New airport scanners.

[Jrecee]

Do the classic scanners still exist alongside these new ones? These scanners only penetrate clothing, therefore anyone who's serious enough to kill themselves for a cause is probably going to be willing to shove their shoe bomb up their ass.

[MrPopo]

For all of those who criticize these increased security measures, what do you propose should be done? Nothing?

Yes, nothing. Stuff is going to get smuggled aboard and some people are going to die. That's just the reality. I'd like to see people start bombing Greyhound buses. Would Greyhound suddenly start putting up security screening at every pickup? Hell no, they'd just eat the cost and move on.

[tbeeghly]

No other country in the entire world puts their citizens through this.

The US is probably the biggest target in the world for the terrorists.

Are you using the word biggest literally or what? How many terrorist attacks have their been on US soil. 2? 3?

[YoshiEgg25]

No other country in the entire world puts their citizens through this.

The US is probably the biggest target in the world for the terrorists.

Are you using the word biggest literally or what? How many terrorist attacks have their been on US soil. 2? 3?

If you're talking about international terrorism, then yes. However, most people don't know this, but far more American terrorism is made by American terrorists. Timothy McVeigh, the Animal Liberation Front, the Westboro Baptist Church (if you call them terrorists)...You'd be surprised by the number of terrorist groups running on U.S. soil.

[gtmtnbiker]

Yes, nothing. Stuff is going to get smuggled aboard and some people are going to die. That's just the reality. I'd like to see people start bombing Greyhound buses. Would Greyhound suddenly start putting up security screening at every pickup? Hell no, they'd just eat the cost and move on.

Enhanced security/screening will likely be coming in the future.
http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/grants/aw ... index.shtm

Airplanes have the top priority of enhanced security. When you're flying 20K feet above sea level, there's not much a passenger can do if a bomb goes off. Plus, a plane can be used as a weapon as exhibited by 9/11.

Sure, one can do the same with a bus but the amount of potential lives lost is smaller. The amount of damage is also smaller.

If enhanced security really bothers you, then let your elected officials know your feelings.

[Hobie-wan]

Easy way to email your rep that you object to the nonsense.

http://demandprogress.org/scanners/?source=bb

==============

http://skreened.com/oped/junk-search

[MrPopo]

Airplanes have the top priority of enhanced security. When you're flying 20K feet above sea level, there's not much a passenger can do if a bomb goes off. Plus, a plane can be used as a weapon as exhibited by 9/11.

Oh, very valid points. But still, life is dangerous. Think of how many idiots we let have driver's licenses. I don't think we should cut ALL security; that'd be foolish for the reasons you mentioned above. The metal detector and the scanner is good enough for me. But if someone is willing to smuggle a kilo of C4 in his rectal cavity then we're just going to lose the plane. That's just the reality. If software piracy has taught us anything it's that you can't stop people who want to circumvent your security. There comes a point where you don't increase security by much but you DO increase legitimate customers' frustrations by a lot. And we're quickly passing that point on the airlines.

If enhanced security really bothers you, then let your elected officials know your feelings.

Oh, I do. But they seem more apt to listen to people who go "I'm afraid of dying" than the guy who goes "I'm ok accepting the risk of dying".

[Ziggy]

I didn't see it linked, did any one hear about the viral video about this? I heard about it on the radio on the way to work today. Some guy used his iPhone to (I guess) record video while at the airport. They played the audio of the important parts on the radio.

They explained the procedure to him and asked if he wanted it done in private. He said, "No, you can do it out here. But if you touch my junk I'm calling the cops" or something like that. A supervisor (or whatever) came over and was explaining it to him. He said it was sexual assault and the lady said it wasn't, so he said "it's not because the government is doing it." The lady told him if he didn't want to do it then he didn't have to fly that day.

That's all they played on the radio. I haven't looked for the video yet. Any one else see this? He apparently referred to it as "his junk" a lot.

edit: Found it here...

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/1 ... passenger/

[CRTGAMER]

Didn't seem that long ago in the movie Total Recall, "nah that would never happen."




