Full body scanners

[Capt Steve]

Several here have railed against this terrible government intrusion on our rights, privacy etc.. Don't blame the government for trying to do the right thing and protect the public. Vent your anger at the freakin terrorists without whom none of this would be necessary. I guess you could blame the government for pissing off the terrorists to begin with but lets not go there.

Everyone knows before they buy a ticket what to expect at the airport. If you can't live with the new rules don't fly or come to the airport and bitch. Do I like it? Hell no, but it beats getting blown out of the sky. I hope they get better at screening, whatever the method utilized and lets get back to some common sense profiling, the hell with PC.

 

[M28]

Capt Steve tells it like it is.

Brian~

 

[jkc]

Airline security searches are not about catching bad guys, they're about preventing fanatic Muslims from acting out their warped religious exhortations to kill us infidels by raining hellfire from the sky, by blowing up America-bound airliners. We infidels don't run the same risk upon entering the neighborhood Piggly-Wiggly, as yet...

As Captain Steve said, we need to get realistic about examining prospective flyers, toss out the PC handbook, and get real --- Caucasian Presbyterians and Baptists and etc. have so far not been much of a threat --- it's been fanatic Muslims that have been causing all the trouble ...

 

[The Big D]

... Caucasian Presbyterians and Baptists and etc. have so far not been much of a threat --- it's been fanatic Muslims that have been causing all the trouble ...

Don't recall his religion, but Timothy McVeigh was clearly Caucasian.

Be safe.

 

[The Big D]

Captain Steve nailed it.

FTR, I daresay I fly and have flown far more than most on this Forum. Now over a million miles. At least 99% of that time I had a gun either on my person (yes, even post-9/11) or in my checked bag...now exclusively since 2005...and at times prior.

My bag has been delayed overnight a grand total of twice and never lost. Both times my gun was safe and sound in it when we were reunited.

There is far too much "I heard someone say..." or "My neighbor/friend/friend of a friend..." stuff that is patently untrue. Yes, I have had some rather "humorous" encounters with security and TSA personnel. (Once had to relinquish a cigar punch whilst traveling with a 14 round pistol on my hip.)

I have been the subject of wandings and pat downs. No worries; I grin (usually) and bear it. I have nothing to fear from being searched and frankly hope someone will soon get a thrill taking a gander at my physique...such as it is. Maybe I'll go commando just hoping they have a really sensitive scanner.

Yes, certain nationalities and a particular religious group are most recently committing the atrocities but suspect Timothy McVeigh looked like a whole lot of Forum members. And it wasn't too long ago that Northern Ireland was being torn asunder by, again, folks who look much like a lot of Forum members.

Here's a truth: If I encounter someone onboard trying to mix their cologne with their shaving cream or assaulting a crew member I will be involved.

Be safe.

 

[hsguy]

As far as I'm concerned, when I fly, I am a private individual doing business with a private company. It is none of the govt's business who I am or what I'm carrying.

It's pretty sad that this country has become so weak that people are happy and willing to check their freedom at the door of an airport.

Except for the terrorists, the people killed on 9-11 were private individuals doing business with private companies and government employees in the Pentagon and I am quite sure that most of them would have wished the goverment would have made it their business who the hijackers were and what they were carrying.

 

[therevjay]

Anyone acting odd should be given more scutiny. Likewise anyone who buys a one way ticket, has no luggage, is arabic, is muslim, pays cash, etc.

U*se common sense.

 

[vytoland]

this is the best that big bother can come up with??

the illusion of security today is a joke.

when will americans pick up the big broom and sweep the house clean??

 

[Bassamatic]

I picked this scanner image off another forum. To me this is amazing. Now, I have a young daughter and a wife and I'm not real sure I would want either one to be gawked at by some security employee. Good grief.

 

[Blacksmith58]

Bassamatic, I saw that on Drudge Report Yesterday. Here's my question; If these scans are not recordered or stored, then how the heck are they getting on the net??? Somebodies lying!!!

 

[The Big D]

Bassamatic, I saw that on Drudge Report Yesterday. Here's my question; If these scans are not recordered or stored, then how the heck are they getting on the net??? Somebodies lying!!!

They're tests, demos, and for news releases.

