New TSA Security Measures

[blibblab]

I'm with Matt and livingvicariously on this one. I agree it's way more invasive than before, but for me when all is said and done, it's not extra hassle or extra percieved pain. It's me walking through a machine to go on a plane like I always do. Just a different type of machine. It's not like I'm walking through a gauntlet of policemen beating me with tasers and batons or getting caned for leaving gum on the floor.

First step to totalitarian regimes is willful submission of the public.

[KC2Vegas]

Are these new measures permanent ? Or just for the holidays ? I don't like it.

[LS6]

First step to totalitarian regimes is willful submission of the public.

This will eventually happen.... its inevitable....good thing i wont be alive when it does happen.


NyceGuy.. damn that video sucked.. she waited peacefully too.. they held her and she missed her flight. I feel a lot of people now are on power trips.. they feel they need to show you they have Authority.. when it just comes down to being lazy. it seems everyone wants some kind of power and what little they have over people they will use to make themselves seem right... i dont like it.

i also agree with Warren.. dont close the whole door.. but some of these measures may be out of line. I havent experienced it yet.. but i will in 2 weeks. Ill share my results then.

[BarrelO]

Everyone's a civil libertarian when it's their junk that's getting touched.

[Matt]

The new measures aren't thought of as intrusive because people deem them "necessary" in today's world of terrorists and crazy people. Problem is that these measures are NOT effective and they serve to slow down and disrupt procedures at the airports. Just because you haven't had any issues with it doesn't mean that applies to everyone across the board.

Take for example a woman who recently was going through the TSA checkpoint. She was pulled aside and asked to empty her pockets and open her bag. She did and they TSA agent considered her "suspicious" and started going through her wallet, and began to read her receipts. Then she emptied her pocket that had checks up to $8,000 that she was planning on depositing when she got back home. TSA grabbed the checks, asked her why she had them and what they were for. If you ask me, that's intrusive and an invasion of privacy.

The argument for the new procedure is always, "I have nothing to hide". The problem is that stance defines privacy to be something that people want to hide bad/illegal/dangerous things. Just because I have nothing to hide doesn't mean I have anything to show you.

And another thing, these TSA procedures are costing a fortune. I believe the estimate was close to half a billion and rising for these new machines and procedures which have been proven to be completely useless.

EDIT: Former Homeland Security Secretary owns the company that makes the new TSA body scanners.


via New Yorker 1972

then again.. maybe they do get aggravated cuz of all the people and different personalities that go through those detectors. Think about how cashiers have to deal with people or retail workers. I did retail and well.. you try to be professional and at times you just get straight assholes.. and i would keep my calm only to get yelled at for no reason and just following some rules

Problem is, even the TSA agents don't know the guidelines and rules.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh1h5Mvc3MM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh1h5Mvc3MM[/ame]

Ok yeah I should probably make the distinction here. There's plenty of stuff the TSA are doing, such as in your example, or strip searching children that I don't agree with. I just don't see the body scanner as being an invasion of privacy, considering that they're already looking at all your stuff in your bag with an xray machine.

That said, there's nothing wrong with the methods used prior to these machines, and clearly the only reason Rapiscan got the contract is because of DHS connections.

[gubuju]

just flew last night, nothing out of the ordinary.

walk thru metal detector, no patdowns, on my merry way to the bar

[dnix]

Everyone's a civil libertarian when it's their junk that's getting touched.

LMAO.....meaning no one thought twice about the Patriot Act, but TSA does a pat down, and they think were headed toward serfdom??

I can choose not to fly if I dont like the new security measures. I can think of a lot of other things were I have no choice. I am glad Americans are becoming more concerned. I dont wish to discuss politics on this forum, but if someone is really concerned about their rights as an American, you could start with this site http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

[IRockNvegas]

goes back to my previous post

even the patriot act would be more efffctive if they racially profiled....

JK

[Cisco419]

This is all a joke! I can't wait to fly cause I just had to do all kinds of tsa training for my new job and actually still have a ton more to do! But I think I'm gonna have some fun with it if they still have it next time I fly

I'm with IRock though! Then again coming back from the invasion I was randomly selected for more screening but that was just a reg pat down like they do for concerts and shit.

[Charles~]

I'm with Matt.

I feel worse for the guy that has to touch junk all day than being the junk touchee for five seconds.

[tschwicht]

I'm with Matt.

I feel worse for the guy that has to touch junk all day than being the junk touchee for five seconds.

Absolutely. I was the "junk toucher" doing searches in a remote area of a third world country for a certain security checkpoint mission at one point in my life, and it's not fun. And it just so happens I was there doing it because of, you guessed it, terrorist attacks involving airplanes in the United States. And imagine how these people felt, as they weren't even from the United States!

