Airport Body Scanners

Well being subjected to excessive searches at an airport is not the same as having your President illegally take away your Constitutional protections. You have a choice to go into the airport, you don't have a choice if the President suspends habeas corpus illegally.

Dude, you are using the word excessive improperly. If you have gone through security at any time after 9/11 you have implicitly agreed to at least a strip search. Just because it hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean it isn't happening.

To me, if the option is strip search or walk through a scanner that will render me naked. I'm taking the scanner. I hate the delay of even taking my shoes off let alone taking all my clothes off. The people looking at the scanner will be so jaded after their first shift, your nudity will hardly matter to them. Unless you have two dicks they'll be immune to whatever they see.

My point is you are subject to a more excessive and invasive search now. This would actually be an improvement in both security and invasiveness of proposed searching.

That's not the option though. The option, for now, is metal detector or scanner. If they find something suspicious in the scanner they're still going to strip search you, the same way they would if the metal detector continually goes off. It's an undue invasion of privacy on a massive scale, and I certainly won't be taking part in it if it becomes mandatory in all airlines.

Saying it is undue or excessive is conclusory. What level of searching do you think is appropriate?
 
Dude, you are using the word excessive improperly. If you have gone through security at any time after 9/11 you have implicitly agreed to at least a strip search. Just because it hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean it isn't happening.

To me, if the option is strip search or walk through a scanner that will render me naked. I'm taking the scanner. I hate the delay of even taking my shoes off let alone taking all my clothes off. The people looking at the scanner will be so jaded after their first shift, your nudity will hardly matter to them. Unless you have two dicks they'll be immune to whatever they see.

My point is you are subject to a more excessive and invasive search now. This would actually be an improvement in both security and invasiveness of proposed searching.

That's not the option though. The option, for now, is metal detector or scanner. If they find something suspicious in the scanner they're still going to strip search you, the same way they would if the metal detector continually goes off. It's an undue invasion of privacy on a massive scale, and I certainly won't be taking part in it if it becomes mandatory in all airlines.


Then you don't need to fly.

That's true, and I've already acknowledged that.
 
That's not the option though. The option, for now, is metal detector or scanner. If they find something suspicious in the scanner they're still going to strip search you, the same way they would if the metal detector continually goes off. It's an undue invasion of privacy on a massive scale, and I certainly won't be taking part in it if it becomes mandatory in all airlines.


Then you don't need to fly.

That's true, and I've already acknowledged that.


you do realize tho that there may be occasions you will need to take a flight somewhere.

What will you do?
 
Dude, you are using the word excessive improperly. If you have gone through security at any time after 9/11 you have implicitly agreed to at least a strip search. Just because it hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean it isn't happening.

To me, if the option is strip search or walk through a scanner that will render me naked. I'm taking the scanner. I hate the delay of even taking my shoes off let alone taking all my clothes off. The people looking at the scanner will be so jaded after their first shift, your nudity will hardly matter to them. Unless you have two dicks they'll be immune to whatever they see.

My point is you are subject to a more excessive and invasive search now. This would actually be an improvement in both security and invasiveness of proposed searching.

That's not the option though. The option, for now, is metal detector or scanner. If they find something suspicious in the scanner they're still going to strip search you, the same way they would if the metal detector continually goes off. It's an undue invasion of privacy on a massive scale, and I certainly won't be taking part in it if it becomes mandatory in all airlines.

Saying it is undue or excessive is conclusory. What level of searching do you think is appropriate?

Well, for the record, I have no problem with this so long as people can opt out of it. It is undue and excessive, in my opinion. If others have no problem being subjected to it then that's their decision.
 
I just want the safest procedure out there....if that means that someone has to look at my nutsack for 30 sec, then so be it...at least I know no one on the plane hs something I need to worry about
 
I would a hundred times rather walk through a scanner than have some weird airport personnel using their wand or their hands on me. I hate that crap.
 
I never heard that the cleaning crew planted bo xcutters for the hijackers for 9/11...you got any links on that?

Of course not, the article was gone 2 days after I found it. I'm gonna have to start copying these articles. There are a lot of them that completely disappear, who says the internet isn't censored?

Funny thing, I had posted the whole article on aol and when someone asked for the link, I went back to find it and it was gone.

It wasn't the last time something like that had happened.

I saw an article on reuter's eyewitness news that talked about people being locked in churches and burned alive when civil war broke out in Kenya after the last presidential election. It disappeared too.
 
Then you don't need to fly.

That's true, and I've already acknowledged that.


you do realize tho that there may be occasions you will need to take a flight somewhere.

What will you do?

Well it's never happened yet that I've needed or had to take a flight anywhere, but it's certainly a possibility. If I have to take a flight then obviously I have to take a flight and no amount of complaining about my privacy would get me on the plane without being scanned, I'm sure. But it certainly wouldn't be for anything that isn't absolutely necessary.
 
That's not the option though. The option, for now, is metal detector or scanner. If they find something suspicious in the scanner they're still going to strip search you, the same way they would if the metal detector continually goes off. It's an undue invasion of privacy on a massive scale, and I certainly won't be taking part in it if it becomes mandatory in all airlines.

Saying it is undue or excessive is conclusory. What level of searching do you think is appropriate?

Well, for the record, I have no problem with this so long as people can opt out of it. It is undue and excessive, in my opinion. If others have no problem being subjected to it then that's their decision.