There was a live demo on NBS Nightly News last night.

Be safe.

 

[Hermann]

I'm amazed at the hyper-modesty of many folks who object to the scanners out of concerns for their "privacy". Didn't most of us use gym showers and such without any psychological injury? I think most adults and even most children have a pretty good idea of what nude homo sapiens of both sexes and various shapes and sizes look like, and I can't see prurience or embarrassment arising from a fuzzy monochrome scanner image. These people maybe should spend a weekend at a "nudist colony" --- that might cure them of prudish concerns about privacy... Who cares if some poor TSA sap has to suffer through watching low resolution images of mostly not-very-beautiful people?

I couldn´t have said it better.
And, by the way, you are surrounded by travellers/people that you might never see again in your life and I couldn´t care less about the privacy issue. Scanning is better than being blown up in a darn aircraft.

 

[Bassamatic]

I couldn´t have said it better.
And, by the way, you are surrounded by travellers/people that you might never see again in your life and I couldn´t care less about the privacy issue. Scanning is better than being blown up in a darn aircraft.

Like I said before. Good grief.

The amount of people more than willing to give up their personal freedoms for so called "security" of the system is absolutely amazing.

Modest? Yeah right, I was in the military. Not so my wife and my 22 year old daughter, which whom my original post was directed. Or, maybe, your grandmother.

There is a better way: Profiling. You won't see it with our liberal PC society, but the times just might be changing.

 

[raveneap]

.... I hope they get better at screening, whatever the method utilized and lets get back to some common sense profiling, the hell with PC. ....

Well said. +1

 

[M28]

Don't recall his religion, but Timothy McVeigh was clearly Caucasian.

One incident does not a pattern make.

Brian~

 

[jkc]

I picked this scanner image off another forum. To me this is amazing. Now, I have a young daughter and a wife and I'm not real sure I would want either one to be gawked at by some security employee. Good grief.

There are, in several places in downtown Phoenix, bronze sculptures of naked male and female adult and adolescent homo sapiens with anatomical detail greater than that in this image. If this is unremarkedly acceptable as public art, who can take umbrage at the thought of these anonymous images being seen fleetingly on a security monitor. Yep, we got torso, head, limbs, fuzzy facial characteristics, primary and secondary sexual characteristics, (as, thankfully and unsurprisingly, expected), and some foreign object --- possible bomb?

This reluctance to subject oneself (or others) to these scans is not relenquishing some "freedom" --- it's about insuring that the world's worst whackos don't demolish us. I'd rather know that my family was "scanned", than killed.

 

[Bassamatic]

I picked this scanner image off another forum. To me this is amazing. Now, I have a young daughter and a wife and I'm not real sure I would want either one to be gawked at by some security employee. Good grief.

There are, in several places in downtown Phoenix, bronze sculptures of naked male and female adult and adolescent homo sapiens with anatomical detail greater than that in this image. If this is unremarkedly acceptable as public art, who can take umbrage at the thought of these anonymous images being seen fleetingly on a security monitor. Yep, we got torso, head, limbs, fuzzy facial characteristics, primary and secondary sexual characteristics, (as, thankfully and unsurprisingly, expected), and some foreign object --- possible bomb?

This reluctance to subject oneself (or others) to these scans is not relenquishing some "freedom" --- it's about insuring that the world's worst whackos don't demolish us. I'd rather know that my family was "scanned", than killed.

Offering up statues in a park as an argument against this atrocity is just plain silly.

If you have no problem with this type of "screening" then you will endorse this procedure as you see fit. There is nothing more to say.

However, many people do find it objectionable. And, I will say it yet again...there is a better way.

 

[Capt Steve]

Offering up statues in a park as an argument against this atrocity is just plain silly.

If you have no problem with this type of "screening" then you will endorse this procedure as you see fit. There is nothing more to say.

However, many people do find it objectionable. And, I will say it yet again...there is a better way.

While I am sure many people do find the scans objectionable I am sure even more find the prospect of terrorist bombing mid flight just a tad more unacceptable. So what is the "better way?" Seriously, if you have a solution to this security problem that is non invasive but as effective as a body scan just what is it?

 

[BarbC]

My solution is to initiate security measures based on the Israeli method of targeting possible and likely terrorists.

The US solution of scanning everyone so as not to appear biased is brought to us by the same people who implement "zero tolerance" policies in school, whereby a child bringing in a photo of himself, his rifle and his first deer are subject to the same punishment as a child bringing in his dad's handgun to scare off a bully.

And so Grandma will have to be culled from the screening line in front of her friends and family in order to expose her prosthetic breast in some backroom because some people fear giving offense to a 23-year old Nigerian with a one-way ticket and no luggage, whose father has already warned authorities that he has been attending terrorist training camp.

It is "easier" and "more equitable" to apply the non-thinking broad brush than to use analysis, logic and sense, and hire and train screeners with intelligence.

Which begs the question: Are we trying to appear nonbiased and fair to the people being screened or to the hiring process of the screeners?

 

[Aussie44]

Why are they scanning people in the USA,I mean if they are suspected citizens that live in the States,they should be pulled aside and checked.But anyone (Muslim or Suspected)coming into the Country should be scanned,Stripped and have a cavity check.

Ken

 

[John Sobieski]

a modest proposal

While I am sure many people do find the scans objectionable I am sure even more find the prospect of terrorist bombing mid flight just a tad more unacceptable. So what is the "better way?" Seriously, if you have a solution to this security problem that is non invasive but as effective as a body scan just what is it?

First, what is the effectiveness of the body scan? I read that had the body scan been employed, it would NOT have detected the panty bomber's explosive device.

Knives, guns, belt buckles, etc. are all detectable now without a body scan - so if the body scan doesn't add value, and won't detect the chemically initiated explosive devices, what purpose does it really serve?

Second, why does "security" trump all other values?

Here is my modest proposal for non-invasive commercial airline security.

After you check-in, the TSA will escort you to your changing booth, where you will disrobe and don your TSA-approved flight jump suit - purchased via an additional "fee." The TSA will dispose of your clothes and personal effects, so don't bring anything nice or difficult to replace with you to the airport. Once suitably attired, the TSA will then escort you to the standardized blast-resistant passenger enclosure (B-RPE). The TSA agent will shackle you upright into the B-RPE, and then seal the blast resistant door for the duration of the flight, using a TSA-approved B-RPE lock. TSA-approved astronaut diapers are available for an additional fee.

The airline's baggage handlers will then wheel the filled B-RPE into the hold of the airliner, much as the airlines handle the baggage containers today. The airlines will love this system - no more carry on, no more snacks, no more pillows and blankets and best of all for the airline's financial bottom line, no more "cabin crew." This might be a little uncomfortable for the passengers, but it's a tad more acceptable than a mid-flight terrorist bombing.

 

[sipowicz]

I'm for them. Maybe the scanners will be enough of a novelty for the TSA that they will forget to steal stuff from your luggage.

 

[jeffsmith]

My $.02

I travel for work with the U.S. Govt. several times a year
I have an Govt. Issued ID that shows I am "Cleared"

I also have metal hips and metal legs

Every time travel by Air I end up in what I call the "Terrorist Line"
I get "Wanded", Full Body scan if its there & wiped down for Bomb Residue
(God help me if I go shooting the day before I travel)

It really seems funny to me that as a Cleared U.S. Govt Employee
TSA might recognize I just might not be a threat

So I think there has to be some change in how they screen for potential threats

 

[Crazy K38]

I have an idea, every man and woman legally capable of owning a gun getting to carry it, on the plane, sure the bad guy may have a gun but so do the other 60 people in the plane not planning on dying because he got a wild hair up his rear, I am guessing that if he did anything stupid then it would take 2 months for ballistics labs to make heads or tails of who's lead got him first, I know I know this wouldn't deter him, along with possibility of cross fire, etc. But I would feel alot better with 13 rds of .40 as my flight attendant

 

[John Sobieski]

TSA-approved gun toter?

I have an idea, every man and woman legally capable of owning a gun getting to carry it, on the plane, sure the bad guy may have a gun but so do the other 60 people in the plane not planning on dying because he got a wild hair up his rear, I am guessing that if he did anything stupid then it would take 2 months for ballistics labs to make heads or tails of who's lead got him first, I know I know this wouldn't deter him, along with possibility of cross fire, etc. But I would feel alot better with 13 rds of .40 as my flight attendant

Just because you may carry a gun in Alabama, why should the TSA authorize you to carry a gun on a plane? I mean, imagine the ensuing mayhem that will come from a person carrying a pistol on a plane! It just isn't done!

Well, I guess it is really done all the time and nobody is shot - but it is done ONLY by TSA-approved personnel!

It's probably not fair to the less self-reliant passengers that you should be allowed to exercise your initiative and carry a defensive weapon - all the passengers should be at the mercy of a terrorist.

 

[feralmerril]

Life is a gamble. Even not makeing any decisions is a gamble. My job for 35 years was a guard with a defendse plant often working top secret areas. If a person wants to give up their life to do damage its hard to keep them from doing so. Now yes, you can make it harder and more challanging for them to be sucessfull, but unless you literaly put people stripped naked and examined you arent going to be 100% sucessfull.
From the working security side of things, unfortunatly its hard not to get lax at times when you might likely be screening people for your entire career and not run across even one terriest.
The most stupid fault to security is trying to make your guards or checkers work under PC restrictions.
I say to make things go smoothly, and not stop the world you need to get experianced people with a good "nose". One good person would be worth more than five average checkers. Things would flow better and be less exspendsive for all concerned.

 

[The Big D]

John Sobieski:

There are myriad reasons why carriage of firearms on aircraft must be regulated. In fact, those persons (non-Sky Marshals/TSA) who are allowed to CCW onboard MUST be specially trained before they are allowed to carry.

Knowing how so many on this Forum do not believe in any training/qualifications/regulations whatsoever, your suggestion doesn't fly...pun intended. I surely would not want to be confined in any space w/o possibility of escape/retreat in the line of fire from multiple tin foil hatted pistoleros who happen to spot a Muslim on their flight.

Be safe.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Seems like it would be a lot easier on everyone if suicide flyers had their own gate.

 

[Capt Steve]

First, what is the effectiveness of the body scan? I read that had the body scan been employed, it would NOT have detected the panty bomber's explosive device.

Knives, guns, belt buckles, etc. are all detectable now without a body scan - so if the body scan doesn't add value, and won't detect the chemically initiated explosive devices, what purpose does it really serve?

Second, why does "security" trump all other values?

Here is my modest proposal for non-invasive commercial airline security.

After you check-in, the TSA will escort you to your changing booth, where you will disrobe and don your TSA-approved flight jump suit - purchased via an additional "fee." The TSA will dispose of your clothes and personal effects, so don't bring anything nice or difficult to replace with you to the airport. Once suitably attired, the TSA will then escort you to the standardized blast-resistant passenger enclosure (B-RPE). The TSA agent will shackle you upright into the B-RPE, and then seal the blast resistant door for the duration of the flight, using a TSA-approved B-RPE lock. TSA-approved astronaut diapers are available for an additional fee.

The airline's baggage handlers will then wheel the filled B-RPE into the hold of the airliner, much as the airlines handle the baggage containers today. The airlines will love this system - no more carry on, no more snacks, no more pillows and blankets and best of all for the airline's financial bottom line, no more "cabin crew." This might be a little uncomfortable for the passengers, but it's a tad more acceptable than a mid-flight terrorist bombing.

John, there are lots of frivolous topics here in the lounge but this NOT one of them. I asked Bassamatic a serious question and get this nonsense back from you. I guess you think your response is funny, I don't but then, opinions vary. Your vague quote about the scanners not showing explosives is contrary to everything I have seen and has no source cited to back it up. As far as why security "trumps" other values, in this scenario, without security you are dead. It's hard to appreciate other values from the grave.

I hope someone can come up with a workable, non invasive, efficient method for screening passengers but until they do we will just have to live with the present procedures. As I said before more profiling would be a good start. Carry on's may become a convenience of the past as well. Most folks abuse or flat out ignore the current carry on restrictions and the airlines look the other way which is beyond ridiculous. Scanners will work but only if everyone is competently scanned on every flight. My best friend is a commercial airline pilot and you would not believe the nonsense he sees on a daily basis. Sadly, after 9/11 common sense left the building.

 

[9146gt]

I am for scanners and video in all aircraft bathrooms.

Tom