<p>I have the right to not get on a plane…I do not have the right to not purchase health insurance.</p>
<p>I am so glad I am not traveling by plane this week. </p>
<p>I was surprised that son just flew from boston to san diego with his whole department, and no one got the body search (that he was aware of).</p>
<p>I do recall the thorough El Al search. The young lady was SO professional, and made me feel part of the process rather than a victim. When traveling in USA with my little cousin, who has an Israeli passport, a baby and a toddler in hand, she was given the full search. Somehow, she fit the ‘profile’.</p>
<p>What also amazes me is that the same people who are so sure that a terrorist is about to board every plane, when the chances are indeed miniscule, are willing to get in cars every day, when 40,000 people a year die in them in the US. There seems to be a lack of understanding of odds here.</p>
<p>“I seriously doubt this enhanced examination is doing one bit of good for real security. Some folks in caves are laughing at the stupid Americans going after a trick they tried last year. Whatever they are planning now will evade any security we are using now.”</p>
<p>^This. </p>
<p>It’s all window dressing.</p>
<p>^^^^^^</p>
<p>and it ain’t “reasonable”</p>
<p>using the logic by some here - as long as it stops a terrorists it’s OK - what will we do when a terrorist smuggles a weapon in a body cavity?</p>
<p>for those of you supporting this new set of procedures, is there any point when security measures become “unreasonable?”</p>
<p>I don’t think the reaction to the new procedures is “mass hysteria.” I think it is a “mass agreement” that we have reached the point of unreasonable. </p>
<p>It’s not just the procedure, it’s who’s hired do it, how they are trained, recognizing that the new procedures aren’t really adding any security benefit, and finally, recognizing that there are better alternatives out there, but for some reason TSA won’t use them.</p>
<p>I don’t fly much- but it isn’t any fun for the screeners either.</p>
<p>
[TSA</a> Enhanced Pat Downs : The Screeners Point Of View - Flying With Fish](<a href=“http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/18/tsa-enhanced-pat-downs-the-screeners-point-of-view/]TSA”>http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/18/tsa-enhanced-pat-downs-the-screeners-point-of-view/)</p>
<p>“I served a tour in Afghanistan followed by a tour in Iraq. I have been hardened by war and in the past week I am slowly being broken by the constant diatribe of hateful comments being lobbed at me. While many just see a uniform with gloves feeling them for concealed items I am a person, I am a person who has feelings. I am a person who has served this country. I am a person who wants to continue serving his country. The constant run of hateful comments while I perform my job will break me down faster and harder than anything I encountered while in combat in the Army.”</p>
<p>As others have said, it just strikes me as so much closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. After every incident - we tighten security looking backwards - to prevent what we failed to detect previously. It’s a constant process of hindsight. Yet - the terrorists are looking forward - and devising something new and different each time. I think the new patdown procedures sound outrageous and ridiculous - and I doubt we are any safer as a result. And as someone else has mentioned, what if the next terrorist has the bomb or whatever in a body cavity? What then? </p>
<p>By the way, if you have not yet read Charles Krauthammer’s brilliant essay that was in yesterday’s Post - worth a read. The title is “Don’t touch my junk.”</p>
<p>There seem to be two different types of enhanced scanners: the Millimeter Wave the Backscatter. Can anyone comment on the differences, in terms of possible safety risks?</p>
<p>As for the TSA worker who does not like the enhanced measures but carries them out because they are his job, I don’t think we have to think as far as the Nazis to realize what is wrong with that mentality–just as far as Zimbardo’s prison experiments, or Milgram’s electric shock experiments. Assuming that TSA agents were sensitive people to begin with, we are desensitizing them (and maybe ourselves) to accept these intrusions because “the boss” (whoever that is) says these intrusions are necessary. I can’t say that I am completely convinced that these measures are worthless, but I am skeptical that they really are improving safety.</p>
<p>And I do wonder how it is that the Fourth Amendment requires that police officers have reasonable suspicion before they can “stop and frisk” (H says this is a legal term) yet TSA officers can systematically frisk (and more) everyone who shows up at an airport.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As emilybee stated, TSA is, and always has been, about PR. The more unpleasant it is to get on a plane, the more we are supposed to think that the government is protecting us.</p>
<p>Amesie, I’m not an expert but I did read last night that the millimater wave technology has no known health effects. It does, however, have the same privacy and Fourth Amendment issues as both the backscatter and the enhanced pat-down.</p>
<p>[TSA:</a> How It Works](<a href=“http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/how_it_works.shtm]TSA:”>http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/how_it_works.shtm)</p>
