TSA Guidelines & "You touch my junk" guy

[banca rotta]

TSA forced disabled 4 yr. old boy to remove leg braces and walk through airport security..Vote below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W6BdTMvz0U&feature=player_embedded

Well IMO this is what he gets for going to see Mickey!!!


Anyway enough small talk. How did everyone do on black Friday??? Hmmm?

Hope everyone got some really cool Christmas gift bargains.

Rumor has it Obama got smacked in the mouth shooting some hoops. I woke up at 4:45am yesterday and bought some chinese candles (the best!), so I can light one for each stitch he got.

[WhatMoney]

TSA forced disabled 4 yr. old boy to remove leg braces and walk through airport security..Vote below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W6BdTMvz0U&feature=player_embedded

You failed to mention that this alleged incident occurred in March 2009, 18 months ago. What does this have to do with today's full body scanners?

The story first hit the headlines on Feb. 15, 2010, from a story by a Philadelphia Examiner columnist, Daniel Rubin. Why did the parents wait almost a year to go public with this story? The TSA has no records of this event, but they apologized anyway in Feb. 2010 in case it did happen, pointing out that the TSA personnel did not follow correct procedures for persons with leg braces (or wheelchairs). So at the worst, a couple low wage poorly trained TSA employees screwed up.

However, given the timeline - it's equally possible that the parents made the story up, a year later - so the bloggers and talking heads would have something else to complain about. There are several incidents that received publicity and were in fact false, made up by the parents to get publicity or feed the anti-TSA blogs.

And why did this story resurface again on Nov. 24, 2010? Clearly more politics, dragging an unconfirmed isolated incident that happened 18 months ago into the news again just before the Thanksgiving travel rush. It turned out the so-called body scanner boycott was a complete bust, with 98% of those selected going through the body scanner without incident last week.

The right-wingers will do anything to keep stirring up the public - business as usual.

[lrprn]

I fly almost every week for my job and have for years. I have the option to go through the metal detector scanner or the full body scanner. Only if the scanner alarms in either one am I patted down. No alarm, no pat down.

On the rare occasions I have set off the alarm, the TSA woman who does my pat down explains clearly what she is going to do ahead of time and asks me to tell her if I have objections to what she plans to do. Truthfully I can't tell the difference between the old pat down combined with the metal detection wand and the new pat down.

As several have already mentioned, flying is a personal choice, not a right. If you object to taking the chance that you will be one of the 1-3% (yes, that's right - 1-3%) of passengers that set off the scanner alarm and are then patted down by the TSA agent (source: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/11/24...-fails-to.html), then please find other transportation.

That's what freedom is in this country - having the choice to fly or not fly and making it for ourselves within the personal limits we allow. Freedom does not mean that anyone that believes something different than you do is obviously wrong/clueless/part of a conspiracy and is a free target for insult and derision...and I'm speaking to both sides of the political landscape here.

[msm859]

I fly almost every week for my job and have for years. I have the option to go through the metal detector scanner or the full body scanner. Only if the scanner alarms in either one am I patted down. No alarm, no pat down.

On the rare occasions I have set off the alarm, the TSA woman who does my pat down explains clearly what she is going to do ahead of time and asks me to tell her if I have objections to what she plans to do. Truthfully I can't tell the difference between the old pat down combined with the metal detection wand and the new pat down.

As several have already mentioned, flying is a personal choice, not a right. If you object to taking the chance that you will be one of the 1-3% (yes, that's right - 1-3%) of passengers that set off the scanner alarm and are then patted down by the TSA agent (source: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/11/24...-fails-to.html), then please find other transportation.

That's what freedom is in this country - having the choice to fly or not fly and making it for ourselves within the personal limits we allow. Freedom does not mean that anyone that believes something different than you do is obviously wrong/clueless/part of a conspiracy and is a free target for insult and derision...and I'm speaking to both sides of the political landscape here.

Flying may not be a "right" however, the right to be secure in your person against unreasonable searches is -- it's called the fourth amendment. You should not have to give up a constitutional right to be able to fly. I go to the dermatologists every year and have surgery to remove precancerous spots. I do not wish to go through a scanner that may cause me physical harm -- and No I do not blindly accept that the new scanner is safe. As to the new "pat downs" what is the "probable cause"? Touching someone against their will or a touch that is harmful or offensive is called battery -- it is a criminal offense.
And as to what freedom "is" in this country is why we are having this discussion. I have children and a grandchild. I want freedom in this country to be what it "has" been -- not what someone wants to make it based on their fear of terrorists. The Patriot Act was the first cop out and we are continuing down the path were we are going to wake up one morning and are no longer "living in the land of the free".
By the way I think many experts don't really believe this extra security theater actually is making us any safer.
We will not win this war on terror by giving up all of our freedoms and rights. They win every time we take away our citizens rights in the name of safety. They win every time we take billions away from our citizens to fund education, unemployment, infrastructure because we are spending it on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to "keep" them over there -- and fighting to keep us free?
To follow your belief to its logical conclusion their is no "right" to take a train, ride a bus, drive a car -- perhaps walk around -- and thus one should be subject to an offensive search without ANY probable cause at any time. Sorry, that is not freedom nor the kind of country I want to live in. Since I am not moving, I will do what I can to fight the further vitiation of our Constitution. Everyone should join in this fight.

