Forum: Arts / Debates

Page:
Page 8 of 10: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By dancemomtoo
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:25 PM
^^^^ There is a lot in your statement that is just plain wrong. The tsa is part of the Department of Homeland Security-a cabinet position. Cabinet are part of the EXECUTIVE branch and serve 'at the whim of the president." That means they are under the authority of the President-NOT CONGRESS.

Members of the Cabinet serve at the pleasure of the President, which means the President may remove them at will.-check even wikipedia.

You can only be search by a police officer under three circumstances 1) exigent circumstances or 2)a warrant supported by probable cause- 3) voluntary consent.

Refusing a search (this is an exercise of your constitutional rights) does NOT give a police officer probable cause to then search you or to arrest you for refusing the search-that would make quite a mockery of your 4th amendment rights. Both would be illegal.

Saying that people have to get searched to enter America -its a little late for that after they may have blown up the plane in the air on approach. The search/security efforts need to occur BEFORE they get on the plane.

Thats all I have time to address now.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Odessamember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:35 PM
I don't want to take part in the discussion, but I do want to remind everyone that if you have a problem or a query with a moderator action, to please take it up with the moderators, rather than on the public boards.

Thankyou.

Erin.
::righteous babe::
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Heartmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:38 PM
Edited by Heart (21721) on 2010-11-21 21:40:05 bonus for foreigners who might not know that, idk
WHO APPROVES APPOINTEES TO THE CABINET?
Hint: The Senate.

WHO ELECTS THE SENATE?
Hint: WE THE PEOPLE!

ARE TSA AGENTS POLICE OFFICERS?
Hint: They're not. See "border searches," previously mentioned twice.

WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPLICATIONS OF TELLING A FOREIGN PRIVATELY-OWNED COMPANY IN A FOREIGN NATION TO COMPLY TO OUR NATIONAL REGULATIONS?
Hint: Well shoot, hands on the car and spread 'em, 'cause I don't wanna find out.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By i_am_me
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:43 PM
Edited by i_am_me (202298) on 2010-11-21 21:47:59
Edited by Odessa (22571) on 2010-11-21 22:03:41 veiled profanity
I had another member warn me in PM where the thread would go after it was moved to the open boards. I told her I'd lock it. She told me they'd unlock it. And I did. So they did.

I don't do fighting just to fight. But I know that some people LOVE that stuff. So have at it, new angry people on this thread. Have fun fighting each other.

I'll see all of you reasonable adult people back on the teacher and the SO boards.

Sianora!
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By SaraTheGrouchmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:48 PM
Edited by Odessa (22571) on 2010-11-21 21:50:36 edited out subtle personal attack
Oh squee, that was so mature of you!

Don't stomp away too hard, you may crack the floor.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Heartmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:48 PM
I would love to see where Sara or I made a statement that was in any way off-topic or derogatory until you started in on us... because you weren't responding to the points (dare I say, facts?) we were stating. Maturity at its best!
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Odessamember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:49 PM
Edited by Odessa (22571) on 2010-11-21 21:52:02
May I also just point out, since you seem intent on having this discussion on the public boards despite my advice just up there, that the lock function isn't there for you to lock threads just because you don't like the answers you are getting.

I have been reading the whole thread since it started and I have seen nothing off topic (except for this), no name calling and barely even any shouting.

The lock function exists so users can lock threads that have outgrown their usefulness, ie; diary threads, or time sensitve emergency threads, or threads where a question recieved a definite answer.

This thread was unlocked because it was still being actively participated on. When people aren't interested in it anymore, they'll just stop posting. If people start calling each other names and shouting at each other, then we'll lock it. But until then, this thread was serving it's purpose and hadn't gone off topic at all. It was moved because it's an interesting discussion and because the topic matter pertains to everyone, not just to the folks who read and post in the Teachers board.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled debate :)

Erin.
::righteous babe::
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down? (karma: 2)
By slice
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 09:58 PM
Edited by slice (109495) on 2010-11-21 21:59:15
Edited by slice (109495) on 2010-11-21 22:00:43
OkinawaDancing wrote:

Have children? Don't fly!

Finally a reason to keep annoying children off of airplanes! [Kidding! But I couldn't resist.]


