TSA Regulations. Have they gone too far?

Jump to Last Post 1-40 of 40 discussions (129 posts)

0
L a d y f a c eposted 14 years ago
Currently there are two new measures in place at the airport for screening. There is the 3D machine (Advanced Imaging Technology) which sees through clothing; and there is the new pat down option where people are actually having their genitals groped.

If you are 'randomly selected' for the extra scanning after you go through the metal detectors, and you refuse the 3D you are then obligated to under go the new pat down system.

So far a few people have decided that they did not want to continue with what they considered to be too invasive a procedure, and after leaving the area to leave the airport, have been approached by police and/or security advising that if they leave the airport without finishing the scan or search, they will have a law suit filed against them, along with a fine of $10,000.00, in one case $11,000.

The wait times at the airport have shot through the roof, as these new procedures take a substantial amount of time.

These are simply facts. What's your opinion? Are they going too far? Banning liquids was first; mandatory shoe removal was second; and now there is the new extensive pat down and 3D images of your body without clothing.
reply report
1. 79
  thisisoliposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Ergh, have you ever been through this?
  
  First off, they do not grope your genitalia, they use teh back of their hands over any private area, and the pat down is usually just a light stroke which follows the contours of your body, it is definitely not invasive.
  
  The full body scan is also seen by people in a different room, it takes a matter of seconds, and the people who saw you in the room not only can't connect you with the image, but the images really are not that revealing. Personally I prefer the new machines, they are faster, simpler, and if they ever do manage to get past the up in arms ignorance parade it will mean that I won't have to take my belt/shoes/jacket off every time I get on the plane.
  reply report
  0
  Audreveaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I read this today http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-new … 17whz.html
  
  I'd never thought much about the pat down until I read this and realised how intrusive it really is. I'd have been upset by what she describes too.
  
  Actually, for women I think the machines are much less intrusive than being touched. But I've read there are health concerns about the radiation.
  reply report
2. 72
  RabbiDanyielposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, they have gone to far.
  
  http://hubpages.com/hub/Dont-Touch-My-J … to-liberty
  
  Protests will not work, but what works if boycott of the whole airline industry and have them send their lobbyists to Washington to change things, and voting out any politicians that back these methods that are gone to far. I speak as a disabled 82nd airborne paratrooper, these methods do not add anything to security. This is just a power and money grab by the government and politicians. Testing the water to see how much liberty can be taken away. If you want to really resolve the issue try the terrorist in a military JAG court, especially ones like Nadil Hasan that was responsible at the Ft. Hood shooting.
  reply report
  0
  L a d y f a c eposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'll drink to all of that, Rabbi.
  reply report
0
jerrylposted 14 years ago
Next, they will want your first born to hold as collateral!

Why is it that our government and corporate America never talk about why America is so hated in this world? Could it be that we are intruding where we are not wanted?

Just a thought.
reply report
71
Ralph Deedsposted 14 years ago
I wonder why they can't pre-screen pilots and frequent travelers and give them a pass on the intrusive screening?

Here's a link to some of the pictures saved by U.S. marshals in Florida. They don't appear to be very revealing to me. Rather disappointing, actually.

http://gizmodo.com/5690749/
reply report
1. 79
  thisisoliposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  While I agree that a frequent pass would be a good idea, what is to stop someone looking to blow up a plane from becoming a frequent flyer to avoid the screening process. Terrorism is an upper middle class hobby after all.
  reply report
  71
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Presumably thorough background checks would be required.
  reply report
  71
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Getting a pass would require a thorough background check. Some people might be unfairly excluded, but life is unfair.
  reply report
0
Audreveaposted 14 years ago
Is this what's in place right now? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3EhqO-r8k4&NR=1

Lots of wobbly bits visible.
reply report
1. 71
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Those are a bit more revealing, but no match for PlayBoy playmates. Radiation exposure for pilots and frequent travelers is the only real issue IMHO.
  reply report
66
Daniel Carterposted 14 years ago
As of this morning, at least one state's attorney general has stated that if a bare hand touches the skin of another person in any private area, that's called a felony and the state will prosecute.

I think people are becoming more and more alarmed, and there is some resistence to TSA policy for the sake of dignity and privacy, as it should be.

I don't think anyone (who is not a general threat to humanity) reallys wants to be noncompliant, it's just that none of us wants to be invaded in such a personal way. Therefore, I think it's right to restore some healthy boundaries as to what is and is not appropriate in searches.

The youtube video doesn't leave anything to the imagination, quite frankly. Such scans I believe, should only be used for those who truly appear to be some kind of threat, not based on some random number search.
reply report
1. 68
  Dorothee-Gyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Times when the pat-down was done with the back of their hands have gone, now it is a full body contact "until resistance is met", meaning, until they're up at your genitalia. Sorry, but that's way too much for my taste!
  