[lrprn]

Flying may not be a "right" however, the right to be secure in your person against unreasonable searches is -- it's called the fourth amendment.

In this case, the body pat-down is considered reasonable because the person set off the alarm in the TSA scanner. No pat-downs are done just because the TSA person has a whim to do one. That would be unreasonable.

You should not have to give up a constitutional right to be able to fly.

You are not giving up a constitutional right to be able to fly because there is no such thing. There's also no constitutional right to walk, run, or drive wherever and whenever you want either (for example, you can't walk/run/drive down the middle of the street if you want to either because of the risk it poses to others and yourself). You have a personal objection to the legal, mandated TSA procedures because you don't want to be touched by a stranger no matter how reasonable the search may be. Big difference. And it has nothing to do with the Constitution of the United States.

I go to the dermatologists every year and have surgery to remove precancerous spots. I do not wish to go through a scanner that may cause me physical harm -- and No I do not blindly accept that the new scanner is safe.

Who was it that said, "You have every right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts"? In this case, you've been misled by whatever sources you've seen about the amount of radiation involved in TSA scanning.

Here's scientific proof from the non-partisan Advances for Radiology and Oncology Assn that flying in the airplane itself on one flight exposes you to more radiation than one full-body scan does - "To put that in perspective, a typical chest X-ray is over a thousand times greater than what a person is exposed to per scan when they walk through the airport full body scanner. According to the TSA, one scan is about the same as a person gets from flying for about three minutes in an airplane at 30,000 feet." (Source: http://imaging-radiation-oncology.ad...e-TSA-Way.aspx). Of course, you can choose to have a different opinion, but accept that your opinion is not supported by the proven scientific facts.

As to the new "pat downs" what is the "probable cause"? Touching someone against their will or a touch that is harmful or offensive is called battery -- it is a criminal offense.

See my first response. TSA pat-downs are not battery because the TSA procedures are well-known ahead of time. What is going to be done is posted on multiple signs placed throughout the entire area from start to finish where fliers enter the scanner areas. The TSA personnel explain the process repeatedly as well. Again, it's easy to avoid the pre-announced "battery" by finding another form of transportation to get to where you want to go that doesn't include a tiny chance of being touched in a way you personally find offensive.

And as to what freedom "is" in this country is why we are having this discussion. I have children and a grandchild. I want freedom in this country to be what it "has" been -- not what someone wants to make it based on their fear of terrorists.

So are you saying that even though we may be able to prevent another 9/11 and similar terrorist acts that could kill tens, hundreds, or thousands of innocent people by routinely scanning airplane passengers, every one of us should still refuse to be scanned so we can be "free" to take the chance of being blown up needlessly? Again, if you want to be free in the way you choose to define freedom, exercise your freedom and don't fly. Simple as that.

By the way I think many experts don't really believe this extra security theater actually is making us any safer.

You're absolutely right that it isn't 100% effective. However, in my opinion it's better than the alternative - doing nothing. Consistent TSA scanning has some deterrent power beyond the actual scans themselves too.

To follow your belief to its logical conclusion their is no "right" to take a train, ride a bus, drive a car -- perhaps walk around -- and thus one should be subject to an offensive search without ANY probable cause at any time.

This is your "logical" conclusion perhaps, but not mine. I just said that if you object to a 1% chance that you will be patted down in a TSA security line if you set off the alarm and consider the required pat-down after the alarm a violation of your right to not be touched for any reason, then you should find alternate transportation. Choosing which transportation you personally want to take *is* exercising your freedom.

Sorry, that is not freedom nor the kind of country I want to live in. Since I am not moving, I will do what I can to fight the further vitiation of our Constitution. Everyone should join in this fight.

As I said in the last sentence of my prior post, just because someone does not agree 100% with your point of view does not automatically make that other person wrong or their opinion less valuable than your own. It also does not make that person any less a fighter for personal freedoms than yourself.

To me, this free and open exchange in a public forum between the two of us is what freedom truly is. And being able to disagree in a public forum like this one is the most valuable freedom we have in this country. It's not a new privilege either - we've had it for hundreds of years since our country was founded. What has changed recently is the ability to listen respectfully to both sides and thoughtfully weigh *facts* without immediately veering into an over-the-top emotional over-reaction where suddenly the U.S. is swirling the drain with only a few real "patriots" smart enough to save us all, even if most of us don't think we need saving.