In all seriousness though, what other alternative is there? When we elect representatives, senators, and other governmental officials (some who are in charge of appointing other governmental officials), we are giving these politicians implicit trust that they will be making decisions that closely align with our interests. Is there a guarantee that this will take place? No, because while politicians may have citizens to answer to, they also have lobbyists and party supporters who are very shall we say persuasive (aka wealthy!) in getting their interests addressed as well. And even if we elect who we feel is right, by the time legislation has gone through committees, and the House and the Senate and possibly back through again, it might not even resemble something we'd vote for if given the chance. All government agencies have committees, some permanent some temporary, that operate in much the same way.

But this is what we sacrifice for not living in a direct democracy (which would get very annoying after awhile, trust me!).

This is one of those moments where if "we" as an American people (and I'm aware that not everyone on this thread is American, sorry) could theoretically use the threat of our voting authority to influence some of the systems put in place. BUT, that won't happen and as it appears, a vast majority wouldn't even want to anyway.

My guess is that after about a year or so these new scans/patdowns will relax into pretty much what they used to be, or fewer people will be getting them. That's how it usually is. And then most flight activity will resume as normal... until the next near-threat of course (and then rinse and repeat).
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By OkinawaDancing
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:03 PM
slice wrote:

OkinawaDancing wrote:

Have children? Don't fly!

Finally a reason to keep annoying children off of airplanes! [Kidding! But I couldn't resist.]




Lol virtual high five for that one!
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By RattyPattymember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:06 PM
Let's look at this in a new way. Say the TSA takes away all the body scanners and gets rid of the new pat downs, and then lets say some terrorists taped explosive ingredients onto their legs and wore baggy pants. They then made it into the airport, and proceeded to take the lives of thousands. Now this incident could have easily been prevented with the new technology that WAS implemented but taken away.
Lets face it, the likeliness of the TSA taking away this new technology is very very minuscule, because it would open an even larger debate dealing with a new set ethics. Would it be better to prevent the deaths of a large amount of people, or should the duty of protecting citizens be put on the back burner because some people feel uncomfortable?
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down? (karma: 1)
By dancemomtoo
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:08 PM
Edited by dancemomtoo (81523) on 2010-11-21 23:06:01 added info
Edited by dancemomtoo (81523) on 2010-11-21 23:20:29 more stuff
Who makes the appointments to the cabinet?
Hint-the President

What branch are they a member of?
Hint -the Executive

Who can demand their resignation
Hint-the President.

Where are the USA's borders?
Hint-not anywhere in domestic airports-only in international ones-therefore any reference to border searches is legally irrelevant.

Are the tsa agents police officers
Hint-no, they have not had any of the training and instruction in law enforcement and legal procedure that police officers have, but they ARE agents of the government and as such subject to observing the Constitution.

I think the one thing we can agree on is that this is a gray area that will end up in court if procedures do not change. And I can assure you that the courts will not say if you don't like it don't fly-whichever way they come down they will have a far more reasoned response. I'm looking forward to it.

Just FYI-recent court statements on tsa search parameters


However, the TSA’s authority is not boundless.
The scope of such searches is not limitless. A particular airport
security screening search is constitutionally reasonable provided that
it is no more extensive nor intensive than necessary, in the light of
current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives
and that it is confined in good faith to that purpose.
Aukai, 497 F.3d at 962 (citing U.S. v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 913 (9th Cir. 1973))
Even when administrative security interests are “legitimate and
substantial,” the interests “cannot be pursued by means that broadly stifle
fundamental personal liberties when the end can be more narrowly achieved.”
Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U.S. 479, 488 (1960). Fourth Amendment safeguards
“dictate a critical examination of each element of the airport security program.”
Davis, 482 F.2d at 913.
Courts require that airport security searches be “minimally intrusive,” “welltailored
to protect personal privacy,” and “neither more extensive nor more intensive than necessary under the circumstances to rule out the presence of
weapons or explosives.” U.S. v. Hartwell, 436 F.3d 174, 180 (3d Cir. 2006);

And the underwear bomber-the full body scanners would NOT have detected the explosive substances (google it)-they would not have triggered an alarm-he would not have gotten patted down and he would have gotten on the plane. The ONLY thing that would have kept him off the plane?


wait for it






If anyone on th terrorist watch list was also on the no fly list and the no fly list was enforced unless someone requested and got an exemption. That would have worked.