  They have screened since 10 years with intense scrutiny, behaved as if everyone trying to board an airplane is a terrorist just by buying a ticket, and yet, some people are accompanied into airplanes without passports (and certainly without "enhanced or otherwise pat-down") by guys in dark suits, just in order to produce the thread they needed so desperately in order to justify the billions of dollars, euros and other currencies that will now stuff the pockets of those who produce these naked scanners.
  
  How practical that this just happened now, since a year ago, the machines would not have been available, so aren't we all glad that they are now not only available, but also immediately sold in the thousands, for a mere 100.000 dollars or so a piece. GREAT!
  
  They're in a recession, money is scarce, they have to forclose on millions of people, they cannot help them, they have to cut costs everywhere and cannot help the unemployed anymore, but for our "safety", nothing is too expensive! Thanks, America!
  
  Nothing can be too intrusive, we might even catch one of two terrorists by handling millions of airline customers as if they all were dangerous criminals. That must be worth it, mustn't it?
  
  What are a few tears or a few embarrassing situations against that? How convenient that there are still enough who believe in the official story of 09/11, so that we can always argue everybody into the ground with telling them how happy the families of the victims would be if these procedures had been in place earlier. Sure, and pigs CAN fly, I just saw one go by my window...
  
  Honestly, I can only hope that they cut out that "*%&§" pretty soon, or our family will not ever go to the US again. Sorry, but I can't take the risk of my husband getting a heart attack being groped by some TSA member or having to watch them giving me an "enhanced pat-down procedure". And no, I won't go through one of these machines which have been bought right off the shelf, without any appropriate testing of the risks!
  
  Now they have achieved something that I thought would be impossible: I'm really hoping that I won't have to travel there again anytime soon. Good job, America!!
  reply report
2. 82
  Ms Deeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well put, Daniel Carter. I'm looking into canceling my trip I don't really have to go on, and hoping all this changes into a method with more healthy boundaries. Political correctness has gone too far.
  reply report
60
S Leretsehposted 14 years ago
M. Chertoff, former FEMA director under Bush (in charge when 9-11 occurred)saw this coming. He's cashing in now. This is about money! Not security
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH-dpkJZiOM
reply report
66
relacheposted 14 years ago
Have you folks read this account yet? It just happened on Nov 12 in Dayton, OH.

http://www.ourlittlechatterboxes.com/20 … sault.html
reply report
1. 87
  rebekahELLEposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  that's terrible! I'm not sure if I wouldn't have kicked her you know where and then I would really be in trouble.
  reply report
2. 87
  Lily Roseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That's utterly ridiculous! Before I even finished reading it I knew that she's setting up the scene for a lawsuit. Greed - that's what this is.
  
  What good is a pat-down if it doesn't involve certain parts of the body - if there was a policy for doing a patdown and staying away from the genital area don't you think the terrorists would start hiding things there?
  
  C'mon, people! Do you want to get to where you're going alive? If so, then suck it up and be searched in order to get on the plane or rent a damn car and drive or take a train!
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Let's just hope that some nutjob does not try and sneak explosives aboard a plane using body orifices.
  
  Talk about an uncomfortable search!
  
  What if they ingest the tools of terrorism?
  
  We will have to purge the contents of our stomachs and bowels before boarding?
  
  Oh my, what if they have terrorist tools surgically implanted into their body?
  
  ??
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Of course we want to get to our destinations alive ! But don't tell me that Grandma using her walker is a suspect. And don't tell me that some seven year old little boy needs to be strip searched. I have the video on that one.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I would delete the child search videos from your harddrive if downloaded.
  
  The child search videos are borderline child pornography!
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That was on youtube. I knew people would immediately go to the lowest common denominator. Thank you for ruining the point I am trying to make. This is what I was talking about.
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSQTz1bccL4
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Any adult feeling up a minor is a crime. It is not the lowest common denominator. It is WRONG!
  
  An adult can consent to a search.
  
  A minor cannot, at least not without an order from a Judge.
  
  The videos on youtube of children being searched need to be taken down.
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I was talking about the fact that this is an outrage that this kid is even being searched ! Does he fit the profile of a terrorist ? That is the point I am trying to make here.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I understand. It is also illegal.
  reply report
  82
  kerrygposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Neither the scans nor the pat-downs can find things hidden in body orifices, so if you really want to be safe we should probably start allowing anal, vaginal, and oral probes. After all, if terrorists know we're skipping a certain area in our searches, that's where they'll start hiding stuff, right?
  reply report
  60
  lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There is already a documented case of plastic explosives being hidden in an anal cavity to carry out a sucessful attack. Now what if someone does this in the mall? Are we going to require anal cavity searches to go shopping? We all know this is where it's leading and we all know who is causing the problems. Are we going to allow our government to violate us in the name of political correctness? If so then the muslim terrorists have won!
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Duh -- of course.
  
