Would you be willing to accept an airliner taken down by explosives smuggled aboard once, twice, 5 times in 5 years instead? Who REALLY opposes the same kind of invasive searches at train stations and bus stations? Would you be willing to accept a bombing like the Madrid train bombing instead? 2004 Madrid train bombings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The reason I am asking is because it is easy to just say "don't touch my junk". But there can be and have been real world consequences for lax security in the US and Europe dozens of times in the past decade. As long as we actively cultivate terrorism it seems kind of bizarro to simultaneously resist efforts to contain it while complaining fiercely if a shoe bomb or underwear bomber succeeds occasionally. So what do you really think and why, and be cautioned that if you oppose defensive or protective measures you have to state what rate of terrorist attacks you find acceptable to preserve your convenience and dignity. Keep in mind that in places like India, Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran these things happen nearly daily killing hundreds every single month. Are you really willing to accept that level of carnage instead of a simple pass thru a back scatter x ray device?