Unutterably Silly Airport security decisions?

[Amalthia]

I think I prefer the pat downs. The idea of some random stranger seeing me in all my glory is too embarrassing.

[wodin]

Having been a radiological controls professional in a former life, I know exactly how many RADs or roentgens or REMs are safe for members of the general public, (as opposed to “radiation workers” who’s jobs require daily exposure to radiation). The amount of exposure produced by these AIT machines is minimal to the point of nearly being undetectable, and pose NO threat. On the other hand aircraft crews, and daily flyers may receive enough annual exposure to cause a long term problem (increased risk of cancer twenty years from now); especially if they spend many hours at altitude each day.

That being said, the issue at hand is not the health hazards involved, except of course for aircraft crews; but the privacy problem. I’m relatively sure that the pervert watching the screen will soon become so inured to ogling folks’ privates that after the first few tens or hundreds he/she won’t even notice.

My concern is that they don’t become complacent.

[bjones6416]

Originally Posted by dsvick

I bet the tinfoil one I wear to protect me from aliens would work too.

No reason to go to the expense of a tinfoil thong -- just stick your tinfoil hat in your pants before stepping into the scanner.

[Francesco]

Originally Posted by Klim Chugunkin

The question to ask is this: who benefits most from having these new scanners in all airports? The answer is simple: the corporation that produces these scanners.

Does anybody seriously believe for a second it is about security? It is about making lots of easy money. So, don't expect this policy to change anytime soon.

Originally Posted by Washington Examiner

But this is government we're talking about. A program or product doesn't need to be effective, it only needs to have a good lobby. And the naked-scanner lobby is small but well-connected.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/po...107548388.html

[desertblues]

I am very ticklish..................ouaaaaaaaaa......

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

We do not have the rapid transit system Europe and other countries do.........unfortunately. We used to.....but planes changed that.

I wonder if that sort of transportation will become more popular if security keeps being "upgraded" like this...

Originally Posted by dsvick

Yes, as a matter of fact I do. No, probably not 100%, but mostly, yes, it is about security, and giving the public a reasonable belief that they are protected as well as can be when they fly.

Croocks will be croocks and they will be able circumvent this as well...


Besides, flying is fun, I agree, but it's way more fun to actually see the country your passing through! People should start to un-hurry (as we see here) more! Enjoy the life! Can you imagine the books you can read while being driven to your location, without the stress of getting through airport security, or even the stress of packing your suitcase to stay within the weight limit!

[phenomshel]

Originally Posted by Seanette

All the "certain public degradation is just fine if there's even a faint chance of a fraction of a percent of more safety until the bad guys figure out how to outwit the latest round" types should maybe consider this:

If prison inmates were being subjected to strip searches and groping with no probable cause whatsoever, the ACLU and such would be shrieking in hysterical outrage about human rights violations. So why is it OK for law-abiding travelers to be forced to submit to searches that convicted criminals would be able to file big-dollar lawsuits over and win?

Umm... but they ARE subjected to such. And "probable cause" can be defined as, "any reason the warden decides". And this isn't prison I'm talking about either.. it's good ole' county jail. (From a very close friend's experience)

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by phenomshel

Umm... ... And this isn't prison I'm talking about either.. it's good ole' county jail. (From a very close friend's experience)

Them's the worst. Those are the ones where they get out the broomstick to check your cavities.

[dsvick]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

If the processes currently in place would single out my grandma as a potential threat, the processes are broken and should be scrapped.

Not all grandmas can be safely excluded however - I'd like to point out that there is one here at MR that probably deserves a second look - especially if there are chickens on the flight.

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

Originally Posted by dsvick

Not all grandmas can be safely excluded however - I'd like to point out that there is one here at MR that probably deserves a second look - especially if there are chickens on the flight.

The chicken wouldn't make it past the scanner though - the setting would accidentally be turned up so there'd be chicken with the jacket potatoes

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by dsvick

Not all grandmas can be safely excluded however - I'd like to point out that there is one here at MR that probably deserves a second look - especially if there are chickens on the flight.

[encapuchado]

Terrorist are winning. USAers live with fear.

[poohbear_nc]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

The chicken wouldn't make it past the scanner though - the setting would accidentally be turned up so there'd be chicken with the jacket potatoes

And served to the crew running the scanners!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by poohbear_nc

And served to the crew running the scanners!

And they say there's no such thing as a free lunch.

[AdamV]

I believe most of us miss a most important argument here - heard it's going to be raised by unions soon - the complains from airport security officers loosing their appetite at the end of a day...