There are millions upon millions of true patriots in this country, including the two of us. Even though we disagree on this topic, I know that you are genuine in your beliefs. I'm just as genuine in my beliefs too. However, the difference between us is that I still see you as a patriot. I don't get the sense you see me as much a patriot as yourself. But I'm still every bit as much a patriot as you because I'm expressing my opinions openly and freely as our founding fathers intended. I think it's pretty amazing that more than two hundred years later, here we are exercising our true Constitutional right to free speech. Cool beans!

[LadyInTheRed]

To lrprn:

[Freddy03]

To lrprn:

Agreed!!

[clevelandmom]

What I wouldn't give to go back to the days of the Brady Bunch. Riding around in that monster brown station wagon, sitting all the way in the back. . .BACKWARDS, no seatbelt of course, and not thinking twice about it. Going to the airport to say goodbye to Grandma and Grandpa, and actually being allowed to walk all the way to the gate, kiss them goodbye, and watch the plane back out and take off. . . .ahhh. . .the good ol's days. What I wouldn't give. That being said, if it were my Grandma and Grandpa's plane that exploded because a terrorist bomb goes off because we were living in denial, I would feel FAR more violated than if a TSA agent screened me before letting me get on the plane. These are different times we're living in. Maybe one day someone will finally figure out that certain places in the middle east would make excellent parking lots for our F-15's. But until that happens, the terrorists are living among us. I wonder what all the people who were on the planes on 9/11 would say about the TSA screenings? Somehow, I doubt they'd object. Just my $0.02, which is probably only worth about $0.0000001 now that I've filed BK.

[msm859]

In this case, the body pat-down is considered reasonable because the person set off the alarm in the TSA scanner. No pat-downs are done just because the TSA person has a whim to do one. That would be unreasonable. My understanding is that you do not go through the new scanners they will do an invasive pat down.

You are not giving up a constitutional right to be able to fly because there is no such thing. There's also no constitutional right to walk, run, or drive wherever and whenever you want either (for example, you can't walk/run/drive down the middle of the street if you want to either because of the risk it poses to others and yourself). You have a personal objection to the legal, mandated TSA procedures because you don't want to be touched by a stranger no matter how reasonable the search may be. Big difference. And it has nothing to do with the Constitution of the United States. No. I was referencing I should not have to give up a constitutional right (the 4th amendment) for the "privilege" to fly. Yes, I cannot run down the middle of the street. But, if I am not doing anything illegally and their is no probable cause the police cannot simply stop me and say we are going to pat you down to make sure you don't have a bomb.

Who was it that said, "You have every right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts"? In this case, you've been misled by whatever sources you've seen about the amount of radiation involved in TSA scanning.

Here's scientific proof from the non-partisan Advances for Radiology and Oncology Assn that flying in the airplane itself on one flight exposes you to more radiation than one full-body scan does - "To put that in perspective, a typical chest X-ray is over a thousand times greater than what a person is exposed to per scan when they walk through the airport full body scanner. According to the TSA, one scan is about the same as a person gets from flying for about three minutes in an airplane at 30,000 feet." (Source: http://imaging-radiation-oncology.ad...e-TSA-Way.aspx). Of course, you can choose to have a different opinion, but accept that your opinion is not supported by the proven scientific facts. Others disagree: http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/headlin...01/327160.html or http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/292414

See my first response. TSA pat-downs are not battery because the TSA procedures are well-known ahead of time. What is going to be done is posted on multiple signs placed throughout the entire area from start to finish where fliers enter the scanner areas. The TSA personnel explain the process repeatedly as well. Again, it's easy to avoid the pre-announced "battery" by finding another form of transportation to get to where you want to go that doesn't include a tiny chance of being touched in a way you personally find offensive. No. Again to to follow your statements to their logical conclusion all the police have to do is announce and post everywhere that if you go outside your house we can stop you anytime and pat you down for bombs even in your private parts -- and we can do that to your young children.

So are you saying that even though we may be able to prevent another 9/11 and similar terrorist acts that could kill tens, hundreds, or thousands of innocent people by routinely scanning airplane passengers, every one of us should still refuse to be scanned so we can be "free" to take the chance of being blown up needlessly? Again, if you want to be free in the way you choose to define freedom, exercise your freedom and don't fly. Simple as that. No, it isn't as simple as that. You then are depriving my (and those with my belief) to freely move around the country by all means available. And the weasle word you have that gets us on a slippery slope is when you start saying "we may be able to..." to justify violating constitutional rights and battering people. So then to really send this country into a frenzy all the terrorists have to do is find a suicide bomber who blows himself up in line for airport security, one to blow himself up on a subway, another on a bus etc. etc. And as cold as it sounds we do have to look at a cost/benefit analysis. How many freedoms and at what financial costs do we say enough. Over 40,000 people die every year in this country because of no health care. If you really want to save lives we would do more by having universal health care -- and it would costs less.

