TSA got you down?

[deeper thoughts]

Body scanner CEO accompanied Obama to India | Raw Story

I guess just follow the money

 

[Fox-Cousteau]

I just flew from Orlando to New Orleans, no one searched me. I choose to go through the one line with the scanner (not on purpose, I just wasn't paying attention to which line I got into). My line was slower than usual, but faster than the "search line". I don't get the big deal. If someone is getting their jollies at looking at ME through my clothes, they have some serious mental issues. :mooner:

I spent Desert Storm in Germany performing a counter terrorism mission. Part of that mission involved "patting down" soldiers and civilians. I can guarantee you, it is as uncomfortable for the TSA agent as it is for traveler.:anonymous2: The primary difference is as a traveler, I have to experience it once going and once returning. For the agent, they get to experience it all day. :crazyeye:

NWGratefulDiver makes a few points worth considering. I have some very controversial opinions about "why this is going on" but will keep them to myself, because they could very possibly get us fftopic:.

 

[Fox-Cousteau]

Body scanner CEO accompanied Obama to India | Raw Story

I guess just follow the money

Exactly!!!:cool2:

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

OK, I admit that my logic can be fuzzy at best.

Read what the op wrote.

TSA is not there to catch terrorists, but to prevent terrorism aboard our airlines. But one of the arguments against TSA is that they have not caught a single terrorist.

He (the op) is turning down a Bonaire trip because he feels that air travel is now too inconvenient for him. He suggests that you avoid air travel too because TSA screening is just too entirely cumbersome, ineffective (since it has not caught a terrorist), and violates your rights. Why the whole process is "hellish" for him.

In my opinion, a dive trip to Bonaire is really really really really really worth a pat down if that is what it takes. (I've been to Bonaire...haven't had the dreaded pat down yet.)

I think it is a little ridiculous to suggest that we all boycott airline travel because of TSA's goofy practices. #1, the TSA doesn't care if you travel or not. #2, for some of us, the destination is worth it.

When we reach the point where the government needs to feel your genitals in order to keep you safe, the terrorists have won.

The government is counting on people saying "as long as I get my little slice of heaven, I don't care what you do." Here's why you should care ...

1. These measures are ineffective. Terrorists are creative, and will always find ways around any system that's put in place. What do you think TSA will do if a terrorist decides to smuggle explosives on board in a body cavity? Will the traveling public be willing to submit to cavity searches in order to fly?

2. These searches are a fundamental violation of your rights as a US citizen. It is illegal for anyone ... military, police, or otherwise ... to take a nude picture of you or engage in sexual contact with you without your consent or without probable cause. Why would you be willing to give up that right ... especially when the people passing the laws requiring you to are exempting themselves from the same policies?

3. The long-term health risks of these scanners are unknown. We do know that radiation is generally harmful, and that cumulative effects can take years to show up. Are you willing to take the word of your government ... who is relying on the word of the people who are selling them this equipment ... that these things are not harmful to the public?

4. TSA personnel have not been trained to conduct these searches in a professional manner. There have been numerous incidences reported of improper contact and humiliating behavior. And what's the impact on kids? How do you explain to a child that they shouldn't allow a stranger to touch them "down there" ... except when he's wearing a government uniform?

The traveling public would be more likely to be cooperative and supportive if the TSA can be more practical and more professional in its approach. But the unfortunate result of these policies is that more and more the TSA is treating the public as though they are the terrorists ... and more and more the public is thinking of TSA as "the enemy".

The current approach isn't making the airways any safer for any of us ... just more difficult and unpleasant. And since it's really being driven by lobbyists representing companies who stand to make a lot of money by pushing this equipment on the public, the only way to effectively counter it is by impacting the airline industry to the point where their own lobbyists can push for a better system. As long as the public continues to fly, all the complaining in the world will fall on deaf ears.

It's all about money ... it's always all about money.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Interesting but not surprising, given the self-selected group polled, and prefatory statements like:

and:

These polls are a tabloid fixture, and have the effect, in my opinion, of legitimizing sensationalism with their deliberately skewed results.

An LA Times poll shows 61% opposed ... and 48% saying they'll seek alternatives to flying.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[iztok]

I think it is a little ridiculous to suggest that we all boycott airline travel because of TSA's goofy practices. #1, the TSA doesn't care if you travel or not. #2, for some of us, the destination is worth it.

TSA does care. If we don't travel TSA doesn't have reason for existence.

Luckily more airports are opting to handle their own security.

For some of us our liberties are worth fighting for above and beyond our inconvenience.

 

[ianr33]

The traveling public would be more likely to be cooperative and supportive if the TSA can be more practical and more professional in its approach. But the unfortunate result of these policies is that more and more the TSA is treating the public as though they are the terrorists ... and more and more the public is thinking of TSA as "the enemy".

X Lots!

 

[DandyDon]

 

[naimis]

OK, I admit that my logic can be fuzzy at best.

Indeed, and way to put words in my mouth. As some of the others who "got it" noted: follow the money. This isn't at all about safety or security, it's about money. Putting a bunch of poorly-educated and inadequately-trained people in charge of security, and telling them that they are, in effect, above the law is only going to result in exactly the sort of transgressions that we're seeing in the news these days.

These things don't make my flight any safer, nor do they even make me *feel* safer. Even with these wonderful new backscatter machines, the TSA has proven fairly ineffective: Adam Savage: TSA saw my junk, missed 12" razor blades But someone is making money off of getting these devices installed in airports, and they almost certainly have lobbyists working on their behalf.

As far as ID cards go, they can be forged without too much difficulty. UK’s “unhackable” national ID card hacked in 12 minutes.

Background checks can be useful, sure, but 1) it's become apparent that the background checks on TSA personnel are minimal at best, based on the reports of theft by TSA personnel of baggage contents, and 2) can you imagine the effort required to do background investigations on all travelers?

I personally would not mind having military personnel filling the role of airport security. I'd really rather have soldiers than most of the TSA people currently employed. I think soldiers might be inherently better at intimidating would-be terrorists than TSA personnel. Realistically, however, intimidation really isn't going to be effective against a determined, planed terrorist attack. The current measures *might* be useful against the Timothy McVeigh-style solo (or near-solo) attackers, but I doubt they could have prevented 9/11. National Intelligence is more likely to uncover the bigger planned attacks like that, provided the agencies communicate with each other.

As far as canceling my Bonaire trip is concerned, I still have hope that I can one day fly without having to submit to a public groping. In the mean-time, I can dive in other locations that I don't have to fly to get to. That said, if the opportunity comes up to go to Kwajalein, I'd submit to the screening only because such opportunities simply aren't generally available. Anything else can wait until the TSA is reigned in.

The TSA isn't *all* bad, mind you: I used to get my carry-on searched every time I went through security. I finally asked about it and the TSA agent told me that the batteries I had in my carry-on luggage blocked their scanners, so they had to look inside. After that, I stopped putting batteries in my carry-on luggage, and haven't been stopped at security since.

I hope that security at airports can some day be provided in a sensible manner that doesn't involve tossing everyone's rights out the window. Until then, I'm driving to my dive sites (unless someone sends me to Kwaj

 

[naimis]

I just flew from Orlando to New Orleans, no one searched me.

Maybe the change hasn't occurred yet, but Orlando has opted out of the TSA in favor of another private screening company:

New York, Orlando join anti-TSA rebellion, TSA mounts PR effort