Privacy is a problem, more importantly the long term health issues. That scan for the frequent flyer can't be good.

[Upsidedown Fuji]

This is not an option in my case as it is for business people and others who require air travel as an integral part of their line of work.

I can't drive across the Pacific Ocean from Japan to see my family and friends I haven't seen in 3 consecutive years.

Before planes, there were boats. You can still take a boat across the ocean if you so desire. Or change your job to not require flying.

For all of those who criticize these increased security measures, what do you propose should be done? Nothing?

As for the Israeli way, I had a friend who was subjected to 3 hour questioning (this was before 9/11), a body search which resulted him in missing his flight. He was probably acting like a punk and they wanted to put him in his place.

Instead of bitching/moaning about something, let's hear some realistic solutions.

Right, so it all just boils down to a bunch of soft belly achers who can't have their cake and eat it too. I'm sorry but this isn't as simple as complaining about bad service. There are rights being infringed on and something needs to be done about it.

So you ask what can be done? Let's see... There are better ways to conduct security and still treat the passengers like they're human beings and not all potential criminals. How about more training for actual sensitivity toward the disabled, young, and pregnant for starters? There are plenty of big news stories that have been released in just over the past few months that expose how insensitive the TSA agents are. Sure they have long work hours herding human meat but that doesn't mean they need to make crippled kids drag themselves through metal detectors without parents help or enhanced pat-down young 7 year old girls who are already miserable from traveling.

Maybe its time to invest in less invasive electronics that aren't as looked down upon as the backscatter scanner and try some better forensics methods that are hyper sensitive to the most destructive chemical bases instead? We already have all the security methods in place to prevent any potential terrorist like the ones back in 9/11 so no more box cutters, knives, sporks, water bottles, and blast doors on the pilot cabin. But you know what? weapons can be fashioned out of anything so unless you bind the passengers hands and give them adult diapers for the flight, you're never going to solve the problem of some nut sharpening an airline tray and stabbing an attendant.

I am not saying to stop airport security. Not in the slightest. I think it does help and I don't think it should be scaled back to nothing. The security we have now is a joke. They just let women wearing hijabs a free pass through the scanning at the airport. Great job your beloved scanners did when you can just get an out by religion or dispensation for some special condition.

So with your reasoning everybody should just go back to pre 20th century travel in the name of comfort and security because they don't deserve to speak out about current security standards? That is a very simplistic answer and it makes you sound very close minded to what goes on around you in this giant blue ball we live in.

Your reasoning may work for people who live in the US or other large land locked nations rife with resources that are capable of being self reliant with their own domestically created resources (which isn't how things are anymore especially for the great USA regrettably). International travel by cargo freighter is no longer an option in this age of technology. All your games, computer parts, gizmos, and cheap clothes you're probably wearing right now, where do you think they came from? The USA or wherever you live? Not in the slightest, they came from cargo ship from china, indonesia, malaysia, phillipines, etc.

So I did some Googling a few months ago because I did want to avoid flying as I actually get airsick and really don't like the sensation of flying but I put up with it because there are no comparable options anymore. It takes 2 weeks MINIMUM to hitch a ride on a cargo ship if you are allowed to board one in the first place. While it would be cool to try it out for once, that's two lost weeks on a ship in the middle of open sea. Get your business on and a pack of poker cards ready because you're in for a lot of downtime and thats just ONE WAY. Not an option for our international world.

Also I agree with what Hatta said. The TSA is an arm of the Federal Government and they are hand in hand with the private aviation businesses. There are no alternatives for inernational travel equivalent to air travel. You have no choice in air carriers who treat their customers better, everyone is sorted through the same gates before entering the terminal. If we didn't complain the TSA wouldn't improve how it treated the people its supposed to SERVE. The TSA isn't going to just say, oh, we should improve our service to customers because we're so benevolent and kind. That's not the way it works, things don't change till people speak out. And that's why we speak out on this. It's not just bitching as you claim it to be.

We no longer have dedicated transport cruisers to cross the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. So until I can hop on a ferry from Los Angeles to Yokohama in under 2 days, your alternative holds no ground.