I understand everyone's concern about their privacy, however your privacy is not being unwillingly invaded here. No one is making you get on a plane. The TSA isn't coming into your homes and grabbing your private areas.

You can take a bus. They won't feel you up or put you through any weird machines with death radiation. This is the equivalent of me getting mad that a private business owner requires me to wear a shirt and shoes into their store. I don't like shirts! But oh wait, they aren't forcing me to wear a shirt. I can shop somewhere else.

People complain about how there are so many gaps in our security detection, but then when something new is added they complain about privacy. Pick one or the other. Stop fighting both battles.

As for the complaints about little kids being searched, well I hate to break it to everyone in the United States who thinks kids can do no harm, but in many countries, most of which we're fighting terror in or should be, they use children to carry bombs too. Why? Because of mindsets like the ones we have here.

I won't say the machines or pat down process is perfect. I won't say we don't overspend on a lot of things (that's a whole other thread in itself). I can't even completely say that this method will ever catch anyone. If it deters even one person that may have succeeded in something equivalent to 9/11 though, i'm all for it. Unfortunately for my argument (and great for those opposed to it) there is no way to measure that effectiveness and you can always say "it hasn't caught anyone".

[NyceGuy]

I'm with Matt.

I feel worse for the guy that has to touch junk all day than being the junk touchee for five seconds.

Absolutely. I was the "junk toucher" doing searches in a remote area of a third world country for a certain security checkpoint mission at one point in my life, and it's not fun. And it just so happens I was there doing it because of, you guessed it, terrorist attacks involving airplanes in the United States. And imagine how these people felt, as they weren't even from the United States!

I understand everyone's concern about their privacy, however your privacy is not being unwillingly invaded here. No one is making you get on a plane. The TSA isn't coming into your homes and grabbing your private areas.

You can take a bus. They won't feel you up or put you through any weird machines with death radiation. This is the equivalent of me getting mad that a private business owner requires me to wear a shirt and shoes into their store. I don't like shirts! But oh wait, they aren't forcing me to wear a shirt. I can shop somewhere else.

People complain about how there are so many gaps in our security detection, but then when something new is added they complain about privacy. Pick one or the other. Stop fighting both battles.

As for the complaints about little kids being searched, well I hate to break it to everyone in the United States who thinks kids can do no harm, but in many countries, most of which we're fighting terror in or should be, they use children to carry bombs too. Why? Because of mindsets like the ones we have here.

I won't say the machines or pat down process is perfect. I won't say we don't overspend on a lot of things (that's a whole other thread in itself). I can't even completely say that this method will ever catch anyone. If it deters even one person that may have succeeded in something equivalent to 9/11 though, i'm all for it. Unfortunately for my argument (and great for those opposed to it) there is no way to measure that effectiveness and you can always say "it hasn't caught anyone".

I think the problem is that they keep adding things that are supposed to make flying safer. However these things ARE invasive. And I'm supposed to take a bus to Vegas from now on?

This week there were 2 articles saying that the scanners wouldn't even have detected the "christmas bomber." We're continually adding these measures and approving of them because we feel that they're necessary, but they are not. I don't care how you look at it. I didn't mind the long lines for metal detectors, and I wasn't even too bothered by taking off my shoes. We've become so scared and paranoid that we're willing to allow ridiculous things in the name of safety, when they're not effective at it to begin with.

So you're saying that we SHOULD be afraid of little kids bombing airplanes? That's my point, where does it end with this growing fear? There are dangers in driving, buses, walking down the street, and we don't pad ourselves to avoid them. And there have been talks to extend these measures to other forms of transportation as well.

[WarreN]

I really don't like this "if you don't like it don't fly" mentality. Not flying in this country isn't an option, we don't have bullet trains or any other fast alternative to flying yet. We shouldn't be forced to undergo humiliating and intrusive searches just because we want to travel.

Again, before someone responds, I'm fine with searches and what not, I just want a line drawn. Yes its true this isn't affecting everyone and maybe hasn't affected you personally yet, but that doesn't make it OK.

[Drew]

I really don't like this "if you don't like it don't fly" mentality. Not flying in this country isn't an option, we don't have bullet trains or any other fast alternative to flying yet.

That's under the assumption that flying on a plane AND traveling to places at a fast pace is a right of life and not a privilege...

[WarreN]

I really don't like this "if you don't like it don't fly" mentality. Not flying in this country isn't an option, we don't have bullet trains or any other fast alternative to flying yet.

That's under the assumption that flying on a plane AND traveling to places at a fast pace is a right of life and not a privilege...

Seriously Drew? You think of flying and traveling as a privilege? Maybe for Vegas and vacations...

What about for business or family emergencies, etc? I think you're thinking about this the wrong way.

We may be privileged to have had the invention of flying, but no longer is it merely an advantage or special gift.

Flying is a necessity in life today.