New TSA screenings

[Browning151]

Lately there's been a good bit of buzz about the new TSA screening procedures, many people are uncomfortable with going through a full body scan but even more invasive are the new "pat down" procedures implemented by Mr. Pistole. Personally I think the approach by the TSA is pretty one dimensional and sort of out dated. For one, the ridiculous screenings of airline pilots are pretty much pointless, let's use our brains here: if an airline pilot wants to bring down an aircraft he doesn't need a gun or a pair of nail clippers, he has control of the aircraft. Second, the invasive nature of these new "pat downs" is just time and resource consuming, not to mention uncomfortable for nearly anyone who is subjected to one, especially since full body scans are not always an option. There are many ways to "profile" someone with no regard to race, age, gender or religious affiliation. If the TSA were to train "profilers" to ask each person who passed through security a series of questions through casual interaction and evaluate their responses, I think the entire process would be much faster and much more efficient.

To me the fact that terrorists have managed to hamstring air travel as much as they have is already a small victory to them, especially if their objective is to break down the infrastructure of the U.S. piece by piece. More importantly though is the idea that we may be focusing our attention in the wrong direction. These organizations know that airline security is paramount to us now, therefore they will be looking for new ways to attack us, but what's to stop them from attacking a sports stadium, a concert, a cruise ship port, cruise ship or even something as simple as a shopping mall. Sure, there are security procedures in place for everything but a shopping mall, but I don't think they are near what they are for airline travel. Where do we as Americans draw the line and say enough is enough? When we have to submit to the same screening procedures currently in place at airports just to go and buy a pair of shorts at a mall? Are we really ready to give up so much freedom in the name of security?

Opinions or ideas? I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks about this issue. But more importantly how do you feel about giving up more and more of your freedoms in the name of "security"?

[JJSPEC Racing]

If everyone would just go through the scanners, thing would move faster. My wife and daugther just went through and didnt have a problem at all with it. Deal with it. There are people of every race that want to hurt Americans so we must scan everyone and make sure that they are not packing a small but lethal amount of substance that could jeapardize the people in an aircraft. Thumbs up for a govt agency being proactive and trying to protect us. If you dont have anything to hide then you shouldnt have a problem. These agents are not trying to feel someone up for pleasure, just trying to detect something unimaginable. It took a man trying to set his shoe on fire to wake up everyone to the possibility of a bomb being smuggled that way. Get over it people, if the body scan or full pat down will help save a plane from being attacked, then by all means pat me down or scan me.

[BanginJimmy]

the problem is still a very simple one. A terrorist could still easily smuggle aboard any number of objects or substances that could bring a plane down. They just need to shove it up their ass (or vagina) and the scanners and pat downs wont see it.

[TIGERJC]

the problem is still a very simple one. A terrorist could still easily smuggle aboard any number of objects or substances that could bring a plane down. They just need to shove it up their ass (or vagina) and the scanners and pat downs wont see it.

With that philosophy the TSA shouldnt even try to do any screenings of any kind since there will always be holes in the system. These type of screenings will help reduce the small time terrorists chances of bringing down a plane. The threat from more sophisticated terrorist organizations will always have to be thwarted before that terrorist even walks in to a airport. I do think the money used for the full body scanners should have been used to boost our anti terror defense network on both the local and federal level. But Homeland wanted to spend money on something that the public actually sees.

[David88vert]

The solution is very simple. Hire a bunch of Playboy playmates to do the patdowns, and you will not have any more complaints. Everyone will be willing to let them "touch their junk".

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

[ISAtlanta300]

The solution is very simple. Hire a bunch of Playboy playmates to do the patdowns, and you will not have any more complaints. Everyone will be willing to let them "touch their junk".

That won't work, since the screeners have to be the same sex....unless you are happy to let a hunky chippendale 'touch your junk'....

[nreggie454]

I have a problem with the full body scanners mainly because some expose the body to unnecessary radiation. Even without that risk, I think they are a bit overboard and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

[BanginJimmy]

With that philosophy the TSA shouldnt even try to do any screenings of any kind since there will always be holes in the system. These type of screenings will help reduce the small time terrorists chances of bringing down a plane. The threat from more sophisticated terrorist organizations will always have to be thwarted before that terrorist even walks in to a airport. I do think the money used for the full body scanners should have been used to boost our anti terror defense network on both the local and federal level. But Homeland wanted to spend money on something that the public actually sees.


The point I am making is that these new screening techniques dont make us even marginally safer than the old standards.

How about using some more realistic things. Intelligence and the FBI know of many factors that could lead to higher levels of suspicion. If you have a passenger that does certain things, they are singled out for more thorough screening. Things like traveling alone, ticket paid for in cash, 1 way ticket, no luggage (not as good of an indicator with all the fees for a checked bag), recent emigration from a known terrorist country, and the list goes on, could save a lot of time and money on useless screenings.

[nreggie454]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19746-fullbody-scanners-we-reveal-all.html

In short, there is cautionary speculation stating that the full body scanners (especially the X-ray types) can damage DNA which can lead to cancer, along with the concern that the images can easily be saved and distributed by a shady worker.

I'll opt for the pat down, and moan like I'm being intimate with seven supermodels at the same time. Call it my nonviolent protest, if you will.

As others have stated, with new security measures come new innovations by terrorists. With this progression, I don't find it too crazy to have a security colonoscopy at airports within the next decade after the first attempted keister bomber. Maybe something like a wetsuit will be the required clothing for airline travel since it is 100% revealing and eliminates the need for body scanners.

I feel that intelligence is our best tool for thwarting terrorism and being able to identify questionable behavior is better than subjecting every single person to ridiculous measures.

[nreggie454]

Also, it appears Congressmen/women are not subjected to these invasive screenings. I would imagine that they would have more of a problem if they had to deal with the same issues and inconveniences the average citizen encounters.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101119/14485711948/why-congress-isnt-so-concerned-with-tsa-nude-scans-gropes-they-get-to-skip-them.shtml