TSA and the Government is out of control!

i saw them in use on the tv show "boarder wars". they screen cargo with them.

troll?

god i hope your kidding. meter broken?

im not sure. they do have to travel at a speed of 3mph, and that sets them apart from other vehicles. Plus Im not sure what they will find in mall parking lots other then victorias secret packages.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Air travelers buoyed by President Barack Obama's request for his national security team to consider less intrusive airport screenings shouldn't expect anything different at airports soon. "No, we're not changing the policies," the head of the agency responsible for airport security said Sunday.
Advertisement
Quantcast

"It really comes down to what is that balance between privacy and security," said John Pistole of the Transportation Security Administration. The current threat level is too high to lessen the use of full body scans and intimate pat-downs that some passengers undergo at some airports, he said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Those measures don't apply to Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who said security experts "are looking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public." She, for one, wouldn't like to submit to a security pat-down.

"Not if I could avoid it. No. I mean, who would?" Clinton told CBS' "Face the Nation" in an interview broadcast Sunday.

Pistole said the ingenuity and determination of terrorists trying to bring down an airplane ruled out changes in screening policies that have been assailed by some passengers as an invasion of privacy.

"Clearly it's invasive, it's not comfortable," Pistole said of the scans and pat-downs. But, he added, "if we are to detect terrorists, who have again proven innovative and creative in their design and implementation of bombs that are going to blow up airplanes and kill people, then we have to do something that prevents that."

Rep. John Mica, R-Fla. who is set to become Transportation Committee chairman when Republicans take over the House in January, differed with the approach.

"I don't think the rollout was good and the application is even worse. This does need to be refined. But he's saying it's the only tool and I believe that's wrong," Mica, a longtime critic of the TSA, said separately on the CNN program.

With the peak traveling season nearing, air travelers are protesting new requirements at some U.S. airports that they must pass through full-body scanners that produce a virtually naked image. The screener, who sits in a different location, does not see the face of the person being screened and does not know the traveler's identity.

Those who refuse to go through the scanners are subject to thorough pat-downs that include agency officials touching the clothed genital areas of passengers.

Obama said in Lisbon on Saturday that he had asked TSA official whether there's a less intrusive way to ensure travel safety. "I understand people's frustrations," he said, adding that he had told the TSA that "you have to constantly refine and measure whether what we're doing is the only way to assure the American people's safety."

Clinton, appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," said she thought "everyone, including our security experts, are looking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public" and that "striking the right balance is what this is about."

Pistole was shown videos of people being patted down where the screeners touched the breasts of a woman, felt into the pants of another person and felt the crotch of a man. He said all three cases were proper and that the gloves of the screener who felt inside the pants were then tested for explosive trace residue.

A Nigerian man was accused last Christmas of trying to set off a bomb hidden in his underwear aboard a flight from Amsterdam.

Pistole added that very few people receive the pat-down. People who go through the new advanced imaging machines available at some 70 airports are usually not subject to pat-downs, he said.

Pistole said that while watch lists and other intelligence sources help the TSA pick out travelers who might pose greater risks, rules against profiling mean that some people who are less of a risk, such as the elderly or the disabled, must sometimes undergo pat-downs.

"I want to be sympathetic to each of the negative experiences. We've had extensive outreach to a number of different disability community groups, a number of different outreach efforts to try to say, how can we best work with those in your community to effect security while respecting your dignity and privacy," he said.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., appearing on CBS, said Congress would hold hearings on the "very controversial" issue of how to strike the right balance. Asked how he would feel about submitting to a pat-down, Hoyer said: "I don't think any of us feel that the discomfort and the delay is something that we like, but most people understand that we've got to keep airplanes safe."

Hahahahaha

http://i.imgur.com/55AC0.jpg

If anyone finds themselves sexually aroused by this, they need to seek help instantly.

If we could combine TSA security screenings with the health care bill... fuck, I just solved the public option.

There is no "right" to fly on an airplane. If you dont want your genitals touched take a train/bus/car/taxi/ferry/bike/walk. nobody is forcing you to fly.

again.

government has already said you have a right to access transit through navigable airspace.

wow you should have said something earlier. its all so simple now, we could have avoided this whole 6 page thread. thanks for clearing everything up!

anytime, i figured it had been said, i just didnt waste an hour reading 6 pages of "you are dumb, you are really dumb, fo' real"

i usually side with the people against the government but i really dont think these things are put in place so people can touch my junk easier.

keine ahnung, not like everyone onboards life is in there hands or anything

I'd just like to say that you make a great point here, fighting the threat of terrorism, especially when it comes to aviation has really been a fight in which the terrorists strike, and airlines subsequently adopt new measures to prevent that from happening again. It seems to be working as best it can because instances of successful terrorists attacks on planes have really declined, hopefully soon with good security measures such as this it can pretty much be wiped out.

cause there's 2 of them.

1 pilot decides he wants to crash the plane, the other can try to fight him back. But if the other has a knife, then things get harder.

not directly related to that concept, but here's an interesting case in which the pilots probably should have gone through better security.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Express_Flight_705

Everything is all fine until THIS happened:

haha their soo effective

you don't have to be a fucking dick, i clearly thought up and wrote that in about 5 seconds.

I'm just saying, if 1 pilot goes insane, at least the other guy has a chance. And i didn't say knife fight. I wouldn't consider just reaching over and stabbing the other guy to be a fight. Just implying that crashing the plane is a hell of a lot easier to do when you don't have some other guy trying to stop you. Look up the egyptair crash off cape cod about 10 years ago. Pilot went nuts, crashed the plane. Just because they are well qualified and such doesn't mean it never happens.

either way, doesn't matter cause TSA security for pilots basically consists of looking at the pilot and seeing if he's wearing a pilot outfit, then waving him through.

Have you ever heard of egyptflight 990?

"The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the EgyptAir flight 990 accident is the airplane's departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean as a result of the relief first officer's flight control inputs. The reason for the relief first officer's actions was not determined."


read the report. I have.


Not that I disagree with the rest though, if a pilot wants to crash the plane, he'll find a way to do it. Namely by just pushing down.

I understand what the patriot act is, but honestly, does it hurt being that stupid?

Alright sure, if a pilot wants to crash a plane it can be done multiple ways. But why not prevent one of them by X-raying and patting down pilots? I don't see the problem.

I'm confident your parents are related.

I feel like further talking to you will be no more successful than talking to a brick wall. I fear for the fact that you can reproduce

I like how Woozy kept pointing out facts and you other guys resorted to insulting him. Well done.

who cares if your lucky you might get a free handy

best post in the thread yet

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_AIRPORT_SECURITY_PAT_DOWN?SITE=ORBEN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

tsa reviewing the pat-down... all that public outcry definitely won't have an impact eh?

Just because they got tired of all the bitching and are smart enough to know that it will keep getting worse if they don't at least make it look like they might change it, doesn't mean the bitching was justified. Notice how it said that right now, they don't actually plan on changing it.

well...from what I've read this whole thing seems to have led to nothing out of the usual. And actually, I've even read on other sites that people traveling say they've gone through faster than usual due to the scanners.

Oh how the irony kills me.

so i had an argument about this yesterday with my dad, i was saying that our right to privacy should still be protected when we are flying, and they need to have a reasonable suspicion to search you. they shouldnt be able to just search anyone for no reason. he was saying that they should be able to search people without a reasonable suspicion, and profiling should be ok, because it works. which ill admit, searching muslims makes more sense than searching everyone the same, including grandmas and 4 year olds. but its still in violation of our rights, and it shouldnt be allowed. but he said it should be allowed because its protecting our safety.