Is the TSA going too far?

[Chaos Descending]

Seems like it's starting to get a little personal in here.

 

[Nowhere Man]

I have no clue what you mean by this, but I think it could be an insult of some kind. Whatever, you clearly are seeing the distinction I am trying to make nor do you see Arrgh's point so it's sort of pointless to continue to try and explain. I think we have both made our points very clear and easy to understand and you simply just don't get it.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I have no clue what you mean by this, but I think it could be an insult of some kind. Whatever, you clearly are seeing the distinction I am trying to make nor do you see Arrgh's point so it's sort of pointless to continue to try and explain. I think we have both made our points very clear and easy to understand and you simply just don't get it.

Ah, that's always a great tactic. "I've explained myself and you don't agree with me so you must just be too dim to understand."

Always a great argumentative technique.

 

[Shaw]

I have no clue what you mean by this, but I think it could be an insult of some kind.

If you have no clue what I meant, why are you assuming there is an insult?

 

[Subcommander R.]

I understand that it is a private service and that will always be the standard argument for anything. The problem I have is how far should we allow private sevices to go in usurping our rights? You can say, "well you have a choice" all you want, but when the choices are do what we say or don't fly then it's not much of a choice is it? We all may not have to fly, but at some point, you may need to get somewhere faster than a train, bus, boat or car can take you. Look at at&t, if you want a smart phone then you can get any service provider you want. If you want an iphone, you have to choose at&t, so yeah you have a choice, but not really. I think if private companies are going to participate in counter terrorism they should be subject to our lawss including the constitution. How far should they be allowed to go?

However far they want. As long as the airlines want security screening by the TSA then this is the way it will be.

If you're concerned about timing then plan your trip better and well in advance.

Everyone is grossly overreacting to this. They'll only do a pat-down if you refuse a body scan. So just take the fifteen seconds it takes and move on. Its not as bad as locker rooms from gym class and its a hell of a lot faster. So just cowboy up everyone.

 

[Arrqh]

...and I find your allegation offensive.

Couldn't be as offensive as you trivializing what happen with Rosa Parks.

I didn't trivialize anything. If you misunderstood me, I'd be happy to clarify.

But you've pretty much blown past almost everything I've posted thus far, and instead are making the incorrect claim that I'm trivializing a historic example of a person defending their civil rights without any sort of explanation why. If you want to have a conversation about this then I'm totally game, but if all you're going to do is dole out judgments, well...

 

[Nowhere Man]

I have no clue what you mean by this, but I think it could be an insult of some kind.

If you have no clue what I meant, why are you assuming there is an insult?

I'm not assuming shit, that's why I carefully put the words it could be in there. I really don't know if it a compliment or not. I think it could be an insult because of your disagreement with what I'm saying. If you are complimenting me on my understanding of what Rosa Parks was trying to do then great.It's not coming off that way as I read the text.

 

[Tom Hendricks]

I understand that it is a private service and that will always be the standard argument for anything. The problem I have is how far should we allow private sevices to go in usurping our rights? You can say, "well you have a choice" all you want, but when the choices are do what we say or don't fly then it's not much of a choice is it? We all may not have to fly, but at some point, you may need to get somewhere faster than a train, bus, boat or car can take you. Look at at&t, if you want a smart phone then you can get any service provider you want. If you want an iphone, you have to choose at&t, so yeah you have a choice, but not really. I think if private companies are going to participate in counter terrorism they should be subject to our lawss including the constitution. How far should they be allowed to go?

However far they want. As long as the airlines want security screening by the TSA then this is the way it will be.

If you're concerned about timing then plan your trip better and well in advance.

Everyone is grossly overreacting to this. They'll only do a pat-down if you refuse a body scan. So just take the fifteen seconds it takes and move on. Its not as bad as locker rooms from gym class and its a hell of a lot faster. So just cowboy up everyone.

Would you allow someone in that locker room to take a picture of you naked?

 

[Subcommander R.]

I understand that it is a private service and that will always be the standard argument for anything. The problem I have is how far should we allow private sevices to go in usurping our rights? You can say, "well you have a choice" all you want, but when the choices are do what we say or don't fly then it's not much of a choice is it? We all may not have to fly, but at some point, you may need to get somewhere faster than a train, bus, boat or car can take you. Look at at&t, if you want a smart phone then you can get any service provider you want. If you want an iphone, you have to choose at&t, so yeah you have a choice, but not really. I think if private companies are going to participate in counter terrorism they should be subject to our lawss including the constitution. How far should they be allowed to go?

However far they want. As long as the airlines want security screening by the TSA then this is the way it will be.

If you're concerned about timing then plan your trip better and well in advance.

Everyone is grossly overreacting to this. They'll only do a pat-down if you refuse a body scan. So just take the fifteen seconds it takes and move on. Its not as bad as locker rooms from gym class and its a hell of a lot faster. So just cowboy up everyone.