  If some bozo brings a gun out of his home and into times square and unleashes a flurry of death, then we'll ALL have to be anally searched before we leave our homes.
  
  "it's for our own good"
  
  Orwell's 1984 was NOT an instruction manual, but it pretty much shows EXACTLY what's going on, here.
  reply report
87
lovemychrisposted 14 years ago
Our local newsman, Victor Bravo (VB), just had the best line..... TSA's new slogan: "You don't get on til we get off." !!
reply report
59
Disturbiaposted 14 years ago
Ok, I'm ready for my pat-down!
reply report
74
livewithrichardposted 14 years ago
The 4th Amendment to the Constitution:

'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

Clearly, these searches are unconstitutional. Yes, airlines are private corporations. The airports are public and operated by a government agency. The TSA is a government agency not a private organization.

It was stated below, this is not about security it is about money. Both Soros and Chertoff are profiting from the naked body scanners by way of the company Rapiscan, whose contract is worth $173 million. Lobbyists for this company include Susan Carr, a former senior legislative aide to Rep. David Price (D-N.C.) who is coincidentally chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee.

Imagine that, a Lefty and a Righty coming together for a common cause.
reply report
1. 87
  lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Here's another example:
  
  WASHINGTON — Earlier this year, Representatives Barney Frank, the unabashedly liberal Democrat from Newton, and Ron Paul, an outspoken libertarian Republican from Texas, formed an unlikely alliance aimed at slashing the defense budget to trim the deficit.
  
  Chris Preble, director of foreign policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, helped bring Frank and Paul together on the issue. He wrote an article earlier this year in which he called for significant defense cuts. Frank read the article and sent it to Ron Paul, with whom he had worked previously on attempts to decriminalize marijuana use and online gambling.
  
  “I said, ‘We need a liberal and conservative coalition, an intellectually honest approach to this,’ ’’ Frank recalled. “I said ‘Do you want to work together on this?’ And he said ‘Of course I do.’ ’’
  reply report
2. 59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Didn't we secede from Britain for less than this?
  
  like... seriously people, wake up.
  reply report
56
C.J. Wrightposted 14 years ago
The Federal Gov has gone entirely too far. All this will do is restrict travel to the point it hampers commerce. I'ts also setting a dangerous precident on warrantless searches.
reply report
82
kerrygposted 14 years ago
Ugh, more horror stories coming out, and with the holidays coming up, there's sure to be more to come. I'm just grateful I don't have to fly anywhere anytime soon. Maybe by the time I do, enough people will revolt to get the rules changed...

TSA forces cancer survivor to show prosthetic breast: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40278427/ns/travel-news/

TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40291856/ns/travel-news

I know a fair number of survivors of childhood sexual abuse who are having panic attacks over the enhanced pat downs, too. Given that something like 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men has survived sexual abuse or assault of some kind, that has the potential for some pretty ugly scenes.
reply report
59
Evan G Rogersposted 14 years ago
Have they gone too far?

... obviously the answer is yes. Rape is generally "too far".
reply report
1. 73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I want to see a video of someone faking orgasm while the TSA employee is doing the pat down. That would be hilarious
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  you'd probably be thrown in jail for it
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It would be even funnier to discuss the charges in an open Court!
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  funny? or "satisfying"?
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Just funny,court is never satisfying.
  reply report
76
Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago
I wonder how many people would say it goes too far if it was only Muslims...or those who look like Muslims...had to undergo this screening.
reply report
1. 82
  kerrygposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There are several Muslim-Americans on a political community I watch on LJ who have pointed out that they've been putting up with this stuff for years and that it's taken the rules affecting white men (women have also been complaining for years about sexual harassment masquerading as "searches") for it to become a national issue.
  
  From personal experience, I know my husband and his relatives get pulled aside for "random" searches a lot more than really counts as "random," but so far the worst that's happened is one of my brothers-in-law missing his flight.
  reply report
2. 59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The muslims have a track record that has proven they deserve hieghtened scrutiny.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Absolute nonsense. Which mosque did Timothy McVeigh belong to?
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Pure nonsense ! 1 Timothy Mcveigh. 19 Muslims on 9-11 . 1 panty bomber last christmas. 1 muslim Ft Hood. 1 failed attempt in Times square by a muslim. 72 olympics. 2 embassies . The USS Cole etc etc and many many more.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hitler - raised in the Catholic church. Do we need to go on?
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Nice try at deflection though.
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  now, see, the problem here is that "muslim" has become loosely synonymous with "terrorist", and BOTH are very vague terms.
  
