Encounter at the Airport Security

[radhak]

The recent backlash against the TSA regulations all passengers have to either undergo the full-body-scan or full-body-pat-down (which they are required to specify as "groin check" before they start) made its first celebrity last week when a passenger John Tyner issued a challenge : "If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested" !

You can read the summary here. That post-scan picture shows the scan is really intrusive, to say the least.

The complete blog is also very interesting, even if long.

Personally, if I had to fly with two young daughters, I would prefer the scanner to the 'pat down', and try not to think of what the person on the other side of the scanner is viewing. When they tell us, maybe years down the line, that these scans were harmful to our health, we will have to just shrug our shoulders and carry on.

We did change our thanksgiving plans of flying to Boston simply because of the hassles of airport security. We are driving over to South Carolina instead. My cousin is disappointed, but that's how it is.

[jackellis]

A female friend of mine has been scouring the web for instances where the scanner images are kept instead of being discarded. She gets outraged with every incident, which leads me to believe women are a lot more uptight about the scans than a pat-down.

Personally I'm not worried about the scanners and I could care less whether they post my silhouette on the morning news. The pat-down is another matter. My wife has often claimed she's only as old as the man she feels. No one else is gonna get that privilege.

I think I agree with a comment in a news article I read a while ago that adding layers of security is probably not helpful at this point. If the Israelis don't need to do this kind of invasive search, we shouldn't need to do it either.

[dbhost]

I hated flying before 9/11, and these insane so called security procedures do nothing to make me want to get on a plane. I'll jump in my car and drive instead thank you very much... Okay going international might be a problem, but that's what boats are for.

[Bruce Cohen]

I'd rather be felt-up than blown-up.

Bruce

[LCHIEN]

well, the problem with the current situation is if this is allowed, then what will come next?
As an example, here's a brief history of incidents and airline security response.

1, Hijacking airliners with guns: Metal detectors
2. Hijacking planes with knives : confiscate penknives, eliminate real metal silverware
3. Man tries bomb in shoe : remove all shoes for inspection
4. Rumors of liquid component bombs : confiscate all liquids not in 1 oz bottles and plastic bags
5. Man with underwear bomb : all body scanners and intrusive pat down

So as I said my next question is what will come next?
All the terrorists have to do is spread rumors or get one volunteer to put a stick of dynamite up his bum and we'll all be cavity searched every flight...

There has to be a stop to it someplace. If we give up all our freedoms and spend all out money and time on searching for the terrorist's previous M.O. then we'll never catch up and we'll go broke and be afraid and paralyzed which is exactly what they want.

[RAFlorida]

I agree with Bruce.

Freedom has a price.

[herb fellows]

I just got back from Oregon and San Francisco yesterday.
I made a point of winking at the TSA agent while they were scanning.
I think it made him very nervous.

But seriously...

The terrorists have won, let's face it. Every measure we take is just trying to keep them from 'hitting the jackpot'.
The amounts of worry, money, aggravation, upset, changed plans etc etc etc is exactly what they wanted to do. They know they can't kill us all, and the next best thing is to make us so scared that we have to change our lives to accomodate their threats.
Mission accomplished, as a certain President once said.

[Bruce Cohen]

In all seriousness, if this country wasn't so PC obsessed, and allowed a "bit" of profiling, I believe we'd all be better off and we'll save money and time.

Bruce

[JR]

[rant]Air travel bites. The big one.

Loring's excellent analysis presents only a small portion of the indignities one has to suffer.

Seats jammed together so closely you can't open a lap-top.
Upcharge for exit row.
Seats so narrow that even small people are squished. Pity the large person.
Charging for the privilege of bringing luggage.
Charging for changing travel plans.
Hours spent on the taxiway during travel delays.
Goofy boarding procedures with long waits, slow progress.
Stupid rule that keeps you from boarding a plane that sits at the end of the jetway. "Sorry, sir, the door is closed." Thank goodness they've taken away my weapons at the security check.
Non-sensical rules regarding the use of phones or computers during take-off and landing.

Oh, brother, don't get me started on comprehensive transportation policy. L.A. is about to start building a second light rail line that goes near, but not quite all the way to LAX. As compared to Frankfurt, for instance, where one can step downstairs and get directly onto the high-speed rail system.