Wonder why this is not our policy?
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By slice
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:19 PM
RattyPatty wrote:

Let's look at this in a new way. Say the TSA takes away all the body scanners and gets rid of the new pat downs, and then lets say some terrorists taped explosive ingredients onto their legs and wore baggy pants. They then made it into the airport, and proceeded to take the lives of thousands. Now this incident could have easily been prevented with the new technology that WAS implemented but taken away.
Lets face it, the likeliness of the TSA taking away this new technology is very very minuscule, because it would open an even larger debate dealing with a new set ethics. Would it be better to prevent the deaths of a large amount of people, or should the duty of protecting citizens be put on the back burner because some people feel uncomfortable?


If I've been following the arguments correctly, I believe the issue is the degree of privacy we should be reasonably asked to sacrifice in the name of safety. Which isn't exactly an answerable question, especially not by the government who would gladly turn into Big Brother if they could.

Like dancemomtoo, said, it's a pretty grey area. But I don't know about the courts siding with citizens unless in outstanding circumstances (such as the urine incident). And in that case I don't think they would rule the TSA as unconstitutional so much as the procedure not being carried out correctly.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Heartmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:53 PM
Courts (esp. of American Supreme nature) give huge leniency to the government. When there is NOT a fundamental right in question. Sometimes privacy is fundamental (abortion), and sometimes it's not (searches). {This determines the level of judicial "test" put to the case which is not even relevant BUT ANYWAY.}

Fundamental right at stake = unless CRUCIAL government interest that could not be handled any other way, Court sides w. individual {They're big on finding alternative solutions for things}

Anything else at stake (i.e. "rational basis") = Court sides w. state/federal govt

Issue that a legislative body could handle = Court gives ambiguous ruling (they don't like to MAKE law, just decide on them)




Calling it right now - cases, if there are any, aren't going to make it past District Court. It's too compelling of an argument for the state (assuming any of those stories hold water, lololololol).
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By SaraTheGrouchmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:11 AM
How is this so Big Brother like? Nobody's getting wire tapped or micro chipped here. It's a more advanced x-ray machine and a more in depth pat down. We've all been getting x-rayed and patted down for years. Technology and terrorists are advancing, so why wouldn't you expect beefier security?

It is as invasive as you let it become. If you think of it as necessary safety protocol, it's not going to bother you. If you think of it as a huge invasion of privacy and completely unnecessary, of course it's going to feel like pee in your cornflakes. Do I enjoy putting catheters in people? (old, young, conscious, unconscious alike) No! Do some of my patients think it's a complete violation of their personal space? Absolutely! But it's medically necessary for their health and it's part of my job, so we both get over it and move on. It's over in one, two, three, (just like the scan) and we all carry on about our business like nothing ever happened. It's all the same concept.

When you're laying on your death bed, you're not going to remember back to the time you had to walk through an x-ray machine at the airport. Fight for something worth the memories.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Liritmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:52 AM
(This response is kind of disjointed. I haven't slept much in about a week.)

I'm flying to Florida on Tuesday. My local airport does not have the full body scan machines yet, however, MIA does and when I fly home in a week, one of my biggest concerns is that I'll be randomly selected.

If I want someone to see a naked picture of me, I'll give them naked pictures of me. I remain unconvinced that these full body scanners actually protect us to the extent that TSA claims, particularly considering only a select handful of passengers travel through them.

Likewise, I feel a pat down that includes a genital swipe is inappropriate and unnecessary - again, I remain unconvinced that it does anything to guarantee anyone's safety. It seems to me that there's always going to be that one person who gets around the extra security measures and leaves the government scrambling to make excuses and look for other inconveniences to convince us that this illusion of safety exists. It doesn't, and nothing TSA does or doesn't do will ever change that.

If the risk were as great as they state it, there are already dangerous individuals getting past the security checkpoints. If it's as small as I suspect, the enhanced security is a waste of time and taxpayer's money. But the bottom line is that there always has been, is, and always will be a risk - great or small. And the only ones TSA is fooling, I believe, are themselves.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By slice
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 05:27 AM
Edited by slice (109495) on 2010-11-22 05:28:46
SaraTheGrouch wrote:

How is this so Big Brother like? Nobody's getting wire tapped or micro chipped here. It's a more advanced x-ray machine and a more in depth pat down. We've all been getting x-rayed and patted down for years. Technology and terrorists are advancing, so why wouldn't you expect beefier security?

