New Security Screening "Procedures" At Airports.

• CenterBHSFan

  

  Well, this thread got entertaining
• justincredible

  

  isadore;569013 wrote:Based on experience with terrorist bomb attempts we use scans and then pat downs when needed. So we dont look up in the sky and see another Lockerbie but this time over the USA.

  
  Nope. The US has been 100% effective in preventing terrorist attacks without these scans since 9/11. They are unnecessary, you said it yourself.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Justin, the only way this debate you're having with Isa is going to end is either by LJ shutting down the thread, or one of you getting banned. THAT would be interesting... if LJ banned you! lmao
• justincredible

  

  If I end this debate the terrorists have won even more.
• bigorangebuck22

  The plane dosen't leave the ground and you join the mile-high club. Somethin just not right with that!
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Just called my wife's stepfather to hear exactly how the search went.....the TSA agent had on gloves, so no skin to skin contact. With the back of the hand made contact with the genital region (i.e. the frank and the beans) and probed within the underwear which depending on one's "manscaping" would have touched the pubic area.
  
  This isn't right.
• BGFalcons82

  

  justincredible;568902 wrote:Only in America are you a terrorist until proven innocent.

  
  I hadn't thought of it this way, but this is spot on.
  
  Lost in the "discussion" last night is that fact that there are other ways to provide safe flying environments, other than taking nude photos and searching our bodies in violation of the 4th Amendment. Things like bomb-sniffing dogs and profiling could be used, but aren't popular with the politicians. These will never happen, so we get what we elect.
• isadore

  justincredible;569132 wrote:Nope. The US has been 100% effective in preventing terrorist attacks without these scans since 9/11. They are unnecessary, you said it yourself.

  
  they are hardly unnecessary given the methods shown by our enemies. new threats were presented first by richard reid, which we adjusted to, then by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;569192 wrote:Just called my wife's stepfather to hear exactly how the search went.....the TSA agent had on gloves, so no skin to skin contact. With the back of the hand made contact with the genital region (i.e. the frank and the beans) and probed within the underwear which depending on one's "manscaping" would have touched the pubic area.
  
  This isn't right.

  
  better than being blown to pieces.
• isadore

  BGFalcons82;569197 wrote:I hadn't thought of it this way, but this is spot on.
  
  Lost in the "discussion" last night is that fact that there are other ways to provide safe flying environments, other than taking nude photos and searching our bodies in violation of the 4th Amendment. Things like bomb-sniffing dogs and profiling could be used, but aren't popular with the politicians. These will never happen, so we get what we elect.

  
  people walk through metal scanners everyday and do not consider it being considered a criminal until proven innocent. those metal scanners are there because of a threat and the body scanners are there because of a obvious, deadly threat to the lives of Americans.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  A metal scanner detects an immediate threat (knife, gun, etc.). You don't even need to go on a commercial flight to go through a metal detector. Many courtrooms and even schools use them. People don't bitch because it isn't intrusive. Have metal on your person? Put it in the tray. There is no intrusion.
  
  You can't be serious comparing that to these new TSA rules.
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;569233 wrote:A metal scanner detects an immediate threat (knife, gun, etc.). You don't even need to go on a commercial flight to go through a metal detector. Many courtrooms and even schools use them. People don't bitch because it isn't intrusive. Have metal on your person? Put it in the tray. There is no intrusion.
  
  You can't be serious comparing that to these new TSA rules.

  and yes I am, metal scanners are a degree of an intrustion. You have just described it. I am quite aware that they are used at many places where there is a potential threat. Body scanners are only incrementally more intrusive and At airports we have an obvious threat that endangers many lives.
• justincredible

  

  isadore;569225 wrote:they are hardly unnecessary given the methods shown by our enemies. new threats were presented first by richard reid, which we adjusted to, then by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

  
  You never answered my question about what happens if someone tries boarding with a bomb up their ass. Will you be for or against cavity searches before boarding a plane?
  
  I think Shooter Jennings is right: "They're preparing us for an all-out police state."
  
  [video=youtube;LOL12y4QJbg][/video]
• believer

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;569233 wrote:You can't be serious comparing that to these new TSA rules.