Would you allow someone in that locker room to take a picture of you naked?

The difference is that the 'picture' is deleted immediately after viewing.

But if I had a guarantee that would be the case in the locker room I'd be fine with it. Gawk at my white and hairy beer gut if you wish.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Would you allow someone in that locker room to take a picture of you naked?

The difference is that the 'picture' is deleted immediately after viewing.

No one seriously believes that, do they? We have no idea what these TSA people are doing in that booth. They could be in there with their damn iPhones recording everyone who comes through. We'd never know, right? The TSA says these machines don't store images, but why trust them?

And yes, I believe the TSA definitely has all four wheels off the road on this one. When the choice is between these two things:

1) Walk through a machine that spits out a picture of you naked, and exposes you to God knows how much radiation in the process;

or

2) Get felt up by some perverted piece of shit in a uniform,

then I would say we need to do a massive overhaul here. Our rights are being violated left and right. This must end. NOW.

 

[Nowhere Man]

Wow Laserbeam, I think this the first time I've ever found myself agreeing with you. I've been here 3 years and read your posts often.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Would you allow someone in that locker room to take a picture of you naked?

The difference is that the 'picture' is deleted immediately after viewing.

No one seriously believes that, do they? We have no idea what these TSA people are doing in that booth. They could be in there with their damn iPhones recording everyone who comes through. We'd never know, right? The TSA says these machines don't store images, but why trust them?

And yes, I believe the TSA definitely has all four wheels off the road on this one. When the choice is between these two things:

1) Walk through a machine that spits out a picture of you naked, and exposes you to God knows how much radiation in the process;

or

2) Get felt up by some perverted piece of shit in a uniform,

then I would say we need to do a massive overhaul here. Our rights are being violated left and right. This must end. NOW.

Cut the hyperbole. TSA agents want to get it over with as fast as possible and people like you insist on insulting them and making their lives miserable. How about reading this article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101123/ap_on_re_us/us_airport_security_tsa_officers

If you want to talk radiation, you get more being on the plane than being scanned. If you're paranoid about radiation then stay home and indoors, because you get radiation exposure every second outside. And you'd also have to avoid dentists. And Doctors. And God forbid using a microwave.

 

[Tora Ziyal]

All this airport security has tipped the balance too much in favour of annoying legitimate passengers.

Truth is, you can't eliminate the risk of terrorism. More controversially, I also disagree with the current popular thesis that "one should always try to reduce it as much as possible". That degree of reduction requires increasingly extreme levels of intervention in daily life. The tipping point of acceptability is NOT at the point of maximum reduction of risk, but actually arrives significantly before that point. We're seeing that with the public resistance to these pat-downs. Yes, they would probably increase security... but so what if it is unacceptable to our quality of life?

The greatest victory of terrorism isn't killing people, it's altering people's lifestyles sufficiently that the issue behind the terrorism become predominant in people's thinking. Losing a plane, say, every 20 years is far less intrusive on the average person's life than increasing airport security to a point where the risk drops to say, once every 30 or 40 years.

Of course, some security is required, but the systems currently in place are confused, partially redundant and efficient. Streamline and simplify to achieve a less intrusive balance between security and ease of travel, should be the watchword now.

I'm with you one hundred percent, Holdfast.

 

[Trekker4747]

If someone wants to visit their family for thanksgiving and they live far away then they need to take a plane. If they only have 3-4 days off because they have a shitty job that doesen't provide vacation days and it would take more time than what it's worth to drive then they have no choice, but fly. They then go to the airport and are picked to be searched without probable cause and they refuse, then they can't get on the plane. There is no choice, you are forced into the system. You can't refuse on the grounds of it bieng unconstitutional because the constitution is bieng usurped.

The operative word there is want.

I want to be with my Aunt for Thanksgiving... I've wanted to see her many times in the last 15 years... but wanting isn't equivalent to a right to fly to see her. I couldn't afford the plane ticket, so no matter how much I wanted to see her, I couldn't.

If you want to fly enough to pay the high ticket prices, then you also want to fly enough to put up with the searches.

Luxuries (like flying) are not rights. Confusing them as such diminishes the meaning of the word rights to something trivial... and that is more dangerous to the Constitution and the rights it protects.

I also don't have the right to drive on a highway. But I do have the right to not have my car searched, at random, by a police officer on a whim.

That's what this about. It's not about "right to fly" it's about "right to not be searched."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

TSA agents want to get it over with as fast as possible and people like you insist on insulting them and making their lives miserable. How about reading this article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101123/ap_on_re_us/us_airport_security_tsa_officers

The "I was only following orders" defense has been proven to be invalid. If those TSA goons don't like having to enforce those rules, no one's forcing them to work there.

If you want to talk radiation, you get more being on the plane than being scanned.

