahaha

You know, I'd look past the Chertoff issue if it produced a tangible benefit to be honest.

[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

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

Interstate commerce is one of those rights.

[highlight]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.[/highlight]

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.

As far as there being evidence if these new security procedures work...only time will tell. I think the authorities are just trying to see if this helps. I bet when they first started using metal detectors people had a similar reaction. Times have changed, so procedures must change.

Our world is much different now from when the Constitution was written...I don't think our founding fathers pictured someone tried to blow up an airplane with explosives in his underwear.

You are comparing a public moment with a private moment. When we enter the public realm, we must forfeit most of our privacies.


So you have many ideas on what we shouldn't do...any ideas on what we should do?

[ALady]

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.

Apples and oranges and you know it, counsel   ;)

I get the point you're trying to make - these new procedures do seem invasive, perhaps unnecessarily so.  And of course we should be on guard with seemingly small measures like this that continue to encroach on our personal freedoms, especially considering the lack of demonstrable benefits.  

Of all the hoops we've had to jump through for air travel in the past couple of years, this seems relatively low on the annoyance scale.  Could that be why folks aren't up in arms like they should be?

Or meh.  Maybe I'm just an exhibitionist.   ;D

[Bigsky]

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.

Apples and oranges and you know it, counsel   ;)

I get the point you're trying to make - these new procedures do seem invasive, perhaps unnecessarily so.  And of course we should be on guard with seemingly small measures like this that continue to encroach on our personal freedoms, especially considering the lack of demonstrable benefits.  

Of all the hoops we've had to jump through for air travel in the past couple of years, this seems relatively low on the annoyance scale.  Could that be why folks aren't up in arms like they should be?

Or meh.  Maybe I'm just an exhibitionist.   ;D

...a burlesque exhibitionist... ;)

[ALady]

 ;D :-[  ;)

[bowl of soup]

What are three things that cost over $100?

[Bigsky]

What are three things that cost over $100?

Ladies & gentlemen...we have a winner!!!  ;D

[Sticky Icky Green Stuff]

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.

yeah, you're hitting the nail on the head for sure.  the personnel they hire at these airports is definitely questionable to say the least.  

and you're right it's definitely a false sense of security.  but that's why americans are fucking idiots.  we give up our rights for security time and time again.  it's sad really.

we need to cut defense spending and we could easily cut it by 10 or 20percent but the repubs/conservative nuts/ and people who have been convinced to be afraid do not understand how fast these things could snowball into situations where we're pissed at eachother rather than the "terrorists".  

the war on terror can suck my fat nuts.  

[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

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.

yeah, you're hitting the nail on the head for sure.  the personnel they hire at these airports is definitely questionable to say the least.  

and you're right it's definitely a false sense of security.  but that's why [highlight]americans are fucking idiots[/highlight].  we give up our rights for security time and time again.  it's sad really.

we need to cut defense spending and we could easily cut it by 10 or 20percent but the repubs/conservative nuts/ and people who have been convinced to be afraid do not understand how fast these things could snowball into situations where we're pissed at eachother rather than the "terrorists".  

the war on terror can suck my fat nuts.  

Are you an American? you must be one of the smart ones... ;)

I still have yet to hear a better solution to this problem. Is there such a thing as a security screening that doesn't violate our privacy? For anyone who has gone to a concert (T5 for an example) they have been given a fondling by security before entering...you don't seem to be bitching about that.

I think some people just get on these bandwagons against our government...when they have yet to actually be affected by it. Don't bitch about your privacy & rights being violated until they have been...

[el_chode]

Alright, I like how everyone's being intelligent about this, I was afraid it may devolve into something nasty haha

First, my solution is dogs. The only danger dogs pose are the danger that I may go up and pet one.

Second, my premise is that you're not going to do jack squat with these new procedures or scanners. From my blog post:

The lesson we should all take away from this is let's be smart about safety – you can tell more about a potential threat if you sit behind a screen and watch how people behave instead of microwaving their internal organs or fondling their external ones. I'd even wager $10 with anyone that a dog will do a better job picking out a threat than any piece of machinery every could. So let's stop funneling money away from our already bankrupt treasuries into a morally and ethically bankrupt system providing a false sense of security, and get back to a cheap, fast, effective, and safer travel industry.

