I was scanned a couple of weeks ago and I really have no idea what all this noise is about. And I am pretty certain that women that have been sexual assaulted would find this comparison insulting. A 30 second over the clothes pat down by someone of the same sex, as compared to a violent assault... I mean give me a break... Don't blame the TSA, blame the idiots that continue to find creative ways to hide explosives, drugs, etc.
TSA Blog
TSA Imaging Overview
TSA Frequently asked question
TSA Pat Downs and Sexual Assault
I was told once of an old woman who didn't lower her blinds too often. When asked about this, she answered something like this. "If they can see more than God created , more power to them."
And we should feel sorry for those poor scanner operators. How would you like to look at negative images of people all day? Do you really think they are going to find you interesting and memorable after the last 3,000 people that passed across their screen. You must have something really special...
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
I have already found ways to avoid my next 3 air travel plans, and am working on a 4th. I have informed the airline of my change of plans, and written to my Congressman, asking him to stop the destruction of the airline industry that I and those like me are compelled to create. Why the fuss? Because we are tired of being treated as criminals for absolutely NO GAIN in security. Those who are looking for new ways to kill us will always find new ways to kill us, and the TSA will then react, after the fact, to make our lives even more miserable.
Remember the shoe bomber actually got on the plane? Since then, the TSA has checked over 10 BILLION shoes and not found a single bomb. Remember the undie bomber actually got on the plane? Remember that the shampoo bombers actually got on the plane? Since then we've had to buy our toiletries at the other end of the trip and discard them before we come home, and we can't even take water on board those long flights, but the TSA hasn't found a single water bomber yet. Now the TSA is poking around in millions of undies, and so far haven't found anything except what God put there. And that's going too far. When there are far more effective and less intrusive means of protecting the airlines, why do we want to continue this utterly stupid, pointless and economically destructive TSA bureaucracy?
I don't agree with those objecting on 4th amendment grounds, but I do ask, at an even more fundamental level of common sense, what's your "probable cause" for groping my 3-year-old girl?
J. Ewing
Please expand on this:
"When there are far more effective and less intrusive means of protecting the airlines"
Also, there probably have been no more shoe bombers because they are checking the shoes... Seems logical. Stop checking shoes and there will probably be another shoe bomber...
By the way, they will let you buy water after the security check.
I am all for profiling in order to reduce the pain on the majority, however there is a large group that is against that, and they may miss that one 80 yr old Grannie that is pissed off and ready to blow something up.... Or that toddler with an attitude...
My nearly 70 yr old Mother had to give up her manicure scissors in the name of safety... It seems odd but strangely necessary if we insist on treating everyone equally. Though I am uncertain what anyone would do with a 2" long scissor...
By the way, are you shy or why do you dislike the scanners? Similar to a metal detector but different.
I object to ALL these security measures because they are ineffectual, and because I deeply resent the assumption that /I/ am a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to my fellow passengers. There is absolutely nothing in my history which would suggest such a thing.
Why not simply do as Canada does? Issue a biometric ID card after a background check, and let those folks sail through security by a simple ID check? We ought to be looking for bombers, not bombs. We shouldn't be groping the 99.99% of passengers who are NOT suspicious, just to give proper attention to the 0.01% who are, and who can be identified through profiling.
J. Ewing
Makes sense to me... Anyone know why we do not do this biometric card? Who would pay for the background checks? Is a background check more or less invasive than a physical scan? (Note: Due to my wife's in-home preschool, we pay for multiple yrly or bi-yrly back ground checks... Not exactly cheap...) Is anyone actually threatening or really angry with Canada? Except maybe some USA hockey players.
Also, what if the background check misses something or we become unhappy/unstable after the check? Will we blame the government for the disaster? Or will we say, man that was better than those scans?
By the way, speaking of the unstable Granny.
Let's not grope the baby trying to keep bathwater off the plane. Ninety percent of domestic travel is middle-aged American businessmen, and 100% of 9/11 bombers were foreign-born Muslim males. Even the simplest background check and positive ID would make the distinction, and eliminate 90% of the current pointless indignity, while allowing screeners to concentrate on the remaining, more suspicious passengers. Remember, the panty-bomber was on the no-fly list. TSA is incompetent at even the job they ARE doing, which isn't keeping us safe; it's an illusion.