It is as invasive as you let it become. If you think of it as necessary safety protocol, it's not going to bother you. If you think of it as a huge invasion of privacy and completely unnecessary, of course it's going to feel like pee in your cornflakes. Do I enjoy putting catheters in people? (old, young, conscious, unconscious alike) No! Do some of my patients think it's a complete violation of their personal space? Absolutely! But it's medically necessary for their health and it's part of my job, so we both get over it and move on. It's over in one, two, three, (just like the scan) and we all carry on about our business like nothing ever happened. It's all the same concept.

When you're laying on your death bed, you're not going to remember back to the time you had to walk through an x-ray machine at the airport. Fight for something worth the memories.


When did I say I had a problem with it? I don't believe I implied so anywhere. So if anyone's lying on their death bed please don't put me there!

I was merely reiterating what the early arguments had been to the "Why object if it makes us safer" argument. Just playing devil's advocate.

I said the government would turn into Big Brother IF they could, which was mostly tongue in cheek but kind of true to some degree. What better way to stop terrorism than to know exactly what every single person was doing and saying at any given time? :)
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By imadanseurPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 05:30 AM
HOW much are we going to put up with in the name of "keeping safe"?


Well I'll put up with a lot to avoid being blown up, but hey that is just me.

I still think it is funny that so many people are discussing all this genital fondling and you haven't experienced it at all. You are making up stories of how this will be and have no idea how it is running in airports.

I also think some of you that are so opposed would be up in arms if another 911 happened and have all sorts of choice words for the TSA because they didn't do enough.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By slice
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 05:44 AM
imadanseur wrote:

HOW much are we going to put up with in the name of "keeping safe"?


Well I'll put up with a lot to avoid being blown up, but hey that is just me.

I still think it is funny that so many people are discussing all this genital fondling and you haven't experienced it at all. You are making up stories of how this will be and have no idea how it is running in airports.

I also think some of you that are so opposed would be up in arms if another 911 happened and have all sorts of choice words for the TSA because they didn't do enough.


Agreed! I feel like, again with the exception of a few sensational stories that the web has been circulating, most of the uproar has come from just hearsay about the procedure. I believe I've read this thread in its entirety and I don't recall anyone who's actually experienced the "new" patdowns weighing in, correct?

I, too, am willing to put up with a great deal to avoid death on an airplane. I don't care what kind of statistic someone throws my way, being up in the air is an incredibly vulnerable experience. Sure the chances of an attack on YOUR specific plane are theoretically low, but the chances of survival if such an attack were to occur are even lower. Not to mention OUR government would be shooting down the plane if it had reasonable cause.

So yeah, all situations I'd like to avoid in any way possible. Nude-a-tron me up!
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Cienmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 07:38 AM
SaraTheGrouch wrote:

It is as invasive as you let it become. If you think of it as necessary safety protocol, it's not going to bother you.

Oh, right, because it's entirely MY fault that I'm uncomfortable with a random stranger swiping their hand through my crotch to "keep me safe." They shouldn't have to draw the "security vs. personal boundaries" line anywhere, because hell, it's for our safety! ::rolls eyes:: Please. This is not keeping me any safer than I was before. It's not necessary like a catheter is for a patient, it's necessary because the government wants to look like they're doing something to keep them gosh darn terr'rists off our land! 'MERICA!
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By DancinDiva2005member has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 08:25 AM
Edited by DancinDiva2005 (17591) on 2010-11-22 08:28:28
Lirit wrote:

I remain unconvinced that these full body scanners actually protect us to the extent that TSA claims, particularly considering only a select handful of passengers travel through them.

Likewise, I feel a pat down that includes a genital swipe is inappropriate and unnecessary - again, I remain unconvinced that it does anything to guarantee anyone's safety. It seems to me that there's always going to be that one person who gets around the extra security measures and leaves the government scrambling to make excuses and look for other inconveniences to convince us that this illusion of safety exists. It doesn't, and nothing TSA does or doesn't do will ever change that.

If the risk were as great as they state it, there are already dangerous individuals getting past the security checkpoints. If it's as small as I suspect, the enhanced security is a waste of time and taxpayer's money. But the bottom line is that there always has been, is, and always will be a risk - great or small. And the only ones TSA is fooling, I believe, are themselves.



Agreed. That's basically what I said a few pages back. I also don't think it helps that our security measures are being blasted all over the internet either.
If someone wants to make it through the security..they will FIND a way through. Especially with all of the loopholes.

Is TSA trained what to do if they do find someone with materials to make an explosive on their person? What if they blow something up right there in the airport?