I've always believed that you need to fight ideology with ideology. Dogs can typically route out ne'erdogooders better than most humans. They can sniff out many types of explosives (the scanners can't even tell the difference between a tampon and dynamite). And more importantly, the dogs are mobile. They provide security at all points of the airport and not just at the scanning location. Plus, there's the psychological element: someone up to no good is way more likely to be nervous when the place is swarming with dogs than just keeping their composure for a few minutes at the checkpoint.

More importantly, if the TSA's stated objective is to prevent people from approaching, changing their mind, and leaving until they find a hole, then dogs take care of that also.

Here's a link to Dave Barry's experience (never know if humorists are fabricating things or not, but it's still funny):

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/15/131338172/humorist-dave-barry-and-the-tsa

In the name of shameless self promotion, below is a link to my full  post And I'm honestly seeking criticism from your lawyery folk if you're so inclined, because I'm not sure if my argument is truly nuanced in a legal manner the right way re: Fourth Amendment.

http://www.folkdemon.com/2010/11/18/quick-thoughts-tsa-outrage

And, ALady, I think this is the opposite - there's been audible backlash from the public at large as well as the Gov't. Napolitano (DHS) and Pistole (TSA) have both gone on the record on the measures over the past few nights. It seems that this is the last annoyance people are willing to take.

[ALady]

And, ALady, I think this is the opposite - there's been audible backlash from the public at large as well as the Gov't. Napolitano (DHS) and Pistole (TSA) have both gone on the record on the measures over the past few nights. It seems that this is the last annoyance people are willing to take.

This is what I've read as well, and yet most everyone I've talked to - especially frequent travelers - has had the "meh" reaction.

Anyway, dogs are fucking awesome.

[Taterbug]

Alright, I like how everyone's being intelligent about this, I was afraid it may devolve into something nasty haha

First, my solution is dogs. The only danger dogs pose are the danger that I may go up and pet one.

Second, my premise is that you're not going to do jack squat with these new procedures or scanners. From my blog post:

The lesson we should all take away from this is let's be smart about safety – you can tell more about a potential threat if you sit behind a screen and watch how people behave instead of microwaving their internal organs or fondling their external ones. I'd even wager $10 with anyone that a dog will do a better job picking out a threat than any piece of machinery every could. So let's stop funneling money away from our already bankrupt treasuries into a morally and ethically bankrupt system providing a false sense of security, and get back to a cheap, fast, effective, and safer travel industry.

I've always believed that you need to fight ideology with ideology. Dogs can typically route out ne'erdogooders better than most humans. They can sniff out many types of explosives (the scanners can't even tell the difference between a tampon and dynamite). And more importantly, the dogs are mobile. They provide security at all points of the airport and not just at the scanning location. Plus, there's the psychological element: someone up to no good is way more likely to be nervous when the place is swarming with dogs than just keeping their composure for a few minutes at the checkpoint.

More importantly, if the TSA's stated objective is to prevent people from approaching, changing their mind, and leaving until they find a hole, then dogs take care of that also.

Here's a link to Dave Barry's experience (never know if humorists are fabricating things or not, but it's still funny):

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/15/131338172/humorist-dave-barry-and-the-tsa

In the name of shameless self promotion, below is a link to my full  post And I'm honestly seeking criticism from your lawyery folk if you're so inclined, because I'm not sure if my argument is truly nuanced in a legal manner the right way re: Fourth Amendment.

http://www.folkdemon.com/2010/11/18/quick-thoughts-tsa-outrage

And, ALady, I think this is the opposite - there's been audible backlash from the public at large as well as the Gov't. Napolitano (DHS) and Pistole (TSA) have both gone on the record on the measures over the past few nights. It seems that this is the last annoyance people are willing to take.

Good idea on the dogs chode.  But I guarantee some fuckin nutjob will bitch about the wet spot on there crotch from a dogs nose.  We  
"American Idiots " should know by now that you can't make everyone happy.  Maybe we should ask the family members of the 2752  people that died in the twin towers what they want.