<p>from the link:
"Millimeter wave technology bounces harmless electromagnetic waves off the body to create a black and white three-dimensional image…</p>
<p>Backscatter technology projects low level X-ray beams over the body to create a reflection of the body displayed on the monitor."</p>
<p>At the bottom of the page at the link there are examples of the high level of resolution of the images.</p>
<p>I don’t know enough to compare the risks. I’m guessing the xray radiation are particularly worrying for cancer survivors or people who fly frequently. I am personally more concerned with how graphic the pictures are.</p>
<p>Deleted. Some doubt of its truthfulness.</p>
<p>I am stunned by the people who think this groping and naked images are okay. Unfortunately, I bought a plane ticket for my D, for a trip she could have taken by bus or train, albeit it would have taken a long time. Never again. She will be grossed out to say the least when she realizes that she has a choice between naked pictures and sexual assault. This has to stop. </p>
<p>Again, I can’t believe that Americans are willing to give up our rights so easily. I am beyond furious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Especially when not a single captured 9/11 conspirator has been charged with a crime by the US government.</p>
<p>“Millimeter wave technology bounces harmless electromagnetic waves off the body to create a black and white three-dimensional image”</p>
<p>Harmless? Who determined that? Show me data from randomized, controlled, FDA approved clinical trial of the exact devices they are using to microwave my skin, and then I would say “maybe”.</p>
<p>Whether or not the TSA security measures are really providing any enhanced security or whether they give a false sense of increased security is hard to tell. I will say that with respect to my carry-on luggage, because I carry what I call my “hair arsenal” (electric round hairbrush thing and flat iron) the bag sometimes gets a second look/scan at security. Fine by me. </p>
<p>MY DH travels weekly for business. He’s now at platinum level on the airlines. Whatever it takes to keep the skies safe is what we ned to do. I agree that they tend to tighten down on something like the printer cartridges AFTER its been a problem, so I am trying to think of tghe body scanners as a proactive approach. Maybe I am deluding myself, but thats what I am telling myself 
As an aside, my BIL works for the Dept of Homeland Sercurity. Whatever new things they are thinking of putting in place… he isnt telling…</p>
<p>Bunsen: That’s a nice thought but clearly not going to happen anytime soon. For those of us with flights in the near future, it would be helpful perhaps to have a sense of how harmful electromagnetic waves tend to be. </p>
<p>My thinking now (with two holiday flights coming up) is that I will say no to the x-ray machine (I’ve already had some necessary but high-radiation medical procedures) but I don’t know about the waves. And I am also thinking I will refuse the “private” part of the “private screening”–anything the TSA agents want to do to me, they can do in public. I don’t know why I should need privacy for them to touch me.</p>
<p>
Excellent point!</p>
<p>Also, you may not be aware that radiation emitting devices used for medical purposes are very frequently (some after every single use) re-calibrated to very precise specs. Do you believe this is being done with airport scanners? A radiation expert interviewed on Chicago radio yesterday was very skeptical. He made the point that, even if a machine is within proper calibration limits, activating it even one or two seconds longer than the protocol calls for dramatically increases the radiation received by the traveller. Are you comfortable having TSA employees manning this highly sensitive radiation equipment in a busy airport while its pointed at your body? Really?</p>
<p>momofsongbird, excellent post! CT scanners and X-ray machines are run by licensed professionals who have to undergo a certain amount of training and have appropriate degrees. I would like to know: what kind of training and certification do the TSA employees who run these radiation-emitting medical devices (aka airport scanners) have?</p>
<p>The debate over whether these procedures are safe, violoation of rights or violation of privacy are all important points of discussion but many seem to be missing another major point. The way I understand this not every passenger is screened by scanner or enhanced pat downs. Just like always people are for the most part pulled randomly for these procedures, 92 year old grandmas, business peolple etc. The point is if this is random with no regard to most likely candidates for terrorism then these checks are just as likely to miss a terrorist as to catch one. Why would we accept these intrusions on our rights if the ultimate goal of catching terrorists is not increased. The Isreali method of screening seems smarter. Don’t we have it within our ablility to know a grandmother who has lived in the same house for 50 years, who travels once a year at holiday is not a risk vs. a Yemeni exchange student on a visa might be? But alas we wouldn’t want to do the forbidden profiling required for this smarter but vastly more effective screening.</p>