  This is exactly the point - anyone that opposes the US Flag can easily be thrown in either category. the point is that the US needs an 'enemy' that can't be pinned down.
  
  Read Orwell's 1984 and you'll see this for what it all is.
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Did a book report on it 35 years ago Evan
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Did a book report on it 35 years ago Evan
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  so....
  
  ... you're argument is...?
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  whoops, "your" argument is. Typo, my bad.
  reply report
  76
  Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Actually, debating about whether Muslims are all terrorists or not was not the topic at hand when this started either.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The Manchurian candidate mosque ?
  reply report
3. 60
  lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It's only Muslims that are trying to kill us! What's the sense of groping 80 year old octogenarian nuns and molesting 3 year old children?
  reply report
59
tony0724posted 14 years ago
This one should make all of you sick to your stomach !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSQTz1bccL4
reply report
1. 82
  kerrygposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Or this one
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJNY_PTULO4
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  HOLY COW ! Have we lost our collective minds ? That is just sick ! Kerry that one really chaps my hide !
  reply report
76
Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago
I knew someone would prove me right
reply report
1. 59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So are you saying they are victims UW ?
  reply report
76
Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago
No, I just knew that some people wouldn't complain about these regulations if it was used on someone else and not them.

The innocent Muslims who died on 9/11 certainly were victims.
reply report
59
tony0724posted 14 years ago
The innocent Muslims who died on 9/11 certainly were victims

At the hands of who UW ? Other Muslims that's who !
reply report
1. 71
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  At the hands of Al Qaida. Few Muslims here in the U.S. approved.
  reply report
  59
  tony0724posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Isn't Al Queda Muslim Ralph ?
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Opus Dei is Christian. To say they represent all or even most Christians is absurd...
  
  ...kinda like your point.
  reply report
  71
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  They claim to be, but their actions violate the tenets of the faith of nearly all Muslims today.
  reply report
76
Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago
And how do you know who is and isn't a Muslim?
reply report
1. 60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  We should probably just persecute all dark-skinned people just to make sure.
  
  If any white folks convert to Islam, we'll be in big trouble; But I'm quite sure that will never happen.
  reply report
82
habeeposted 14 years ago
I think the POTUS has declared that the pat-downs and x-ray machines are something we're just going to have to endure for our safety.

I read on a blog today that Israel has like the safest flights in the world, and that they don't do this. I have no idea if this is true or not. Anyone have more info on this?
reply report
1. 87
  Anolindeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  From Wikipedia:
  
  "As part of its focus on this so-called "human factor," Israeli security officers interrogate travelers using racial profiling, singling out those who appear to be Arab based on name or physical appearance.[24] Additionally, all passengers, even those who do not appear to be of Arab descent, are questioned as to why they are traveling to Israel, followed by several general questions about the trip in order to search for inconsistencies.[20] Although numerous civil rights groups have demanded an end to the profiling, Israel maintains that it is both effective and unavoidable. As stated by Ariel Merari, an Israeli terrorism expert, "it would be foolish not to use profiling when everyone knows that most terrorists come from certain ethnic groups. They are likely to be Muslim and young, and the potential threat justifies inconveniencing a certain ethnic group."[25]
  
  Passengers leaving Israel are checked against a computerized list. The computers, maintained by the Israeli Ministry of Interior, are connected to the Israeli police and Interpol in order to catch suspects or others leaving the country illegally.[26]"
  reply report
  82
  kerrygposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  We already have racial profiling in this country - the combination of brown skin, foreign accent, and Islamic name gets my husband gets pulled aside to get questioned or have his carry on dug through every second or third time we fly, which goes way beyond "random" if you ask me - so I don't think "allowing" it would necessarily change that much.
  
  It seems to me the personal contact with each and every passenger is probably more key to Israel's success.
  
  http://www.thestar.com/iphone/news/worl … tle-bother
  reply report
73
Reality Bytesposted 14 years ago
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
reply report
87
lovemychrisposted 14 years ago
Too bad you didn't listen when we SCREAMED to tell you that...but your guys created the Patriot Act anyway.

The beginning of the end of liberty.
Rah Rah'd by the now complaining Right-Wing.
reply report
1. 82
  habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, I'm glad Obama got rid of the Patriot Act...oh, wait...
  reply report
  61
  uncorrectedvisionposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Not only did President Shining Handsome Obama's administration seek renewal of the Patriot Act but sought expansion of several provisions that we were told were terribly intrusive and unconstitutional when enacted under President George W. Bush's Administration.
  reply report
  82
  habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I saw that on the Rachel Maddow Show. She was NOT a happy camper!
  reply report
  61
  uncorrectedvisionposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Rachel Maddow not happy how is that possible. Just listening to her gives me a raging case of "blow out the pilot light and call my self Sylvia."
  reply report
  82
  kerrygposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Most progressives I know (and I know a lot) are furious about it, actually. It's one of several areas where Obama has dangerously alienated his base.
  