Nice wiggle but you didn't answer. Besides concluding this is excessive, what level of search is ok for all members of the flying public to go through?
 
Saying it is undue or excessive is conclusory. What level of searching do you think is appropriate?

Well, for the record, I have no problem with this so long as people can opt out of it. It is undue and excessive, in my opinion. If others have no problem being subjected to it then that's their decision.

Nice wiggle but you didn't answer. Besides concluding this is excessive, what level of search is ok for all members of the flying public to go through?

How can I make a decision for the entire public? I clearly can't even make this decision for this message board. For me, personally, I'm willing to put my bags through their scanners and go through the metal detectors. If they feel they need to pat me down I'd be annoyed but I wouldn't make a scene or anything like that. If they start asking me to remove clothes then we have a problem.

However, if you have no problem going through this scanner then it doesn't effect me in the least.
 
There was no TSA pre-9/11. There were only airline screeners.

Government rules did not specifically bar the objects before last year's the attacks, but the airlines were in charge of security then, with the Federal Aviation Administration overseeing their performance. The airlines issued a manual in 1994 that listed for screeners items passengers could not carry past airport checkpoints

USATODAY.com - Travel - News - Pre-9/11 rules barred box cutters

There was a story about some kid who planted box cutters in 2003 (after the attacks) in an effort to get the airlines to bolster security.

Federal officials talk to student after air scare / Notes in planes said motive was to bolster security
 
Well, for the record, I have no problem with this so long as people can opt out of it. It is undue and excessive, in my opinion. If others have no problem being subjected to it then that's their decision.

Nice wiggle but you didn't answer. Besides concluding this is excessive, what level of search is ok for all members of the flying public to go through?

How can I make a decision for the entire public? I clearly can't even make this decision for this message board. For me, personally, I'm willing to put my bags through their scanners and go through the metal detectors. If they feel they need to pat me down I'd be annoyed but I wouldn't make a scene or anything like that. If they start asking me to remove clothes then we have a problem.

However, if you have no problem going through this scanner then it doesn't effect me in the least.


Let me ask you this

Guy in front of you goes through the scanner....it beeps

do it again

it beeps

they ask the guy to follow them to a private room to strip search him

he makes a huge scene, doesnt want to do it.

They let him through because of it.....do you want that guy on your plane?
 
so you have no proof?

gotcha

no, I have no proof. Does that mean it's a lie?

Do you think there weren't metal detectors and luggage scanners before 9/11?



does it mean its a lie?

no

does it mean I ahve to be skeptical of your claim

yes



If I told you I had a 14 inch cock, but didn't supply proof would you believe me?

Trust me, I wouldn't ask for proof.

As for the rest, why do you think so many illegals on cleaning crews were fired immediately after 9/11? Ask the church rat Elvira why she lost her job on the cleaning crew at Ohare airport after 9/11.

Be skeptical all you want, I don't lie, however if you read my posts, you'll see I'm one of the most honest poster's here, and I put a lot of my private life into my posts, so much so that if I were a liar, it would be pretty clear before very long.
 
Well, for the record, I have no problem with this so long as people can opt out of it. It is undue and excessive, in my opinion. If others have no problem being subjected to it then that's their decision.

Nice wiggle but you didn't answer. Besides concluding this is excessive, what level of search is ok for all members of the flying public to go through?

How can I make a decision for the entire public? I clearly can't even make this decision for this message board. For me, personally, I'm willing to put my bags through their scanners and go through the metal detectors. If they feel they need to pat me down I'd be annoyed but I wouldn't make a scene or anything like that. If they start asking me to remove clothes then we have a problem.

However, if you have no problem going through this scanner then it doesn't effect me in the least.

That's all I wanted to know. I just wanted what you were comfortable with.
 
no, I have no proof. Does that mean it's a lie?

Do you think there weren't metal detectors and luggage scanners before 9/11?



does it mean its a lie?

no

does it mean I ahve to be skeptical of your claim

yes



If I told you I had a 14 inch cock, but didn't supply proof would you believe me?

Trust me, I wouldn't ask for proof.

As for the rest, why do you think so many illegals on cleaning crews were fired immediately after 9/11? Ask the church rat Elvira why she lost her job on the cleaning crew at Ohare airport after 9/11.

Be skeptical all you want, I don't lie, however if you read my posts, you'll see I'm one of the most honest poster's here, and I put a lot of my private life into my posts, so much so that if I were a liar, it would be pretty clear before very long.


I am not denying the statement that you had a link....I am skeptical on the cource and the validity
 
does it mean its a lie?

no

does it mean I ahve to be skeptical of your claim

yes



If I told you I had a 14 inch cock, but didn't supply proof would you believe me?

Trust me, I wouldn't ask for proof.

As for the rest, why do you think so many illegals on cleaning crews were fired immediately after 9/11? Ask the church rat Elvira why she lost her job on the cleaning crew at Ohare airport after 9/11.

Be skeptical all you want, I don't lie, however if you read my posts, you'll see I'm one of the most honest poster's here, and I put a lot of my private life into my posts, so much so that if I were a liar, it would be pretty clear before very long.


I am not denying the statement that you had a link....I am skeptical on the cource and the validity

Okay, I can handle that....just wait till you find an article online and it disappears on you.
 
So if you have a choice between standing in line an extra 5 minutes or dying on the plane how many of you would opt for the second choice? Not to mention you can't refund the ticket.
 

Forum List

Back
Top