Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

jac01 · 11-29-2010, 10:40 PM

Some TSA agents are speaking out about having to do this invasive "groinoscopy" patdown procedure:

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2010/...-on-pat-downs/

I'd be willing to bet that this guy isn't alone in his sentiments. Now that they are unionized, the TSA officers should file a grievance against the management directive that they perform these invasive patdowns and simply refuse to comply because the order to do so violates the Constitutional rights of passengers to not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures.

i812-) · 11-30-2010, 06:34 AM

I went through the proceedure in dallas while coming home from mexico last summer. Was not told I could elect out of the x-ray. They did warn me if I had anything in my pockets it would cause a search. Patted them down felt nothing went through and something showed up. Thats right the very dangerous dryer lint in my pocket which caused me to be patted down like a criminal.

Good thing that happened!! I know I am feeling safer flying knowing that all the dryer lint in ones pockets have been removed. Do you know how flamable that is??

one should not be made to feel like a criminal to ake pubils transportation. TSA is the only people I can think of that charge you the COPS experience. $$$ for the tciket $$ to check your luggage but hey free cavity exam at security.

I wont willingly fly again.

dirty dog · 11-30-2010, 10:27 AM

I guess what they should do is just stop all the checks, then put up signs saying your flying at your own risk and when the passengers are blow up, we can say hot damn they were warned, and I got through the airport in 5 mins.

CuteOldGuy · 11-30-2010, 11:02 AM

These searches are not going to stop even a minimally competent terrorist. Let's face it, they have won. These searches are even being considered for courthouses and other areas. The simple fact is we are being desensitized to becoming a police state. Other countries seem to be able to keep their planes in the air without patting down nuns and babies.

jac01 · 11-30-2010, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirty dog

I guess what they should do is just stop all the checks, then put up signs saying your flying at your own risk and when the passengers are blow up, we can say hot damn they were warned, and I got through the airport in 5 mins.

Nobody is suggesting this. You can have security checks that are done in a more intelligent and focused manner. As the Israeli airport security agency has said, "stop looking for weapons, look for terrorists." Observe people that fit the profile and give them some extra scrutiny. Those that have hijacked or attempted to blow up airplanes all fit a certain profile. Stop assuming that all passengers are potential terrorists that are guilty until proven innocent via TSA irradiation scan or gropedown. Concentrate enhanced screenings on those that fit the profile: men ages 17 to 45 that are from predominately Muslim nations. Stop wasting resources subjecting the elderly, non-Muslim women, and children to this. The TSA agent in that article is on record saying that he wouldn't want these procedures done on his elderly parents, his kids, or his wife. That's saying a lot about what is being done by the agency in the name of "safety".

lacrew_2000 · 11-30-2010, 01:59 PM

I say let each airline take care of their own security. Airline "A" might make you spread your cheeks and smile, while Airline "B" might do the Israeli interview technique. The passengers could decide where on the spectrum they want to be.

lacrew_2000 · 11-30-2010, 02:06 PM

"I guess what they should do is just stop all the checks, then put up signs saying your flying at your own risk and when the passengers are blow up, we can say hot damn they were warned, and I got through the airport in 5 mins."

I think some in the TSA may have reversed this argument...if a plane gets blown up, they'll be off the hook, because they did all the scans and pat downs.

Bubba · 11-30-2010, 03:03 PM

The real shame is that we have to have this discussion. The very fact that we have to worry about airline security means terrorists have accomplished one of their goals...FEAR!! In addition, this fear has caused us to spend millions and millions of dollars in an on-going effort to be "safe."

This whole deal is a no-win situation. If passenger screening isn't stringent enough and something happens, people will blame the Government for not doing more. When they increase screening people complain about their rights or say that nothing can be done to stop a determined terrorist so why bother. We want the Government to protect us but when they do we complain about Big Brother being overbearing!

I don't have the answer(s) to this mess. I'm not sure there is "one" answer. Our best hope is for civil, thoughtful discussions (like this one) to continue. Hopefully somewhere along the way a solution the suits most of the people will be found.