  To squeak this back onto the immediate topic at hand, check out the comments on this post: http://community.livejournal.com/ontd_p … 76913.html
  
  This is a community consisting about 98% of liberals, progressives, socialists, and anarchists.
  reply report
  76
  Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And I agree with the person who commented that this was not a big deal until it affected white Americans.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The screaming child video is what caught my attention.
  
  Minors cannot consent to molestation, even with their parents permission.
  
  Child molestation is the only words for it.
  reply report
2. 73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I despised the Patriot Act.
  
  The one good thing I can say about Barak Hussein Obama is the elimination of the Patriot Acts.
  
  Oh wait, duh?
  reply report
  87
  lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Uh huh...and if he got rid of it, you would be screaming that he is making it less safe for Americans.
  
  Please!
  That's why it got passed in the first place...no one wanted to be labeled Un-American. You guys had that whole smear and labeling campaign going like gang-busters back then. Color-Coded fear days....remember?
  
  I trust the Obama adm not to abuse it more than the former one.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Uhmmmm, he has State sanctioned molesting of children who want to fly to gramma's house for Thanksgiving.
  reply report
  87
  lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  He? I heard that Congress voted down those scanning machines, but DHS went ahead with them anyway.
  
  They seem to be another agency that's above the US gvt. Like so many of the alphabet organizations. They do what they want, gvt be damned.
  reply report
  82
  habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Obama condoned the pat-downs and scanners. I'm not saying he was wrong to do so - I'm still on the fence.
  reply report
  73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Another astounding reality of the U.S.A.
  
  Citizens spying on citizens?
  
  http://www.infragard.net/
  reply report
  60
  lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Haha! Sooo naive! Typical of the left all the policies they hated sooo much are now perfectly ok! LOL! Hyppcrites!
  reply report
  87
  lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Same way you conservs were all for taking away our rights when Bushco was doing it. Now you have a problem with it. Hypocrits yourselves.
  reply report
  60
  lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No.I had a problem with it then too, which is why I didn't vote for Bush once!
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  IF Obama EVER got rid of the Partiot Act (he will never do such a thing, of course, because the D's and the R's are the same party -- I'm still trying to wake you up to this point, lovemy), then I would actually give him a +100 tally.
  
  Unfortunately for Obama, his tally would still be about a 100-to-35000.
  reply report
  60
  EPmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You are dead on.
  
  People approach politics with the Democrat vs Republican mentality heavily ingrained into their minds. These are the same people who go into the voting booths and check off anyone with a D or R next to their name -- whichever corresponds to their political party.
  
  POLICIES OVER PARTIES -- it really is time people start realizing this. D and R are become two sides of the same worthless coin.
  
  I admire your attempt to wake people up. You certainly have your work cut out for you here on the HP political forums. Good luck!
  reply report
3. 59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  man, lovemychris, how can you NOT be a Libertarian? You keep saying things like "we need freedom" and "government mandates wreck the economy"...
  
  ... but then you claim that Democrats are holy angels.
  
  Look into the book "Defending the Undefendable" by Walter Block, it might just rock your world. (Not that I'm plugging it, but you can find the links in just about any of my hubs).
  reply report
65
prettydarkhorseposted 14 years ago
I have traveled most of 15 years to and from different international and local airports, all I can say is that there is a price for "security". I can just imagine the dilemma of the one who is working as the one who is tasked to do the "patting down" and for us who will be subjected to the procedure. Maybe they can really devise a way to penetrate up to the smallest cell in our body instead of doing that procedure.
reply report
0
jerrylposted 14 years ago
What next? Will those patting people down hold up signs 1 thru 10 to rate your body scan?

Next come sponsors to offset the costs to the airlines.

Maybe they will hand out recommended diet regimens to those overweight.

Possibly brochures from surgeons for body enhancements.

Think of the possibilities.
reply report
1. 59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  and it will only cost you your soul eternal!
  
  ... and it will all be paid for with money that was taken straight from your paycheck!
  reply report
61
readytoescapeposted 14 years ago
I have one word for the TSA and its current security dilemma, SPANDEX.

Has anyone ever seen a spandex wearing Wal-Mart shopper ever try to shoplift?

“Excuse me Ma’am, do you know you have a tumor that looks like a Power Ranger?

