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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pam Baldwin

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?


I'll take the Thoughts and Suggested alternatives please, pass on the feelings :chuckle:

Seriously, this is a violation of our rights as Americans.

So.....we adapt by taking away our rights?

I would suggest to the terriorists what to do next (in case they haven't thought of it):
Have a terriorist store bomb material in a body cavity....and make sure they get caught!!!! Then TSA will Have to implement body cavity searches......:jawdrop:

Hey, if they can't blow up any planes anymore, shut down the airline industry....that's a good attack on this counrty isn't it?
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME 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.

If that is the extent of the profile, then no, it wouldn't work. However, if you start profling people who paid cash for a ticket, have no luggage, and spend all their spare time in the Sudan, Yemen, Pakistan, then that should raise an eyebrow. As well as the persons state of being at check in.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Last edited:

Delmar

Patron Saint of SMACK
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 don't even get why arming pilots is controversial? If the pilot wanted everybody dead he could just crash the plane:idunno:
 

Delmar

Patron Saint of SMACK
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Maybe he doesn't want to kill himself....?
If a pilot happened to be a person that just wanted to shoot a bunch of people, he could do it at a sporting event or a shopping mall. My point is the pilot has to be a person you can trust, or you are messed up to begin with.
 

Delmar

Patron Saint of SMACK
LIFETIME 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.

I'm pretty sure this is a bit of a red herring. I know the government has been accused of such, but do you really think this is the case?
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
I think of that clip every time this subject comes up. Archie Bunker was exactly right in what he was saying. Sadly the point of the show was that Archie's views on the subject were all wrong.

Then of course the meathead's views are considered just as cuckoo today.
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Nick, I like that one too. I wish they had one on how many people are killed in vehicle accidents. They should be considered deadly weapons and subject to the car and truck government funded 'buy back' opportunity. All those old clunkers sitting on peoples front lawns, sitting somewhere near Washington, maybe the government could charge admission for viewing the biggest junk yard in the world.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
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.
You've got to be kidding me; "VERY difficult....even when compared with other law enforcement agencies"? There is no way they have a process to get the cream of the crop. I've yet to meet even ONE that doesn't seem like a rent-a-cop reject!

But on to the OP. Airlines should be free to sell tickets and fly people as freely as they like. That is in the constitution, sure, but I've never really relied on that document to prove a point. It is *right* to let people be free to buy tickets from airlines that let them get on their airplanes as freely as possible (I realize, they would have to make people line up to board the plane).
 

Lucky

New member
Hall of Fame
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."
Does that stop private companies like airlines? Walmart denies my 2nd amendment rights too. So I can take my business elsewhere if I want. But TSA is government, you'll say. Yes. That's what makes this topic so messy. Private business intertwined with government. Global capitalism outranks our little government anyway, so I'm not worried.
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Does that stop private companies like airlines?

If the right is inviolable, then it applies universally. I think that the case is particularly compelling that the 4th amendment applies universally, since it is nothing else than the right to non-interference with one's own body and property: "Don't put your hands on me." It's a right to non-interference. I don't think that anyone has the authority to violate that right. :idunno:

Walmart denies my 2nd amendment rights too.

If it truly were a right, then I don't think that Walmart should be able to infringe it either.

But TSA is government, you'll say.

No, I won't say that. I think that the distinction is a non-issue.
 

nanonator

New member
Here is an interesting article on Body Scanners:

Body Scanners: The Naked Truth

by David Rittgers

David Rittgers is an attorney and legal policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

This article appeared in The New York Post on November 17, 2010.


The body scanners coming to your local airport provide marginal benefits — if any — in detecting weapons and explosives hidden on travelers. They aren't worth the cost in money — let alone in civil liberties.

The Transportation Security Administration has put these machines — X-ray and radio-wave booths that look beneath clothing to perform virtual strip searches — across the nation and around the world. Industry advocates claim the technology's needed to stop terrorists with explosives hidden under their clothes like Christmas bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Yet the public is justifiably skeptical. Pilots and passengers are "opting out" and taking the alternative screening method — a run through a traditional metal detector and an all-too-intimate pat-down. Cell-phone videos of encounters with TSA screeners are going viral.

If the ineffectiveness of body scanners is not enough to give the public pause, the cost ought to be.

Air travelers now face a few bad choices: Submit to the body scanner, endure an invasive manual pat-down or accept an $11,000 civil fine. This is security theater at its finest. Congress needs to revisit these protocols completely — starting with a total halt to the obscenely expensive and jarringly ineffective full-body scanner.

