TSA Scans

[Quantum Windbag]

no one is "fondling" you. "fondling" implies a sexual nature to the touching. someone of the same sex patting you down isn't 'fondling'.

no offense., but people really need to stop mischaracterizing this.

once again, feel free not to fly. that is absolutely your right.

I'm sorry, groping, jabbing, and otherwise touching me inappropriately.

I shouldn't have to avoid flying because the government assumes it can do whatever it wants.

and i shouldn't have any more planes hit my city because of a bunch of whiners.

whose concerns do you think are more valid?

Mine.

You do not have the right to subject people to violations of human rights simply because you are afraid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

[And whats funny is these same idiot liberals defending this shit were screaming at the top of their lungs about Booooosh violating our privacy rights by allowing the government listen in on international phone conversations with overseas terrorists.

no. what's funnier is you rightwingnut freaks who said it was ok for government to read your emails and listen to your phone calls are suddenly up in arms because they actually ARE doing something for security.

what's the matter, it's about your sacred bodies, so suddenly you are all upset?

hypocrites.

What about those of us with a consistent position?

We do not exist in her world.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You're falling into the same trap that many others who are defending these practices have fallen into. You're presenting a false dichotomy, that either we have to submit to naked scans and our crotches being grabbed, or our plane will blow up. That is hardly the reality.

when was the last time you flew?

because i can assure you no one is grabbing your crotch, no matter how much some might want them to.

this is just nonsense.. fauxrage because a certain segment of the population wants them to engage in profiling.

if they were saying this was going to be done to just muslims, the rightwingnut freaks (not saying you, btw... but you see the nutters on this thread) would be all happy.

When was the last time you flew? The new procedure requires the hand to go up the inside of your thigh until it meets resistance. If I did that to you on the street you would call it groping, and have me brought up on charges. Yet you think it is justified if the government tells you it is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

no. what's funnier is you rightwingnut freaks who said it was ok for government to read your emails and listen to your phone calls are suddenly up in arms because they actually ARE doing something for security.

what's the matter, it's about your sacred bodies, so suddenly you are all upset?

hypocrites.

What about those of us with a consistent position?

i simply disagree with you. i do think you're putting ideology before pragmatism and overreacting to this.

that's particularly true given that you've already acknowledged that you want security privatized.

Strange.

I usually get a ccused of over reacting when I tell people that Islam is dangerous, not when I point out that something is not necessary.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

when was the last time you flew?

because i can assure you no one is grabbing your crotch, no matter how much some might want them to.
this is just nonsense.. fauxrage because a certain segment of the population wants them to engage in profiling.

if they were saying this was going to be done to just muslims, the rightwingnut freaks (not saying you, btw... but you see the nutters on this thread) would be all happy.

LOL, wow what arrogance. You can "assure" us? Have you flown in the last week since they implemented the new "techniques"?

I HAVE, and as I said before, its is not a simple "pat down". It IS groping, and NO you DONT always get a choice.

'grabbing your crotch' implies a sexuality.

and i don't believe you.

and you absolutely have a choice about being touched... walk through the scanner.

or are you whining on principle?

You do not have a choice if the scanner detects something, like the zipper in your pants. or even just a glitch on the screen.

Just saying.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

LOL, wow what arrogance. You can "assure" us? Have you flown in the last week since they implemented the new "techniques"?

I HAVE, and as I said before, its is not a simple "pat down". It IS groping, and NO you DONT always get a choice.

'grabbing your crotch' implies a sexuality.

and i don't believe you.

and you absolutely have a choice about being touched... walk through the scanner.

or are you whining on principle?

LOL. thats your arguement now? You don't believe me? Next time you fly, OPT for the grope down, then come back here and defend it.

As I stated before, when I fly this last monday I had no choice. I went through the x-ray machine, and then was told to stand on the pat down mat and was patted down.

Since you seem to be a self appointed spokesperson for the TSA, please explain how that happened.

The new scanners seem to be alerting to zippers in pants. Maybe you should toss them in the bin and walk through in your underwear next time.

Eyeblast.tv

 

[Quantum Windbag]

'grabbing your crotch' implies a sexuality.

If it happens anywhere other than the airport (or the bedroom) it's a crime.