If it is an illusion, you must admit it is a pretty good one. Hundreds or Thousands of crazies would love to blow up an American plane. I mean they would die a hero from the perspective of their peers and go straight to Heaven. And we have flown millions of flights with NO EXPLOSIONS.
I think I'll stick with the illusion, I like the odds and feel incredibly safe everytime I board an airplane. And I really don't mind taking off my shoes or posing for a scanner snap shot.
Now is TSA perfect? I am absolutely certain that they are not. An incredibly large organization that is made up of fallible humans, with trillions of potential opportunities for error each year. I am incredibly impressed that it goes as well as it does. Thank heavens for some luck once in awahile.
I wlll point out that El Al has had zero bombings while being the biggest target, and they don't scan anybody, they don't pat down anybody, and nobody takes off their shoes. They profile and use positive ID.
On the other hand, the undie bomber actually got on the plane. The shampoo bombers actually got on the plane. The shoe bomber actually got on the plane. All that in spite of the TSA. The problem is that it is far harder, if not impossible, to find a bomb than to find the bomber. And it is a lot more effective. The only reason not to do it the better way is because of some political correctness run amok. No other explanation for it.
J. Ewing
The TSA is certainly using the Plan Do Check Act continuous improvement cycle. Everytime someone comes up with something new, TSA escalates their measures and closes another loop hole. (kind of like software companies w/o the simple update downloads)
This new technique will be just as frustrating for businesses. New Technique
By the way, I have nothing against the security check method. It would be nice and simple. I just think there are a lot of people that will disagree.
Also, comparing Israel's culture of intense security, vigilance and lock downs to the USA's is like comparing apples and cabbage. El Al Link
My favorite story is the guy who forgot his briefcase in a public place and came back to find that it was blown up. Std Procedure...
A few more interesting links regarding El Al. It sounded good while it lasted.
El Al Security Cost
El Al Illusion
El Al Profiling
We can not even ask foreign looking people that do not speak English and seem suspicious for Proof of Citizenship without an uproar. Now we want to strip search Muslim folks that do not answer the questions correctly. And increase TSA cost and staff by 10 times. And spend more time in the airport. Don't see it happening.
Having two total joint replacements I have had to go through additional screening and pat downs every time I have flown since 9/11. This latest increase in screening has bounded over my threshold for invasion of privacy. It denies my 4th amendment right to be "be secure" in my person and violates the restriction of "unreasonable searches and seizures". I refuse to be treated like a criminal for buying a plane ticket. Fortunately, I don't have to choose between an invasive virtual strip search and an invasive and humiliating public pat down. I can choose not to fly. Unfortunately, that means that visiting family and grandchildren is now a minimum of a two and a half week road trip rather than a 3 hour flight.
The inconvenience of screening procedures for someone with even a slight disability is hard for an able bodied person to appreciate. For instance, removing my shoes requires a place to be able to sit down and swing my leg out to the side to put them back on and, by the way, I can't wear slip on shoes especially with the amount of walking required in an airport. Sending my WOODEN cane through the carry on baggage screen makes it difficult to navigate through the metal detector. Standing in full view of all other passengers with my arms out while a total stranger runs their hands over my body in ways that I am not comfortable having done by my doctor in private is something I will never get used to.
The insult of going through a virtual strip search that will inevitably show at least two anomalies, my prostheses, does not bode well for ever avoiding the additional pat down. I am not arguing against safety precautions but there has to be a better way than the massive invasive inefficient practices being used today. Profiling, biometric ID cards, some form of background security check with certification would make more sense than frisking grandmothers and children. In my opinion, the TSA is going about the whole security issue all wrong.
Just because you cannot solve it directly and have to use graphical integration on a particular problem doesn't mean that it isn't the right solution. You can get the right answer or you can waste your time on something that isn't the right answer. Right now the TSA is worthless for its intended purpose, and making a lot of trial and tribulation to no good purpose. Yes, it is politically difficult but, like so many other things we discuss here, replacing TSA with something far more effective, efficient and unintrusive is the right answer.