Come on, TSA just require every traveler to wear a spandex outfit, issued by the airlines with each ticket, to fly.
reply report
60
Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years ago
Looks like a bunch of gullible people were duped once again. No wonder FoxNews is doing so well.

the "outrageous act"
reply report
56
C.J. Wrightposted 14 years ago
I don't like the idea of people being so compliant to warrantless searches. So I think a little protesting is healthy in this instance. However I don't think this story has nearly the legs it has, if it weren't for the children being involved. Why can't the TSA just skip over children? I mean if it's every tenth person, just skip over junior.....
reply report
75
frogdroppingposted 14 years ago
I'd like to know what happens when someone gets caught having inserted something, anally or vaginally, as a means of getting 'it' past security. It's got to be doable. Why bother hiding whatever in your bra or knickers if they're gonna find it (now) so ... then what?

All women/females subjected to an internal, guys to rectal exams?

Maybe I'm thinking too far ahead but you know - who'd have thought such an invasive body search, tagged into the 'we're going to treat you as a suspect despite having no evidence to support it' would've become accepted/the norm.
reply report
1. 56
  C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I just asked that very question to myself this morning as I listened to a local radio show. I mean, some guy tries to light his underpants and we get this. The next logical step is to insert or ingest an explosive device then refuse the xray. Even worse use the long lines created by all this garbage as easy targets for some other kind of attack.
  
  The TSA is considering expanding it's searches to other forms of mass transit. Trains, busses, etc.
  reply report
74
livewithrichardposted 14 years ago
This may sound like a conspiracy but is it possible that these pat downs and full body scanners are just a prequel to retinal scanners and biometric ID cards? Every single person will be put into a database and capable of being tracked anywhere. This will induce a constant state of fear and a constant level of control over the masses.

There will be a line that once crossed will forever change the dynamic of this world, a world that is running out of money and running out of hope. The Elite of this world feel pretty secure right now but once that line is crossed, how secure will they really be?

LOL That would be a good storyline if I were a scifi writer.
reply report
1. 73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  First we accept a body search to travel.
  
  Second they will implement the searches to enter a municipal building.
  
  Third we will have to be searched to gain entrance to an event.
  
  Fourth we will succumb to a body search whenever authorities choose.
  
  Incremental-ism!
  
  Fourth Amendment:
  
  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
  reply report
75
frogdroppingposted 14 years ago
Maybe it's a lot further from conspiracy theories than you think LWR - because the steps you and RB cite are very very probable ones.

The futuristic films of tomorrow's world, where societies live in close quarters, dress similarly, behave in a modified fashion, are subject to authoritative invasion/investigation for no reason - and yet accept it as being a part of the new order may be less futuristic fantasy and more futuristic reality.

And maybe the films are also a part of the whole - a way of de-sensitizing us, making such a society appear normal, moving us towards acceptance.

Scary - but possible.

@ CJ Wright - if the TSA continues as is, no doubt a line will be drawn whereby the you's and me's of this world will say 'enough' - and stop travelling.

If that happened, no one moving round the world, that's gonna cause a whole other different economic problem. Another possibility. You can only beat a dog for so long. There's always the potential for it turning. Bad metaphor but you get the meaning
reply report
1. 74
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Conjures the imagination of the public being corralled by unknown puppet masters but for what reason? What would be the final outcome? I can only imagine one outcome and it's not pretty because it will be fraught from desperation.
  reply report
74
livewithrichardposted 14 years ago
LOL yes, I posted that Amendment on the first page of this thread.

I think we'll see an increased level of infringements to our liberty over the next year or two. Just wait until after the holidays when the Airports cry out about loss of passenger revenue because of the TSA procedures and demand our TAX DOLLARS again to bail them out.
reply report
1. 73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Watch the American entrepreneurial spirit take over.
  
  Fleets of small Cessnas, flying out of small privately owned airports.
  
  What an opportunity!
  reply report
  74
  livewithrichardposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOL yes but you need money or hope of finding money to attain that entrepreneurial spirit. I foresee the American spirit getting bashed over the head and forced to relinquish even more liberties so that the Elite will feel safe and protected.
  reply report
67
SparklingJewelposted 14 years ago
here is some of Ron Paul's idea and new legislation "....Certainly, those who choose to refuse the humiliating and potentially harmful new full body scanner machines may suffer delays, inconveniences, or worse. But I still believe peaceful resistance is the most effective tool against federal encroachment on our constitutional rights, which leads me to be supportive of any kind of “opt-out” or similar popular movements.

After all, what price can we place on our dignity, personal privacy, and physical integrity? We have a right not to be treated like criminals and searched by federal agents without some reasonable evidence of criminal activity. Are we now to accept that merely wishing to travel and board an aircraft give rise to reasonable suspicion of criminality?