Despite what their proponents would have us believe, body scanners are not some magical tool to find all weapons and explosives that can be hidden on the human body. Yes, the scanners work against high-density objects such as guns and knives — but so do traditional magnetometers.

And the scanners fare poorly against low-density materials such as thin plastics, gels and liquids. Care to guess what Abdulmutallab's bomb was made of? The Government Accountability Office reported in March that it's not clear that a scanner would've detected that device.

Even if the scanners did work against low-density materials, the same group linked to the Christmas bomb, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, has already found another way to defeat the technology: hiding bombs inside the human body: A would-be AQAP assassin tried to kill a senior Saudi counterterrorism official with a bomb hidden where only a proctologist would find it.

That bomb wound up killing only its carrier. But a more enterprising terrorist could go to the plane bathroom to remove bomb components hidden in a body cavity, then place them against the aircraft hull — and the results would be far different.

Terrorists already know how to beat body scanners with low-tech (really, no-tech) techniques, but the federal government still spends billions on this gadget.

If the ineffectiveness of body scanners is not enough to give the public pause, the cost ought to be.

An army of executives for scanner-producing corporations — mostly former high-ranking Homeland Security officials — successfully lobbied Congress into spending $300 million in stimulus money to buy the scanners. But running them will cost another $340 million each year. Operating them means 5,000 added TSA personnel, growing the screener workforce by 10 percent. This, when the federal debt commission is saying that we must cut federal employment rolls, including some FBI agents, just to keep spending sustainable.

Why cut funding for the people who actually catch terrorists to add more pointless hassles at the airport? (Going through a body scanner also takes longer — the process is slower than magnetometers.)

Scanners clearly fail an honest cost-benefit analysis. Yet it's privacy that has the traveling public up in arms. Understandably so — the message the TSA is sending us is: "Be seen naked or get groped."

We tell our children not to talk to strangers, but now a government functionary gets to fondle away just because he has a badge?

Thanks, but no. Policymakers should rethink this move toward ineffective, expensive and unnecessarily intrusive aviation security.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12563
 

Frank Ernest

New member
Hall of Fame
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?

Scrap the TSA. Hire Israeli security agents.
 

nanonator

New member
This is the third article I have read in the last week about abuses by TSA:

Retired Teacher & Cancer Survivor Left Covered in Urine After TSA Patdown

A retired teacher and cancer survivor was left covered in urine after a TSA patdown in Detroit.
The teacher was left humiliated, crying and covered in urine after making it through security.
MSNBC reported:

A retired special education teacher on his way to a wedding in Orlando, Fla., said he was left humiliated, crying and covered with his own urine after an enhanced pat-down by TSA officers recently at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.

“I was absolutely humiliated, I couldn’t even speak,” said Thomas D. “Tom” Sawyer, 61, of Lansing, Mich.

Sawyer is a bladder cancer survivor who now wears a urostomy bag, which collects his urine from a stoma, or opening in his stomach. “I have to wear special clothes and in order to mount the bag I have to seal a wafer to my stomach and then attach the bag. If the seal is broken, urine can leak all over my body and clothes.”

On Nov. 7, Sawyer said he went through the security scanner at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. “Evidently the scanner picked up on my urostomy bag, because I was chosen for a pat-down procedure.”

Due to his medical condition, Sawyer asked to be screened in private. “One officer looked at another, rolled his eyes and said that they really didn’t have any place to take me,” said Sawyer. “After I said again that I’d like privacy, they took me to an office.”

Sawyer wears pants two sizes too large in order to accommodate the medical equipment he wears. He’d taken off his belt to go through the scanner and once in the office with security personnel, his pants fell down around his ankles. “I had to ask twice if it was OK to pull up my shorts,” said Sawyer, “And every time I tried to tell them about my medical condition, they said they didn’t need to know about that.”

…“One agent watched as the other used his flat hand to go slowly down my chest. I tried to warn him that he would hit the bag and break the seal on my bag, but he ignored me. Sure enough, the seal was broken and urine started dribbling down my shirt and my leg and into my pants.”

The security officer finished the pat-down, tested the gloves for any trace of explosives and then, Sawyer said, “He told me I could go. They never apologized. They never offered to help. They acted like they hadn’t seen what happened. But I know they saw it because I had a wet mark.”

Humiliated, upset and wet, Sawyer said he had to walk through the airport soaked in urine, board his plane and wait until after takeoff before he could clean up.

But Uncle Barack says its necessary so shut up and get your groping.

70% of MSNBC readers support National Opt Out Day.

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.c...ivor-left-covered-in-urine-after-tsa-patdown/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top