It is a crime even at the airports. People need to speak up and file criminal complaints.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

'grabbing your crotch' implies a sexuality.

and i don't believe you.

and you absolutely have a choice about being touched... walk through the scanner.

or are you whining on principle?

LOL. thats your arguement now? You don't believe me? Next time you fly, OPT for the grope down, then come back here and defend it.

As I stated before, when I fly this last monday I had no choice. I went through the x-ray machine, and then was told to stand on the pat down mat and was patted down.

Since you seem to be a self appointed spokesperson for the TSA, please explain how that happened.

again, why would i opt out of the scanner? i think the scanner is a big nothing.

i'm not the spokesperson for the TSA... I just think the fauxrage is absurd.

if they patted you down AFTER going through the x-ray, then you alarmed the system or they saw something of concern.

if the protocol bothers you, come up with a better one that is equally effective and doesn't make you whine.

Because it is shooting radiation at you, and can leak more than you would get from a chest X-Ray. Or do you really believe the government when it tells you it is perfectly safe?

 

[Liberty]

jillian got royally destroyed in this thread....

 

[Valerie]

What a ridonkulous drama queen this guy is! IMO anyone who tries to make a big mess at the airports next Wednesday is a selfish jackass.

"If you touch my junk I am going to have you arrested," Tyner, 31, threatens the Transport Security Administration officer, in reference to his genitals.

A poll out Tuesday showed eight of 10 Americans support the full body X-ray machines being installed across the country to check under passengers' clothes. Under the new rules, those refusing to submit must undergo the kind of extensive hand search that Tyner also declined.

...

Already the Internet blogosphere is buzzing with talk of a "national opt-out day" on November 24, the eve of Thanksgiving. Fliers would deliberately snarl the system by insisting on hand searches over scanners.

AFP: US airport security staff touch a nerve

Even prior to the passage of ATSA and the Federalization of the screening work force, Federal courts upheld warrantless searches of carry-on luggage at airports. Courts characterize the routine administrative search conducted at a security checkpoint as a warrantless search, subject to the reasonableness requirements of the Fourth Amendment. Such a warrantless search, also known as an administrative search, is valid under the Fourth Amendment if it is "no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose," and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly. [See United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973)].

While the searches at the airport will be conducted by private screening companies, such searches will continue to be subject to the Fourth Amendment requirements of reasonableness because they are conducted at the instigation of the federal Government and under the authority of federal statutes and regulations governing air passenger screening.

TSA: Frequently Asked Questions - Program

 

[jillian]

What a ridonkulous drama queen this guy is! IMO anyone who tries to make a big mess at the airports next Wednesday is a selfish jackass.

yep... but it seems to be an intentional effort on the part of certain groups. they can say it's "private citizens" all they want, but i don't buy it.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Live Free or Die

Hypocrite.

 

[Valerie]

Live Free or Die

Hypocrite.

Bullshit. Feel free to travel at your own discretion, you do not have a right to fly commercial...

You seriously imagine security personnel drooling over your junk after hours?




an administrative search, is valid under the Fourth Amendment if it is "no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose," and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly. [See United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973)



Under the new rules, those refusing to submit must undergo the kind of extensive hand search...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Live Free or Die

Hypocrite.

Bullshit. Feel free to travel at your own discretion, you do not have a right to fly commercial...

You seriously imagine security personnel drooling over your junk after hours?




an administrative search, is valid under the Fourth Amendment if it is "no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose," and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly. [See United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973)



Under the new rules, those refusing to submit must undergo the kind of extensive hand search...

The way I see this they have to prove to things.

1. That this works.
2. That it is the least intrusive alternative.

To counter their argument all anyone has to do is prove that either of these is wrong.

AMERICAblog News: German TV highlights failings of body scanners

In case you missed it, he pulled everything he needs to build a PETN bomb out of his pockets after the trained company rep pointed out everything the scanner picked up. I would guess that I can easily argue that they failed the first test.

 

[westwall]

What I find most amusing about all of this crap is that yet again we see the government buying products that we don't really need, that don't seem to work, that cost fairly ridiculous sums of money when you compare them to technology that is allready out there and who is benefitting? Why Michael Chertoff of course! Our former head of Homeland Security! Yet more political influence being used to screw you the taxpayer.