Also, let’s not forget that TSA was created in the aftermath of 9/11, when far too many Americans were clamoring for government protection from the specter of terrorism. Indeed it was congressional Republicans, the majority party in 2001, who must bear much of the blame for creating the Department of Homeland Security and TSA in the first place. Congressional Republicans also overwhelmingly supported the Patriot Act, which added to the atmosphere of hostility toward civil liberties in the name of state-provided “security.”

But as we’ve seen with TSA, federal “security” has more to do with humiliation and control than making us safe. It has more to do with instilling a mindset of subservience, which is why laughable policies such as removing one’s shoes continue to be enforced. What else could explain the shabby, degrading spectacle of a long line of normally upbeat Americans shuffling obediently through airport security in their stocking feet?

TSA may be merely symbolic of much bigger problems with the federal government, but it is an important symbol and we have a real chance to do something about it. We must seize this opportunity, before TSA offers some cosmetic compromise or the media spotlight fades. If you don’t live in my congressional district, please consider contacting your member of Congress and asking him or her to cosponsor HR 6416, the American Traveler Dignity Act of 2010. With enough help, we can push the bill to a vote early next year. Unless grassroots Americans take action, federal agencies like TSA will continue to bully us and ignore our basic constitutional freedoms."
reply report
67
SparklingJewelposted 14 years ago
here's another account...

Antonia Riggs Miernik reluctantly rolls up her left pant leg, revealing a scar that runs down her knee. When Miernik was 27 years old, she was injured in a car crash, and “basically destroyed the knee.” Now, she has a metal knee implant.

One of the effects of the implant is that whenever the New Port Richey woman flies, she triggers the metal detectors at airport security. She says the normal procedure is that she is then subjected to a TSA pat down. She has experienced multiple pat downs since Sept. 11.

“I feel molested. I’d like to go take a shower with Lysol (afterwards),” Miernik said, describing the pat downs, which she said includes being “touched all over.”

Miernik said the worst experience she had came when her 7-year-old granddaughter was at the airport with her. When her granddaughter saw the pat down, “She went ‘Grandmama, they touched you on your special girl spots.’”
reply report
71
Ralph Deedsposted 14 years ago
"....Apparently there may be reason for concern about the health effects of the radiation from the scanners.

Specifically, these scientists argue that the concentration of radiation on the skin of individuals being scanned poses a serious cancer risk that has been largely dismissed. The TSA has compared the radiation received from the body scanner to the radiation that is absorbed in regular airplane travel or the radiation from a chest X-ray. However, in their memo to Dr. Holdren, Drs. Sedat, Agard, Stroud and Shuman note that this comparison is “very misleading.” The TSA estimates only consider the radiation as it would be if absorbed by the whole body, as opposed to how the scanner really operates, which is to concentrate the radiation on the skin. The scientists claim that the body scanners have not received a proper medical review using “key data” which would allow for a proper understanding of the medical impact of the technology which they believe could cause mutations and skin cancer. They suggest setting up an independent panel to review the safety concerns posed by the scanners, a highly reasonable suggestion for a piece of technology that will be scanning millions of people a year..." More here:

http://www.rutherford.org/articles_db/c … ord_id=685
reply report
59
Disturbiaposted 14 years ago
reply report
1. 59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  rofl
  reply report
  71
  Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Airport inspections are much easier in Scotland, for men at least.
  They can ust use a stick with a mirror on it to check under their kilts.
  
  A true Scotsman is said to never wear anything under his kilt. But now Scots are being warned that the sartorial tradition could be both indecent and unhygienic.
  
  The organization charged with maintaining standards in Highland dress has backed kilt-rental firms who say the age-old custom of "going commando" has got to go.
  
  "We are saying please use common sense and decency as it can be unhygienic and it can be offensive," Brian Wilton of the Scottish Tartans Authority said Tuesday. "If you are out and about in a kilt then remember to show some decorum.
  
  "If you are hiring a kilt, then wear underwear because some of them are left in a horrible state."
  
  The tradition comes from the clansmen warriors of the Highlands who wore little but long kilts that wrapped around the shoulder. The Scottish military took up the idea, and Scots regiments still parade sans underwear to this day.
  
  "My father was a sergeant major in the army and used to clip a car mirror on the end of his pace stick and held it under the kilts of his men to check they were suitably undressed for parades," Wilton said.
  