  Apparently some folks think having strangers "touch your junk" is far better alternative to the common-sense ideas of metal detectors, profiling, questioning, and bomb sniffing dogs.
  
  Damned Israelis anyways. What the hell would they know about stopping terrorists?
• justincredible

  

  believer;569252 wrote:Apparently some folks think having strangers "touch your junk" is far better alternative to the common-sense ideas of metal detectors, profiling, questioning, and bomb sniffing dogs.
  
  Damned Israelis anyways. What the hell would they know about stopping terrorists?

  
  Hey, I love when strangers touch my junk. Just not like this.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  "Body scanners are only incrementally more intrusive"
  
  1) You can't be serious, part 2. A metal detector doesn't record an image of your body. A metal detector doesn't emit radiation. You get your belongings back to you after the queue. Where is the intrusion? No one touches you, no one examines you, it is just walking through a detector. It isn't any more intrusive than having to walk through an area with a canine, which seems to make a lot more sense.
  
  2) Why do you keep neglecting the pat-downs? That can happen even if you agree to the scan.
  
  Have you ever flown before?
• believer

  

  justincredible;569255 wrote:Hey, I love when strangers touch my junk. Just not like this.

  I don't mind strangers touching my junk either as long as I'm wearing a condom.
• justincredible

  

  believer;569267 wrote:I don't mind strangers touching my junk either as long as I'm wearing a condom.

  
  When I get my pat down I'll thank the TSA guy for wearing gloves.
  
  "Glad you're wearing protection, I hear you guys get around."
• isadore

  justincredible;569251 wrote:You never answered my question about what happens if someone tries boarding with a bomb up their ass. Will you be for or against cavity searches before boarding a plane?
  
  I think Shooter Jennings is right: "They're preparing us for an all-out police state."
  
  [video=youtube;LOL12y4QJbg][/video]

  I will be for whatever method they find to use to stop Americans from being slaughtered. Drug use seems to have brought on paranoia in the case of Mr. Jennings
• isadore

  believer;569252 wrote:Apparently some folks think having strangers "touch your junk" is far better alternative to the common-sense ideas of metal detectors, profiling, questioning, and bomb sniffing dogs.
  
  Damned Israelis anyways. What the hell would they know about stopping terrorists?

  
  Israel with two international airports as compared to US. such a similar situation.
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;569263 wrote:"Body scanners are only incrementally more intrusive"
  
  1) You can't be serious, part 2. A metal detector doesn't record an image of your body. A metal detector doesn't emit radiation. You get your belongings back to you after the queue. Where is the intrusion? No one touches you, no one examines you, it is just walking through a detector. It isn't any more intrusive than having to walk through an area with a canine, which seems to make a lot more sense.
  
  2) Why do you keep neglecting the pat-downs? That can happen even if you agree to the scan.
  
  Have you ever flown before?

  That metal scanner is a search and emptying your pockets is an intrusion. is there that much contact with a body scanner, no. hardly more than a walkthrough. Pat downs will be infrequent, but even if so what. It beats being picked up in pieces over Nebraska, Now that is intrusive, if they can find any of you.
  Have flown and have been patted down on more than one occassion, it is no big deal.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  "Have flown and have been patted down on more than one occassion, it is no big deal. "
  
  So you've had your genitals touched?
  
  I know you are trolling, so go ahead and tell us you have.
• isadore

  Manhattan Buckeye;569299 wrote:"Have flown and have been patted down on more than one occassion, it is no big deal. "
  
  So you've had your genitals touched?
  
  I know you are trolling, so go ahead and tell us you have.

  No I believe we have become a nation of whiners. This whole issue is a prime example of it. A minor inconvience caused by necessary safety measure produces a national trauma. As I wrote previously, I have been patted down on more than one occassion, it did not leave me scarred physically or emotionally, It was a MINOR INCONVIENCE.
• believer

  

  isadore;569288 wrote:Israel with two international airports as compared to US. such a similar situation.

  Complete bullshit. The number of airports does not matter. The methods do.
• justincredible

  

  believer;569343 wrote:Complete bullshit. The number of airports does not matter. The methods do.

  
  Indeed. I don't see how the number of airports factors into this at all.