J. Ewing
Well let's assume that El Al is on the right path. We upgrade the screeners and everyone undergoes a 10+ minute interview. In which they are subjected to detailed questioning about their past, relationships, itinerary, etc. Will you feel safe getting on the plane? Maybe?
As for flight pre-authorization and proof. I could envision extensive background checks and maybe retinal scanners as a potential solution. Cards are worrisome because someone will figure out how to steal or replicate them.
My only concern then would be that some crazy would kidnap CDO's grandkids and force her replace those joints with something that goes boom. Feasible?
How about we we reverse discriminate and TSA creates a database of people's parts? Then CDO goes through and the scanner knows what to look for. Maybe they should be saving our images...
I don't know about this though... Then someone will get hold of my scan and I may find it popping up on the internet. See Links below. Have fun.
Comic 1
Comic 2
Comic 3
Comic 4
Comic 5
Comic 6
Comic 7
Comic 8
The feasibility of someone being forced or coerced into undergoing joint replacement surgery to implant a bomb is pretty slim as it requires a 4-5 day hospital stay and 3 to 6 weeks of recovery to be able to walk well enough to get to the security checkpoint, never mind through it. We have the computer capacity to sift out people's preferences and patterns to market products to them surely we can scan travel patterns to begin to differentiate the level of danger a particular traveler might present before they even get to the airport. No matter how intensely TSA screens at the airport we will never reach 100% passenger safety even if we give up 100% of our basic human rights in order to board an airplane. The fact of being alive carries with it inherent dangers. Individuals should be free to make their own choices of acceptable risk not dependent on some outside source to curtail their decision making process in the name of safety.
CDO,
I apologize, you are correct that joints was a poor example. How about if someone had a prosthetic limb?
As for inherent risks... I love risky hobbies and am a bit of an adrenaline junkie. Therefore should I be allowed to choose to speed excessively because I feel mandated speed limits are too constraining, inconvenient and a violation of my rights. Even though it would raise the risk to other citizens?
Similar but different, should you be able to take the risk and bypass security scans and pat downs because you feel they are too constraining, inconvenient and a violation of your rights. Though it may expose others to additional hazard?
I had a gentleman visit from Georgia (Asia). He was shocked that we had so many laws... The USA was supposed to be a FREE country. I tried to explain that many of the laws are there to protect people's freedom and safety from other people's choices and actions. I think he was still puzzled when he headed back.
Hopefully the TSA can find a better solution in time. If they start tracking our travels... Then some other group will complain that BIG BROTHER has finally arrived. Balance is never easy.
Heard an interesting suggestion today from Ron Paul (no less). He was re-iterating that the problem isn't the nature of searches, but that it violates our fundamental rights. There is no "probable cause" for a search of Granny or little Hobie, or Mr. Frequent Flyer, and that is what is angering people-- being treated like criminals while the real criminals slip through and kill us dead. He has introduced a bill to remove the exemption from legal action from TSA agents. That is, touch my junk and you go to jail. The aim, of course, is to turn the TSA back over to the airlines because THEY can (and should) profile, while the TSA cannot. Do that, and 90% of the problem goes away almost immediately. And you have 10 times as many people as you need concentrating on finding the bombers, instead of the bombs.
J. Ewing
John,
Let's look at this from another perspective. Should every potential passenger no matter what their appearance, background, profession, age, or set of abilities be treated as though they have engaged in criminal activity because they want to get on an airplane?
Should a person with a prosthetic limb have to prove that their prosthesis is not a weapon every time they travel? How should this be done? Should they remove it? Should they demand that their prosthesis be made of transparent materials?
I'm an adrenaline junkie myself. I like to drive fast but I obey traffic laws and enjoy my speed thrills at a sanctioned drag race, on a track or out on the Bonneville Salt Flats. I enjoy my desire to speed responsibly. Something I can do without needing others to force me to.
The, all too often, forgotten part of the equation of exercising rights is being responsible for the consequences of that exercise. As a number of wise leaders have taught, "we teach people correct principles and they govern themselves".