I rather doubt that.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

You know what? The guy who precipitated all this nonsense - last year's "underwear bomber" - was on a flight coming in from overseas.

You know that these stringent TSA searches aren't in place internationally, right?

Anyone who thinks that the terrorists can't adjust to this "security strategy" without breaking stride is naively optimistic. The only people really being interfered with here are law-abiding citizens.

 

[CommanderCain]

In a nation where the people are sovereign, I don't remember casting a vote for 'groping'. Especially since it's proven ineffective at stopping terrorists. It especially does not stop terrorists using UPS or similar aircraft as a platform for planting explosives.

 

[Subcommander R.]

TSA agents want to get it over with as fast as possible and people like you insist on insulting them and making their lives miserable. How about reading this article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101123/ap_on_re_us/us_airport_security_tsa_officers

The "I was only following orders" defense has been proven to be invalid. If those TSA goons don't like having to enforce those rules, no one's forcing them to work there.

If you want to talk radiation, you get more being on the plane than being scanned.

I rather doubt that.

So you're going to use an implication of Godwin's Law because you don't want to be checked for bombs? Riiighhht...

They don't mind the work. They mind you. And I don't blame them at all, if you were calling me a 'piece of shit' and 'goon' then I'd be pissed off and disgruntled too.

Ignore the science if you want. An X-ray gives an exposure of .006 rads. Flying from Los Angeles to New York gives .02 rads. It would take 1000 times the power of one medical x-ray in a single dose to even alter your blood chemistry.

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/risk.html#q11

http://www.ehs.psu.edu/help/info_sheets/Radition_Exposures_from_Medical_Uses.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/health_effects.html

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

If our airlines were as badass about security as El Al, then none of this would be necessary.

 

[Trekker4747]

If you want to talk radiation, you get more being on the plane than being scanned. If you're paranoid about radiation then stay home and indoors, because you get radiation exposure every second outside. And you'd also have to avoid dentists. And Doctors. And God forbid using a microwave.

These body scanners use X-Rays to get their images. Those things doctors and dentists give you while standing in a whole other room. Those things that are on the high end of the EM spectrum, are blocked out by the Earth's ionosphere, are emitted by H-Bombs and are the ionizing radiation that can knock electrons off of mitochondrial DNA, causing damage to cells leading to cancer?

Your microwave? Uses (get this!) microwaves. Waveforms on the EM spectrum that are less powerful than light! Micorwaves are fare too big to damage cells enough to cause damage to DNA not to mention in a properly cared for and constructed microwave they're contained inside the Faraday-cage of the oven.

The sunlight? Contains A and B rays which are less powerful than X-Rays but more powerful than light so are capable of damaging cells. (We call it melanoma and sunburn. The former a serious condition but not deep enough to cause severe radiation in internal cells.)

X-Rays penetrate your body, go all the way through you and keep going. The destroy cells along their way. Microwaves aren't powerful enough to penetrate your first layer of skin.

Most good doctors are smart enough to not give their patients, especially young ones, older ones or those in poor health, X-Rays, Cat Scans, or other medical scans that involve high-frequency radiation because exposure to it is dangerous.

Yes, we're exposed to radiation no matter what. I'd prefer to not expose myself to not much more than the Alpha and Beta radiation I get from the sun considering it carries with it only a small chance of skin-cancer with normal exposure.

Now, yes, the X-Rays used by these scanners are on the lower-end of the X-Ray spectrum and probably still aren't greatly more dangerous than the Beta rays we get from the sun. But they are more powerful and they can cause cancer and I believe they may be the ones that "stack." (That's to say that you can only be exposed to so much of it over a lifetime and you can't "undo" or reverse exposure.)

We shouldn't be so cavalier about willing go through these X-Ray machines on the front of radiation. And comparing the radiation you get from a microwave and what you get from these scanners is like comparing being hit with a Nerf ball being tossed by a toddler and being hit with a hollow-point bullet shot from a sniper a quarter mile away.

They're apples and pomegranates. They're not comparable.

But forgetting any radiation danger, forget any privacy issues should we really be so willing to be held-up and searched to this degree in any manner just so we can "feel safe." (Because this is all it is, "feeling" safe; it's not making us safe.) As I've been saying in the TNZ thread all this is is mommy looking under the bed for monsters to try and make us feeling better.

Unfortunately the real concerns aren't under the bed but in the bushes down the street. But, hey, we "feel safer" right?

And the Rosa Parks analogy is apt. She didn't "have to" ride the bus. She could've walked, she could've ridden a bike, taken a cab, got a friend to drive her anything. It was the norm for black women to sit in the back of the bus! What's the big deal? How's the back of the bus any different from the front? How does it hurt her?

No. She defied the "norm" because of what she felt was right. What she thought was a stupid law and a stupid "norm." No different here. We shouldn't be so willing to shrug and put up this so we can "feel safe."