  More here:
  
  From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20101123/NAT … z169TzQPL1
  
  http://detnews.com/article/20101123/NAT … lt-wearers
  reply report
  59
  Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  rofl
  reply report
87
melporposted 14 years ago
No, I do not think the TSA regulations have gone too far. Right now I believe they are doing what is necessary to keep the incident from last christmas from happening again. A course people are going to complaint about it, about less than 0.01% have, but for now we are going to have to put up with it until better technology comes around. The terrorist is just waiting for us to become complacent again. Anything is possible. Everyone must be screened before boarding a plane including the pilots. I can see a rogue pilot getting on a plane with a bomb if he has not been screened.
reply report
1. 73
  Reality Bytesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Wouldn't a pilot be able to crash the plane whenever he chose?
  reply report
  87
  melporposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes. I believe that is possible.
  reply report
67
SparklingJewelposted 14 years ago
good info and perspective...non-partisan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOi6r_rk9sg&NR=1
reply report
0
L a d y f a c eposted 14 years ago
I know where I sit, and I know it's somewhere over the middle. I want protection, yet I want to keep my rights. Causing this opinion are some facts I can't ignore, trying to be realistic here.

The factual breach of the fourth amendment

The harm that comes from the xray machines that the TSA agents have been denied the ability to test to ensure prolonged safety...considering that hospital machines need to have maintenance, and only scan maybe 100 people a day...not thousands..

That a terrorist, no matter who they or where they come from, if they're serious and determined will find some way to get by security no matter the measures. Why else would we have to keep upping our security measures? See: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20023820-71.html

This is a lot of money to be made in this transition

That everyone is aware of the procedures by now and usually has the option to fly or not

That flying instead of driving shouldn't be a privilege given only to those willing to give up their basic human rights. There are many places you cannot get to by any other means.

That although it is sickening that they would be touching children in this manner, someone earlier was correct. It is undeniable that if it was a known fact that children were not searched, terrorists would then begin to use children. That brings me back to finding another solution.

I don't approve of the new procedures. I do, however, approve of the attempt to make the US a secure place. I can understand the thinking behind why something like this would be put in place, I won't be surprised if something more intrusive comes along in it's place.

In reality, the only way the TSA can actually ensure that nothing is getting on any plane that shouldn't be getting on, is to search every single person's entire person. So it's full cavity searches for all, for a maximum security country, or it's back to casual security checks and the security that has been known for years. There seems to be no fine balance. It just seems that there will always be outrage, either at the lack of security, or the breach of personal rights.

If anyone, supporter or non, can come up with a solution that will preserve human rights while practicing maximum protection for the country, by all means, it's an open forum.

Also, on the aforementioned Muslim front...I may be going out on some sort of racial limb here, so please accept in advance that this is my un-biased opinion from a societal standpoint, and not me being ignorantly racist.

To the people pissed off because their friends and family are being racially profiled: what did you expect? Put away your outrage, put away your bitterness toward society, and find that bit of logic in you that knows, that one bad apple spoils the bunch.
How stupid would this be?: Most of the people who keep hurting me and trying to kill me are of descent x. I've been burned by them quite a few times. Yet I keep trusting the people who keep hurting me, just because some of them might not? It's great that your friends and family are wonderful people, and it sucks that other Muslims had to go and make a bad rep for them, but it happened, and it's going to take awhile for over 300 million people to get over. So deal with the fact that those things happened, and suck up the truly, absolutely terrible, and unfair fact that your friends and family are in that bunch of apples.
I'm really sorry that you are taxed with a situation that weighs so heavily on the soul, due to actions of people not under your control. But instead of being pissed off at every other American because they're (rightfully) nervous, maybe you should direct your anger and bitterness toward the people who did this and created this situation for Muslims everywhere.

..I feel bad that this may offend people, and I hope that my opinion is seen for what it is, just unbiased logic toward society factoring in the way human nature is...and not anything ill intended toward anyone. Anywhere. Of any descent. I am not condoning hate crimes or outrageous behaviour of any sort, I'm merely talking about a general mentality. I'm just a little nervous, I don't usually post about things of such controversy.
reply report
59
sannyasinmanposted 14 years ago
Airport Body Scanners are not even necessary. On 24 November 2010, the designated National Opt-Out day, the TSA simply switched them off at airports around the USA and let all travellers go through without any body scans or pat downs.

So, how can they be “essential” for passenger safety? Full article here . . .
http://www.naturalnews.com/030509_TSA_opt_out_day.html
reply report
1. 76
  Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Funny, I saw some being performed on the newscast yesterday.
  reply report
  59
  sannyasinmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Did you read the article?
  reply report
  76
  Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes I did. So, someone said they turned them all off. I don't know if they did or not. I don't know this news source. I tend not to believe everything I read.
  reply report
  59
  sannyasinmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Good for you. I hope that you also include mainstream media in that statement.
  reply report
  76
  Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Lets see...CBC vs Natural News... what to believe...
  reply report
  59
  sannyasinmanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That's up to you, but at least you are making a choice.
  reply report
59
sannyasinmanposted 14 years ago
. . and if you want a peek (and a laugh) at what's coming next, see this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrIJr-kl … ded#at=128
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

TSA Regulations. Have they gone too far?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

TSA Regulations. Have they gone too far?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies