BellaOnline Forums News and Politics Independent Parties Don't Touch My Junk!

Do you think Homeland Security is going too far with their pat-downs and full body images? I applaud the air traveler who recently declared that they couldn't touch his junk. How far is too far to protect American citizens?

I think it's stupid! We all want to be safe, but no matter how cleverly you try to prevent crime, there will always be a criminal who is clever enough to circumvent your efforts. That means you cause inconvenience, embarrassment and greatly increased expenses to the vast majority of honest people, yet still can't guarantee safety. And then where are you when that bad guy does outwit the system, because no one else on the plane even has a plastic knife to defend himself with.

From the beginning, I've argued against all this super-duper search nonsense in favor of armed guards on planes. With trained professionals (especially covert ones) on board, the criminals would at least have some obstacles to overcome. I always heard this would be "too expensive". You can't tell me that all these airport TSA personnel and all that nifty techno-search equipment is cheaper.

--Maria

I wonder how many weapons or explosive devices they have found so far with these searches.

When I checked on the TSA prior to coming to the USA on holiday I found that more TSA officials had been arrested for breaking the law (theft etc) than people they had apprehended for security violations!
Also airport security pay is notoriously poor, in many parts of the world baggage handlers get paid more than the security people. The apparently advanced equipment is a one-off payment and works out as a money-saver in the long run.

Here's a security experts view of some of of the reactions to TSA precautions:
Shneier on security q
Removing belts even when you don't have to

I agree with Maria. Armed guards on planes would be a much better tactic then humiliating people. Do you know how many terrorists they have found in the last nine years by body searching? None. I heard on a talk show today that the cost of employing the TSA people and the new search equipment is astronomical.

It is so simple: the solution is armed guards and the old way of walking thru the metal detector gates, plus baggage and carry on search (running the bags thru the metal detector machines).

"When you want something done, have your opponent do it for you" is one of my favourite quotes and principles. In this case the security theatre at airports is the way that terrorists are doing exactly that.
Good security is a filter, not a wall. By using proactive intelligence and out-thinking your adversary you can be ahead of them instead of always playing catch up. One of the classic ways is to leave apparent weak points that only the criminally minded would take advantage of. Then, as the person who explained this to me said "you may crush them".
Armed guards and metal detectors may seem a good idea in theory but there are all sorts of problems with putting it into practice. Obvious armed guards also equal targets, why risk smuggling weapons through security when you can acquire them from the guard? If the guards go undercover the first accidental flash of a weapon, or it 'printing' through clothing and you risk one or more passengers thinking the guard is a hijacker and trying to overpower them. Possibly causing mass panic in the other passengers as well.
Not all weapons are metal, and in airports I have seen substances that you could combine to make something very nasty just laying in plain sight because nobody thought they were a risk. I have always taken my shoes off at airport security because I have steel toecaps in my everyday shoes, otherwise my toenails cut through the uppers in about a month and a half (Too much information but true). If I didn't the poor metal detector would have a meltdown!

Well...you have some very good points there, Ian. There has got to be a solution though to the way airport security is handled (no pun intended). Groping, touching private parts, and intimidating is not the way. What about people who have prosthetics? One 32 year old woman, a breast cancer survivor, had to suffer the humiliation an agressive "pat down" and was told to remove her prosthetic breast so the TSA could examine it for "security reasons". This is just too much!

This is the show I heard the above story on. Roger Hedgecock brings up a lot more info on the subject.

Roger Hedgecock Show, Nov. 19

I agree, the heavy handed pat-down is doing the terrorists' job for them and also leading to this sort of thing

National Opt-out day

I still prefer good intelligence gathering combined with fake security flaws. If nothing else wondering if an apparent flaw in security is real or staged tends to keep the 'bad guys' guessing on the side of "It's a trap"

I would like to see some of the Obama administration people be forced to submit to a "pat down" and exposed on the screen -- bet things would change in a hurry!

I believe some have carried 'air-marshals' ever since 9/11.

A 9/11 situation couldn't happen today.

Armed guards wouldn't prevent a suicide bomber detonating a bomb with the intent to destroy a plane. Much of the security methods are meant to deter and prevent this.

Taking off the shoes came about because of the shoe-bomber

Liquids ban came about because of the plot by several people to take chemicals in soft drink bottles on board which when combined together would become explosive

The scan came about as a result of the underwear bomber and the scan is meant to avoid having to do intimate pat-downs.

Peter, what happens if the next time someone manages to get something on an airliner through their buttocks? Are we going to have to then subject ourselves to an anal check?

I think that it has definitely gone too far. Strip searches and pat downs should not be necessary to board a plane. Just a thought, but why don't they use dogs to sniff for bombs and dangerous weapons? Dogs can be trained to sniff out diseases and drugs, as well as many other items. This way, no one, unless picked out by the dogs, would be subjected to searches.

All of these precautions are reactive rather than proactive and cover things already done. Good security, like a a good warrior, should always be "before" their environment

The administration people have the defence that they are in a trusted position (supposedly). Their friends and family might be a good idea though as it could be argued that they are ideal for 'turning' or carrying stuff on for "friends" and as such a significant security risk to be thoroughly checked each time they fly. That would certainly help adjust the people in powers' attitude I suspect

The scan came about as a result of the underwear bomber and the scan is meant to avoid having to do intimate pat-downs. [/quote]

Does the scan or pat down detect something as thin and small as a sweet & low packet?

With the scan it depends on placement. Speaking as a professional masseur I can detect areas of muscle lesion through clothes by moderate touch, so possibly yes.

<sigh> How sad for people.

I concur, pro-active intelligence lead methods work best. Sadly the TSA is mainly theatre which gives a false sense of security and upsets most people.
However, with a little patience, it can be overcome in many cases as this guy showed:
Patience and composure overcomes TSA

Good point. Security at airports has been reactive. 9/11 killers had box-cutter, so they subsequntly (and pointlessly)ban any sharp or pointed object. Shoe bomber causes us to have to remove shoes, liquid bombers brings in liquids ban.

A suicide bomber could hide explosives in their rectum or [censored] or swallow it (drug smugglers have been doing so for years).

There is no 100% security.
But get ready to bend over

I disagree.

The key sentence in that article is the police saying" I�m going to escort you out of the terminal to the public area."
The writer was not departing on a plane, he was arriving home after an international flight. He objected � understandably � on unnecessary security on arriving home.

I have not been to this airport but I have arrived at the USA at many different airports. They were not designed for the current situation and at many when you arrive, after passing immigration and customs, you exit not into the street (as you do at rest of the world�s airports) but into the airport terminal secure area.

Although you have already been through security before you departed on the flight to the USA, the USA doesn�t trust other countries security so you and your baggage have to go through the rigmarole again

This is fine for making connecting flights but it is bloody frustrating if you are not.

What the officer did was escort the writer through and outside the secure area.

Other airports have two exits, one for transit passengers where they go into the secure area (and may go through security) and the other for those for whom this is the final destination and the exit doesn�t pass through the secure area.

I thought this video interesting:

Airport security in other countries - CNN video

Ah, that explains the 2hr wait to get out of LAX. Interesting that my traditional Ninja tools (not shakan or other tonki [small bladed throwing items])passed unremarked upon through several types of security checks. I even left one behind by accident on the way back to the UK and got it handed back to me by the TSA!