Just the thoughts of a lost and rambling soul..............

dirty dog · 11-30-2010, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jac01

Nobody is suggesting this. You can have security checks that are done in a more intelligent and focused manner. As the Israeli airport security agency has said, "stop looking for weapons, look for terrorists." Observe people that fit the profile and give them some extra scrutiny. Those that have hijacked or attempted to blow up airplanes all fit a certain profile. Stop assuming that all passengers are potential terrorists that are guilty until proven innocent via TSA irradiation scan or gropedown. Concentrate enhanced screenings on those that fit the profile: men ages 17 to 45 that are from predominately Muslim nations. Stop wasting resources subjecting the elderly, non-Muslim women, and children to this. The TSA agent in that article is on record saying that he wouldn't want these procedures done on his elderly parents, his kids, or his wife. That's saying a lot about what is being done by the agency in the name of "safety".

I see in the name of "less hassle and get me through the airport sooner" its okay to violate the personal freedoms of others as long as they are arab or muslim looking. Nope your right this sure doesnt sound like the move of a police state. Should we make every one of Arab decent or Muslim religious beliefs get a serial number tattooed on their arms or maybe we should just lock them up into little camps. Of course maybe if you were not white and would not be subjected to this "just" because you are of Arab decent or of the muslim religion regardless of the fact that you were born in Kansas City, maybe you would see just how wrong that it. Of course using your plan, Timothy McVey would have been successful blowing up an airplane, no wait, maybe he did look like someone who would blow up a building, no wait, he looked like just any other white boy. Then also you might consider the Muslims of African decent, should we just only check the black men too. You had the belt way snipers who were muslim and black, are you advocating the we check all the black men too. I know maybe we could have an express line for white folks that bypasses all security measures, and we have a seperate line for those who are not worthy enough to have their civil rights protected.

The reality is no one has to fly, so if you choose to fly you know what you have to do, flying is not a RIGHT. I just flew in and out of KC into Chicago and my experiance was not unreasonable especially not to the point I would advocate the civil rights of others of different nationalities.

dirty dog · 11-30-2010, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Other countries seem to be able to keep their planes in the air without patting down nuns and babies.

Yeah your right, question though, how many had 4 airplanes hijacked and flown into buildings and fields in PA.

i812-) · 11-30-2010, 07:42 PM

The whole concept behind the body scan according to the TSa spokesperson is to catch those smuggling hazardous and dangerous fluids. How many of those four planes were hijacked with a 4.0 fl ounce container not in a 1 quart zip lock bag.

Not saying no security but they need to be reasonable and not so intrusive. I wish I could find the study but since 9/11 tourism to america has declined soley do to a security regulations

Cheaper2buyit · 11-30-2010, 08:12 PM

The problem is to much tv & internet would be any pob if so many people didn't have to hear about it. If u drive a car then police can do the same thing all they have to say proble cause & get their rub on. Go to court its to late they got their grope on.

CuteOldGuy · 11-30-2010, 10:28 PM

So we have to violate everyone's rights in order to not violate anyone's rights. Yes, the four planes were American, but none of the perpetrators were nuns or babies.

KCJoe · 11-30-2010, 10:46 PM

I talked to someone who recently went to Israeli and while they weren't subjected to the same security measures as the US, they were interviewed several times, had to file an itenerary and check in with security officials their whole trip. They felt very safe, but always had the feeling that they were being watched the whole time. They were late thirtys and blond, so they didn't fit any Muslim profile, so they assumed everyone was treated the same way.

john_galt · 11-30-2010, 11:37 PM

Profiling can't be written in concrete. By it's very nature it has to be flexible. Yes, young men with a dark complexion between the ages of 18 to 45 are suspect but you can't just follow the rule book. You have to be able to make a judgment call. Maybe that blonde, very nervous guy clutching his carry on is suspect. How about the nasty old woman in the hajib complaining about how bad the US is. It might be something unapparent. Like a man wearing a thousand dollar suit with old beat up shoes. This is unusual and maybe worthy of a second look.