[el_chode]

Alright, I like how everyone's being intelligent about this, I was afraid it may devolve into something nasty haha

First, my solution is dogs. The only danger dogs pose are the danger that I may go up and pet one.

Second, my premise is that you're not going to do jack squat with these new procedures or scanners. From my blog post:

The lesson we should all take away from this is let's be smart about safety – you can tell more about a potential threat if you sit behind a screen and watch how people behave instead of microwaving their internal organs or fondling their external ones. I'd even wager $10 with anyone that a dog will do a better job picking out a threat than any piece of machinery every could. So let's stop funneling money away from our already bankrupt treasuries into a morally and ethically bankrupt system providing a false sense of security, and get back to a cheap, fast, effective, and safer travel industry.

I've always believed that you need to fight ideology with ideology. Dogs can typically route out ne'erdogooders better than most humans. They can sniff out many types of explosives (the scanners can't even tell the difference between a tampon and dynamite). And more importantly, the dogs are mobile. They provide security at all points of the airport and not just at the scanning location. Plus, there's the psychological element: someone up to no good is way more likely to be nervous when the place is swarming with dogs than just keeping their composure for a few minutes at the checkpoint.

More importantly, if the TSA's stated objective is to prevent people from approaching, changing their mind, and leaving until they find a hole, then dogs take care of that also.

Here's a link to Dave Barry's experience (never know if humorists are fabricating things or not, but it's still funny):

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/15/131338172/humorist-dave-barry-and-the-tsa

In the name of shameless self promotion, below is a link to my full  post And I'm honestly seeking criticism from your lawyery folk if you're so inclined, because I'm not sure if my argument is truly nuanced in a legal manner the right way re: Fourth Amendment.

http://www.folkdemon.com/2010/11/18/quick-thoughts-tsa-outrage

And, ALady, I think this is the opposite - there's been audible backlash from the public at large as well as the Gov't. Napolitano (DHS) and Pistole (TSA) have both gone on the record on the measures over the past few nights. It seems that this is the last annoyance people are willing to take.

Good idea on the dogs chode.  But I guarantee some fuckin nutjob will bitch about the wet spot on there crotch from a dogs nose.  We  
"American Idiots " should know by now that you can't make everyone happy.  Maybe we should ask the family members of the 2752  people that died in the twin towers what they want.

I'd like to think the gov't would react in a logical manner to a wet nose-ish complaint (perhaps an innate fear of dogs, or allergies) and say "it's not a constitutional invasion" in the same was as microradation.

I'm not gonna pretend to be a 9/11 victim. I did leave Madrid a few hours before the bombs went off, and was on one of the trains that blew up (imagine waking up in Amsterdam to news like that). I still say that if you want to combat ideology like that, don't clamp down. Show that their tactics WON'T affect us.

Maybe I've got my facts wrong, but the only thing that should ahve been caught by airport security were the box cutters, no? If anything, this absurd reaction is because that asshole tried lighting his farts last xmas.

[CTdeadhead]

this was on Drudge today, kinda scary.

[Bigsky]

I was thinking the same thing with dogs. I was wondering why we rarely see them in airports...they can be trained to smell anything...even cancer cells.

[el_chode]

I was thinking the same thing with dogs. I was wondering why we rarely see them in airports...they can be trained to smell anything...even cancer cells.

I also think they're good because they can smell fear.

[ralph]

I was thinking the same thing with dogs. I was wondering why we rarely see them in airports...they can be trained to smell anything...even cancer cells.

I also think they're good because they can smell fear.

We have beagles patrolling all our aiports in Australia, mainly to detect drugs 'n stuff though... The only problem is their sooo cute but you're not allowed to pat them which sucks.

I went through one of the xray thingys when I flew home last month. I just stood on the foot marks, raised my arms and let the machine do it's thing. Honestly didn't even give it a second thought. I mean we put mobile phones to our ears, microwave our food, sit laptops on our genitals. What's the diff?

[CTdeadhead]

I suspect that explosive sniffing dogs are not easily rushed to every airport in the US.  Also, it may scare people (abu graib flashback), harm allergy sufferers etc.  Nothing but speculation but dog training takes a long time.  Years I bet.  

Its easier to spend millions on technology, tested or not.