[/rant]

[jackellis]

I think there are better ways. Following is an anecdote that purportedly describes one method used by the Israelis:

I read a story a few years back from a fellow that was travelling in the middle east. I wish I could find it now but the gist of it was that this middle aged fellow was travelling alone with minimal baggage. He had been planning this trip for some time and was travelling El Al. While he was waiting in the departure lounge (I think it was Tel Aviv but this can happen in any El Al departure lounge) a very pretty young woman came up to him and started a conversation. She indicated that she was travelling as well and they had a wide ranging discussion about all sorts of things. The author had his ego boosted by this obviously bright, good looking young woman paying attention to him and finding him so interesting. After some time (I think the author thought it was almost an hour) the young lady said her goodbye's and left.

He found out later (through friends) that the young lady was El Al security and was probably former Mossad or Military Intelligence. He must have tripped some sort of profiling warning and he had been expertly interrogated in the nicest possible way and determined not to be a threat. This is just one of the ways that El Al works to protect themselves and their passengers.

It's possible the folks we would hire to do these sorts of interviews are tough to find in the US, and it's also possible the number of passengers could make this method impractical, but I think it would be a lot more effective. One thing the TSA does have right is making the screening process unpredictable. Not knowing when you might be tagged for an "interview" and not knowing the criteria by which you are subject to further investigation introduces a lot of uncertainty into the process.

[All Thumbs]

In all seriousness, if this country wasn't so PC obsessed, and allowed a "bit" of profiling, I believe we'd all be better off and we'll save money and time.

Bruce

Profiling might catch middle eastern terrorists. But there have been cases of Caucasian Americans going to those training camps. How is profiling going to catch them?

I think the scanners are probably going to be pretty effective.

[Bruce Cohen]

Profiling might catch middle eastern terrorists. But there have been cases of Caucasian Americans going to those training camps. How is profiling going to catch them?

I think the scanners are probably going to be pretty effective.

While I agree with you, somehow 80 year old women should not be seen as a possible terrorist.

[radhak]

...
So as I said my next question is what will come next?
All the terrorists have to do is spread rumors or get one volunteer to put a stick of dynamite up his bum and we'll all be cavity searched every flight...

There has to be a stop to it someplace. If we give up all our freedoms and spend all out money and time on searching for the terrorist's previous M.O. then we'll never catch up and we'll go broke and be afraid and paralyzed which is exactly what they want.

Loring, while you summarized it excellently, I thought the comment on body cavities was more rhetorical and sorta amusing.

Till I read today's news : TSA chief rules out body cavity searches !

And if you read on, it looks like the reason does not seem to be because they think it would be shockingly extreme, but because they hope to detect the trigger instead!

So if a terrorist thinks of just using a timed explosive set to explode 6 hours later with no trigger, flying is gonna get real adventurous !

[All Thumbs]

While I agree with you, somehow 80 year old women should not be seen as a possible terrorist.

But did you see that Asian guy that disguised himself as an old white guy and boarded the airliner? It was a story in the papers a month or two ago.

I'd hope the scanner could catch that.

Of course, that was overseas.

Let grandma walk through the scanner.

[cwsmith]

Personally, I have some difficulty with "everyone" seemingly having a problem with the scanning. Scientifically (or so they state), the dosage of radiation from the scan is less than four minutes of flight time. But of course, we live in an age where nobody believes anything the government tells us.

"Profiling" can go a very long way in sorting out who may or may not be a terrorist. I have never quite understood the thinking against "profiling". If purple people with green hair are known assialants, why would we want our law inforcement wasting their time looking for anyone, but people who fit that profile? It's a simple matter of efficiency.

Bottom line of course is that "terrorism" is extremely difficult to defend against. Those who have extreme, suicidal thoughts of distruction are difficult to stop and almost impossible to defend against as their constantly changing to meet the challenge.

One possible solution of course is that everybody sheds all thier clothing and personal items like watches and jewlery and then showers, goes through a detection scan/inspection and then wears a Tyvek suit to their destination. All personal items, including luggage would be sent on a separate flight.

While that would be very intrusive and certainly infringing on one's schedule, it would greatly lessen the possibilities. But even then, I'm sure there would be some way around such extreme measures.

Bottom line of course is that nobody would put up with that, I'm sure. "Security" is basically ****ed, one way or another. It's either too much, or too little, all depending on when the last plane full of passengers was brought down and whether or not you had a friend or relative onboard.

CWS