I have to agree with your friend from Georgia. There is little freedom left in this country. Not because we must be protected from others bad behavior but because folks insist that they must enforce their set of ideas and standards on others to protect them from themselves.
Is flying in a public airplane a right or a privelage?
Searches, monitoring and metal detectors are common in our society. Which ones violate your rights? And which ones are okay? Who gets to decide other than the court?
The ball park attendant searching your bag. The metal scanner before you enter a court house. The police checking your speed with a radar detector? Locker searches in schools?
Also, by your logic should every middle easterner be subject to tighter scrutiny because of their race? By the way, remember a guy named Timothy McVeigh...
John,
Now you are just spewing rhetoric. Getting on an airplane is neither a right nor a privilege. It is simply a business transaction. It is one mode of transportation that an individual can choose to use. That individual can and should evaluate the risk involved in their choice and decide if they are willing to face the consequences of their choice.
I find it reprehensible that we, as a society, have resorted to metal detectors, pat downs and bag searches by ball park attendants etc. thinking this will make us safer. It won't. It frustrates law abiding citizens and simply challenges criminals who wish to do injury to others. We are allowing fear and political correctness to outweigh reason.
Frankly I agree with Congressman Paul. Enough is enough! We need to restore dignity and respect to the way we treat fellow citizens rather than humiliate and embarrass them into giving away all of their unalienable rights.
Since I am pretty much apolitical and unaffiliated, I had to look up what exactly "rhetoric" is. It seems that most of us bloggers use rhetoric often.
"Rhetoric is the art of using language to communicate effectively and persuasively."
Though, I typically like combining rhetoric with sincere and sometimes leading questions?
If flying is neither a right nor a privelage, then you are correct. People that do not like the scans and pat downs can simply opt out of flying and take a car. There is nothing that requires the government to support Airport Travel on any individual's specific terms. Right?
And if enough people choose to not make that business transaction, then the topic will be revisited and addressed. Right?
I hope process or technology will improve this situation soon so that people can get back to focusing on things that support the USA economy. (ie Education, USA Development & Mfg, Tort Reform, Healthcare efficiency, etc)
And before you say it... Yes this TSA Scanner thing is disrupting travel slightly and does have some impact on the USA economy. However, as we have discovered it seems to be the least expensive option at this time, other than racial profiling. Isn't cheaper what us Capitalist's want? (ie lowest cost per passenger, even if it is a bit inconvenient)
Another word we seem to be using incorrectly...
Grope
Do we really think the TSA agents will have this intent when patting down a 3 yr old girl or Grandmas? (especially since I assume their backgrounds are checked for these positions.) Or is this just rhetoric that is stated to illicit an emotional response by the readers?
"Rhetoric is the art of using language to communicate effectively and persuasively." So let me try to understand your point. It is communicating effectively and persuasively to use distracting statements i.e. the "unstable granny" or "kidnapped grandchildren leading to forced surgery to implant an explosive device in someones body? Isn't that setting up a straw man to distract from the main argument and discussion?
You are correct that rhetoric is often used to to illicit an emotional response. This is often done to advance a particular agenda.
I object to yet another instance of government forcing all passengers to comply with increasingly invasive procedures that serve to subjugate the populace without offering an effective result.
Now I believe it was you that commented that I was using rhetoric.
"that serve to subjugate the populace without offering an effective result"
We who choose to fly choose to subjugate ourselves for the greater good... And so far the results are pretty effective... No explosions in 9+ years...
I sincerely wish you and others with like mind good luck in getting things changed. I personally have no preference if I subjugate myself to background checks, scans, interviews, etc as long as it keeps myself and my fellow air travelers safe.
By the way, I only use labels to hopefully bring smiles to the faces of the readers and to challenge stereotypes. If any of my "color" words offended you, I apologize.
I concede that you have made your own choice on this issue as I have made mine. The system will do what the majority desires, however wise or unwise that choice may be. As for me, I maintain my original premise, I will not be treated like a criminal because I purchased a plane ticket. Unfortunately, my own government has accomplished what the terrorists could not. I won't fly again if I must submit myself to the level of "security" that is now required.
Post a Comment