toldailytopic: TSA Naked body scans and full body "pat downs" for airline passengers.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
toldailytopic: TSA Naked body scans and full body "pat downs" for airline passengers.

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for November 19th, 2010 10:21 AM


toldailytopic: TSA Naked body scans and full body "pat downs" for airline passengers. Thoughts? Feelings? Suggested alternatives?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
I mentioned on another thread that the presumption of guilt and degradation involved in either process is unacceptable to a supposedly free people.

As an alternative, I'd suggest better background checks of TSA employees, more stringent checks on luggage, arming pilots, and putting more marshalls in the air.
 

Wunderhund

New member
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for November 19th, 2010 10:21 AM


toldailytopic: TSA Naked body scans and full body "pat downs" for airline passengers. Thoughts? Feelings? Suggested alternatives?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

Follow the example of Israel. When was the last time they had any security issues at their airports or on their airline?

Profile, profile, profile. Three year old children and wheelchair bound old ladies are less likely to be a terrorist threat than an individual from Iran or Yemen or Saudi Arabia, etc.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
[T]he presumption of guilt and degradation involved in either process is unacceptable to a supposedly free people.
"If you like the TSA and what they're doing over at the Justice Department, you'll love Obamacare." :Commie: [Caller Bill Bennett Morning in America radio program 19 Nov 10]
 
Last edited:

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Profile, profile, profile. Three year old children and wheelchair bound old ladies are less likely to be a terrorist threat than an individual from Iran or Yemen or Saudi Arabia, etc.
If that is true why are :CRASH: Muslims permitted to self-pat when Christians and Jews are not? Jer 7:6. :Nineveh:

Why is a cancer surviving flight attendant asked to remove her prosthetic breast and Akhmed diaperhead is passed through with ease? Ge 16:12. Did three year old children, wheelchair bound old ladies, or American crewmembers attack us on 9-11? :squint:
 
Last edited:

vegascowboy

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I mentioned on another thread that the presumption of guilt and degradation involved in either process is unacceptable to a supposedly free people.

As an alternative, I'd suggest better background checks of TSA employees, more stringent checks on luggage, arming pilots, and putting more marshalls in the air.

I can see your point on many of these...but the better background checks for employees seems horrible to me!

I applied with TSA, and the process is, in my opinion, VERY difficult....even when compared with other law enforcement agencies (city, state, federal) for which I have applied.

Perhaps a different approach to screening, rather than better or more lengthy, would be appropriate.
 

Wunderhund

New member
If that is true why are :CRASH: Muslims permitted to self-pat when Christians and Jews are not? Jer 7:6. :Nineveh:

Why is a cancer surviving flight attendant asked to remove her prosthetic breast and Akhmed diaperhead is passed through with ease? Did three year old children, wheelchair bound old ladies, or American crewmembers attack us on 9-11? :squint:

Um...I am a little confused by your response. I think it is ridiculous to search children and wheelchair bound old folks.
 

Dena

New member
Are they going to have women in place for the women and men in place for the men? The only men allowed to put their hands all over me is my husband and my chiropractor. I don't even see male doctors.

On another note, I was listening to Michael Savage for a moment last night and he was whining about those of us who don't want a rub down at the airport. I was surprised. I thought he'd go the other way.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Are they going to have women in place for the women and men in place for the men? The only men allowed to put their hands all over me is my husband and my chiropractor. I don't even see male doctors.

On another note, I was listening to Michael Savage for a moment last night and he was whining about those of us who don't want a rub down at the airport. I was surprised. I thought he'd go the other way.

Savage is a sell-out blabbermouth chump. None of these radio right-wing personalities care about actual liberty or freedom beyond the ability to run their gums.
 

Layla

New member
I think there is a degree of hypocrisy in fearful people shouting about lack of security, yet complaining when measures are put in place... Though, of course, many (perhaps most) don't fall into that category.

I think it's also a valid argument that these measures are put in place simply to placate such fears, when in reality they may do little to effectively tackle the problem.

On the other hand, if everyone was put through the full body scan when flying, the risks would be dramatically reduced, no?

I guess it just comes down to how far you value security over individual liberty. And in a democracy, if the majority place more value on liberty, the measures shouldn't really be in place.

As for a reasonable alternative. Profiling has some merit, but also has inherent issues. If you consider pat-downs and full body scans an invasion of your privacy then it's unreasonable (even immoral) to subject groups of innocent people to the same treatment simply because statistics indicate those groups may be more likely to include the guilty.

Some of Granite's suggestions make sense; better luggage checks, armed pilots and more air marshalls would make a big difference, IMHO.
 

Layla

New member
Are they going to have women in place for the women and men in place for the men? The only men allowed to put their hands all over me is my husband and my chiropractor. I don't even see male doctors.

In the UK, at least, they have female staff to pat-down female passengers. I don't know about the US.
 

Joe_Doe82

New member
To paraphrase Franklin: "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve none and will have neither." Where are all the Tea Party "Patriot" clowns who like to wave the Gadsden flag? They will watch the TSA agents fondle their wives and not say a single word. Cowards, the whole lot of them.
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
I take it as an undeniable axiom that the human person is inviolable. He has certain rights which may not be transgressed legitimately. Any attempt to do so is a violence. He cannot even barter them away. They are absolute side constraints to action. That right briefly may be summed as respect for rational agency. He is an end-in-himself, not a mere instrument for attaining an end. He may not be exploited, discarded as like trash, etc.

Does a full body scan or a pat-down constitute a violation of the inviolable? I'm not sure. :idunno:

If either one of them does, then even if it means that doing away with these procedures means either that the air-transportation businesses must be shut down entirely, or else, we risk our complete demise at the hands of the terrorists, then nonetheless, we must do away with the procedures, "come Hell or high water," as it were. As Kant says, we must do the right thing, and let the consequences be what they may.

I find it curious that a lot of people are answering that the best alternative is profiling. Ok. So let's say that we profile. You have a certain man who is singled out for a security check on account of fitting a certain profile. Well, how do you screen that one man? How do you check him out? By pat downs? By body scans? Remember, inviolability is a property of rational nature as such. Even if you go with profiling (presupposing that this doesn't constitute the violation of a right), you can't violate the person's rights on that account.
 

Layla

New member
I find it curious that a lot of people are answering that the best alternative is profiling. Ok. So let's say that we profile. You have a certain man who is singled out for a security check on account of fitting a certain profile. Well, how do you screen that one man? How do you check him out? By pat downs? By body scans? Remember, inviolability is a property of rational nature as such. Even if you go with profiling (presupposing that this doesn't constitute the violation of a right), you can't violate the person's rights on that account.

Of course you can! Foreigners aren't people; they don't have rights! Silly Traditio...
 

Lucky

New member
Hall of Fame
Profiling sort of works, but if you start hassling all brown folks while giving every granny a free pass, they'll just adapt their tactics. Kidnap granny's grandkids and she'll do whatever they ask to see them again. You have many travel options. I havent found worry-free air travel in the constitution, but at the same time the air industry should mind the dignity of its clients.
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Profiling sort of works, but if you start hassling all brown folks while giving every granny a free pass, they'll just adapt their tactics. Kidnap granny's grandkids and she'll do whatever they ask to see them again. You have many travel options. I havent found worry-free air travel in the constitution, but at the same time the air industry should mind the dignity of its clients.

How about the 4th amendment?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top