I also don't know why all these extra security measures are only being done on planes. IMO, the terrorists are probably working on getting something planned for another form of transportation or something else entirely. Something that we're not expecting.
As someone else mentioned earlier, terrorists look for the grey area. They find it and use it to their advantage, and then feed off the chaos and panic that they've created.


*sigh*
Carry on...
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down? (karma: 5)
By DefyingGravityPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 08:58 AM
Why hello! I just had the in-depth pat down yesterday when I was flying out of SFO. I was randomly selected for the scatter whatever machine and refused it (I'll be honest — it was because I wanted to see this pat down in action. I couldn't care less about someone seeing an outline of my boobies and chub). Anyways...

It was very similar to the old pat down. Yes, the woman used the gloved front of her hand, but it was a quick swipe down each leg and arm, a quick swipe down my back, a quick swipe across my upper chest, a quick swipe on my abdomen, then ONE finger under each boob and ONE finger on my underwear outline — yes, through my legs, but not touching my vagina or grabbing my ass. It was one finger. There was no groping, there was no vagina swipe, no fondling of anyone's junk. I didn't feel violated, the woman was very professional and explained everything she was doing, and I went along my merry way in the same amount of time — or less — than I used to. Granted, I was wearing a tank top and skinny jeans with flip flops, so maybe's it's a more intrusive pat-down if you have fat rolls and are wearing baggy clothes (hey, it's true. There are more places to hide things when one has fat rolls and baggy clothes). I don't know. But for me it was quick, easy, and to the point.

Really, MAJOR over reactions going on here. If you've had the old pat down, this one isn't traumatizingly worse. Really.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By PogMoGilliesmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 09:01 AM
Edited by PogMoGillies (177934) on 2010-11-22 09:13:56 went to get true numbers for the train, car, and bus
I think a large part of the 78% approval was because they asked people while showing them modified pictures, before anyone was asked to go through the new measures. It will be interesting to see the change if they polled again after this weekend, when a greater percentage of the population will have personally experienced this, or be within only one degree of separation from someone who has.

Until this weekend, this was all theoretical, which means that many people are making assumptions, because there was little fact to base this on.

As for my earlier comments- I was well aware that terrorists would find the same loopholes that I was pointing out.

I can forsee a future where people will post an add, and assemble a small group of travelers who need to go to the same location at the same time. They will pool together to rent a small plane and pilot, and leave from a regional airport, which has NO security. Can terrorists do the same thing? Of course they can. That's the problem. Someone bent on using airline travel for terror will find a way around any security measures that are implemented.

As for everyone who is freaking out about those who suggest not flying. There are choices. Most of us who travel to see family include a full travel day to get to our destination and a full day to get home. No you can't get cross country in 5 hours the way you can on a plane, but you get there.

I just searched what it would have taken to get to my Oireachtas (regional Irish Dance competition) by plane, car, bus, and train. This 1200 mile trip is a 2.5 hour flight, a 17 hour car ride, a 25 hour bus ride, and a 31 hour train ride. Yes, it's long and boring, but you're there. if more and more people begin using the bus and train again, creating more damand, then the supply will improve.

Air travel is a convenience. If it becomes too inconvenient, then people will stop using it. Businesses have already moved to far more teleconfrences then ever, because it's cheaper to do it that way.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Trout
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:27 AM
A brief history of airport security... TSA GONE WILD!
graphjam.files.wordpress.com . . .

I just glanced through all the replies and looked at the attached images. Brief opinion: those scans aren't bad at all. It's not like airport security is getting their jollies from searching you for weapons. Also, my "naked" body won't be the first or last one seen and it's not as though it's different from any other human's body who has ever existed. You're a human, you have a body, it's nothing special. If doing full body scans can result in safer flights, then by all means, scan me up.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By Cienmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 02:29 PM
The YouTube link to the SNL skit got taken off by NBC, so I thought I'd put it up again:
www.hulu.com . . .

Love it.
re: Full Body Scan or Pat Down?
By KeepOnSinginPremium member
On Mon Nov 22, 2010 03:23 PM
The thought of either bothers me immensely, but mostly because it is completely exposing you in public!

There's a good chance that I'll be flying in December or January (and if not then, in March), and I'll be in big airports, so I may be subjected to this, and that does not sit well with me.
Page:
Page 8 of 10: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ReplySendWatch

Powered by XP Experience Server.
Copyright ©1999-2021 XP.COM, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
XL
LG
MD
SM
XS
XL
LG
MD
SM
XS