And people like Jillian who were all over the bastard for co-writing that excrement known as the Patriot Act will gleefully pay the same bastard money to "scan" them.

Fools.

 

[theHawk]

Coulter nails it again:

It's similarly pointless to treat all Americans as if they're potential terrorists while trying to find and confiscate anything that could be used as a weapon. We can't search all passengers for explosives because Muslims stick explosives up their anuses. (Talk about jobs Americans just won't do.)

You have to search for the terrorists.

Fortunately, that's the one advantage we have in this war. In a lucky stroke, all the terrorists are swarthy, foreign-born, Muslim males. (Think: "Guys Madonna would date.")

This would give us a major leg up -- if only the country weren't insane.

Is there any question that we'd be looking for Swedes if the 9/11 terrorists, the shoe bomber, the diaper bomber and the printer cartridge bomber had all been Swedish? If the Irish Republican Army were bombing our planes, wouldn't we be looking for people with Irish surnames and an Irish appearance?

Only because the terrorists are Muslims do we pretend not to notice who keeps trying to blow up our planes.

Welcome to AnnCoulter.com

 

[blu]

From all the images I've seen, and that wasn't many, it doesn't appear that the scan is too invasive.

I looked in that TSA saved scans thread and the images weren't very descriptive.

But even if they are...who fucking cares if someone looks at your junk through an x-ray if it means you'll be flying safely? Shit I'll whip my shit out in front of the entire airport if need be. The TSA assholes can go jerk off over it in the back office, I don't care.

If it is harmful to your health, then that would be entirely different.

-SporK

you don't think xrays are harmful?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Apparently prosthetic breast implants are now a matter of airline security as well.

Cancer surviving flight attendant told to remove prosthetic brea - WBTV 3 News, Weather, Sports, and Traffic for Charlotte, NC-

 

[Toome]

Research is what separates panicked and ignorant fools from informed people. The more common whole body imager is the Rapiscan model which uses backscatter x-ray. The difference between a backscatter x-ray and chest x-ray machine is that the chest x-ray machine uses a higher level of radiation in order to penetrate through body tissue and bone in order to obtain a view of the chest. The backscatter uses a lower radiation that literally bounces off the skin (hence, its name: backscatter).

Looking at numbers, the backscatter x-ray emits 0.1 microsevert of radiation. The average chest x-ray emits 100 microseverts. The average cat-scan emits 10,000 microseverts. A panoramic dental x-ray machine emits 26 microseverts of radiation.

You'd have to go through an airport body scanner 1,000 times in order to have the equivalent exposure of a chest x-ray. 260 times in order to have the equivalent exposure of a dental x-ray. 100,000 times in order to have the equivalent exposure of a cat scan.

Lots of things emit radiation. There's more radiation in an airplane's passenger cabin than emitted from a body scanner. Walking across the parking lot at Disney World on a sunny day exposes a family to a lot more radiation than a 5-10 second exposure from a body scanner.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Research is what separates panicked and ignorant fools from informed people. The more common whole body imager is the Rapiscan model which uses backscatter x-ray. The difference between a backscatter x-ray and chest x-ray machine is that the chest x-ray machine uses a higher level of radiation in order to penetrate through body tissue and bone in order to obtain a view of the chest. The backscatter uses a lower radiation that literally bounces off the skin (hence, its name: backscatter).

Looking at numbers, the backscatter x-ray emits 0.1 microsevert of radiation. The average chest x-ray emits 100 microseverts. The average cat-scan emits 10,000 microseverts. A panoramic dental x-ray machine emits 26 microseverts of radiation.

You'd have to go through an airport body scanner 1,000 times in order to have the equivalent exposure of a chest x-ray. 260 times in order to have the equivalent exposure of a dental x-ray. 100,000 times in order to have the equivalent exposure of a cat scan.

Lots of things emit radiation. There's more radiation in an airplane's passenger cabin than emitted from a body scanner. Walking across the parking lot at Disney World on a sunny day exposes a family to a lot more radiation than a 5-10 second exposure from a body scanner.

Wonderful. Did you even read the article I linked to that talked specifically about how the backscatter x-ray is potentially more dangerous precisely because it is designed to not penetrate?