You're absolutely right that it isn't 100% effective. However, in my opinion it's better than the alternative - doing nothing. I am not proposing doing nothing. I am proposing we start being smart on this "war on terror". The ONLY way we are going to "win" is if we get rid of all of the terrorists. The only way we are going to do that is if we quit giving them a reason to hate us i.e. become energy independent and get out of the Middle East were we having been playing puppeter to them for the last 60+ years. Consistent TSA scanning has some deterrent power beyond the actual scans themselves too.

This is your "logical" conclusion perhaps, but not mine. I just said that if you object to a 1% chance that you will be patted down in a TSA security line (I believe it is 100% if I choose not to go through the new scanners) if you set off the alarm and consider the required pat-down after the alarm a violation of your right to not be touched for any reason, then you should find alternate transportation. Choosing which transportation you personally want to take *is* exercising your freedom.

As I said in the last sentence of my prior post, just because someone does not agree 100% with your point of view does not automatically make that other person wrong or their opinion less valuable than your own. It also does not make that person any less a fighter for personal freedoms than yourself. Agreed!

To me, this free and open exchange in a public forum between the two of us is what freedom truly is. And being able to disagree in a public forum like this one is the most valuable freedom we have in this country. It's not a new privilege either - we've had it for hundreds of years since our country was founded. What has changed recently is the ability to listen respectfully to both sides and thoughtfully weigh *facts* without immediately veering into an over-the-top emotional over-reaction where suddenly the U.S. is swirling the drain with only a few real "patriots" smart enough to save us all, even if most of us don't think we need saving.

There are millions upon millions of true patriots in this country, including the two of us. Even though we disagree on this topic, I know that you are genuine in your beliefs. I'm just as genuine in my beliefs too. However, the difference between us is that I still see you as a patriot. I don't get the sense you see me as much a patriot as yourself. Not true. Nothing you have said causes me doubt your patriotism. It is a good vigorous debate, which is sadly too often missing from today's landscape. I enjoy having intelligent discourse. But I'm still every bit as much a patriot as you because I'm expressing my opinions openly and freely as our founding fathers intended. I think it's pretty amazing that more than two hundred years later, here we are exercising our true Constitutional right to free speech. Cool beans!

It is "cool" that we still can exercise our Constitutional right to free speech. I believe the 4th Amendment is equally as important. Freedoms has always been what has set this country apart. The terrorists don't want our land, they want our freedoms. I don't want to hand it to them on a silver platter.

[RichM]

The Nazi SS was within its legal rights, too.

-Rich

[PoorGrammyinBK7]

We flew at Thanksgiving and will never do so again unless we have no choice. I didn't get the pat-down or the scan (lucky), but my 60 year old, USMC vet husband, who was on crutches due to a fractured ankle (and we should not have flown just due to that - was painful and such a hassle for him, even with the wheelchair) was patted down. This was so ridiculous. He had to hop on one leg thru the metal detector - and it went off, because the crutch didn't get out of the way in time. They would NOT let him go thru again , but insisted on the pat-down. Even though the TSA agent was nice and quite embarrassed to have to do it - it just was unnecessary. I kept thinking that if there are terrorists, obviously, they are going to know about this and figure a way around it, so its a waste of time and money. And annoying. So we will be driving or staying home.

in reference to the bold red print.........the something is PAY ME...if you want to touch me...after all my poor husband paid with his life.

seriously, the last time we traveled a few months ago to calif. we swore that was it! no more for us.... my bag was torn apart...i was delayed for what?... my shoes were scanned and scanned AGAIN and they were flip flops!! come on??

if this is put into effect, we simply will not fly anymore...anyone what to see us...they have to go through it..we will not travel further than we can drive.

[dneil]

I have no problem with whatever they have to do to ensure the safety of travelers on planes. If they didn't try to prevent people would be screaming that something should have been done.

Lets face it folks, sometimes prevention doesn't come easy, but it is a heck of a lot better than having to explain why someone was able to "butt crack" a bomb on board than explaining why they have to be scanned or patted down.

[Freddy03]

Don't worry folks - many major airports are looking into privatizing airport security. You will still have to go through pat downs and body scans just now you can have it done by a minimum wage employee who didn't go through the same background check as a federal employee. Happy Traveling!

[RichM]

"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

--Ben Franklin

[Freddy03]

"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

--Ben Franklin

Times have changed since 1700....