New (and idiotic) TSA rules proposed

[TroyF]

I travel a lot. In a down month, I'll take one trip. On a busy month I'll take three. Since June, I've been through airports in Boston, Dallas, Kansas City, Tulsa, Memphis, Phoenix, Onario (CA), LAX, Las Vegas, Reno, Seattle, Spokane, Portland, Washington D.C. (Regan), Atlanta, Detroit and my home of Denver.

How many problems have I had through security out of all those trips? 2. In Memphis, a couple of TSA guys thought they were kings and made life hell for everyone going through the line. A completely miserable experience. In Denver, headed for an early morning flight, security didn't have enough people and it took 1.5 hours to get through the line. Thankfully I got there early, but that was a first class pain in the ass.

The rest of the time? Get through the line, take the shoes off, take the coat off, pull out my laptops (usually have one personal and one work laptop I travel with), pull off the belt. Go through the scanner or full body scanner depending on the airport. Put everything back on and away, head toward the gate.

Total time? It's rare the wait time has ever been over 20 minutes to get to the checkpoint. Once at the checkpoint, all of the stuff above happens in under 3 minutes. 5 on a really slow day.

I don't think about my personal rights much. I've had the hands on search about 3 times (always after going through security) and haven't felt personally violated at any time. All of this needed? I dunno, but it's nothing more than a minor inconvenience to me.

As for the macro opposed to the micro, what do you want to do? No amount of civil disobedience is going to change many of the security measures.

[molson]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I know plenty of older folks who are already not super comfortable with flying, but now you add in the need to remove their shoes, the need to find 3 oz or smaller containers for any fluid if they choose to carry-on (and there's financial incentive to do so now with all the bag fees) and the possible subjection to more intrusive searches, and some of these people say "screw it" and go drive somewhere instead, or just stay home. That's lost tourist revenue.

So you really think that the number of old people who don't want to take of their shoes is a bigger loss to the economy than the number of people who wouldn't feel safe to fly if you minimized security down to the metal detector (it seems like you have a problem with everything beyond that - and that's really the most time consuming thing). And that's not even to mention the hit airlines take when there is a terrorism situation.

[molson]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I know plenty of older folks who are already not super comfortable with flying, but now you add in the need to remove their shoes, the need to find 3 oz or smaller containers for any fluid if they choose to carry-on (and there's financial incentive to do so now with all the bag fees) and the possible subjection to more intrusive searches, and some of these people say "screw it" and go drive somewhere instead, or just stay home. That's lost tourist revenue.

So you really think that the number of old people who don't want to take of their shoes is a bigger loss to the economy than the number of people who wouldn't feel safe to fly if you minimized security down to the metal detector (it seems like you have a problem with everything beyond that - and that's really the most time consuming thing). And that's not even to mention the hit airlines take when there is a terrorist attack or attempted attack

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Lathum

The process really isn't that slow, you are acting as if it is a 2 hour process when really it is 30 minutes tops. You wait longer to get a table at a restaurant, yet you still go out to eat.

As an aside, I haven't waited 30 minutes at a restaurant in this decade.

30 minutes x # air travelers per day (1,500,000 or so) = 750,000 lost man-hours per day. Even if you take into account other factors (leisure, retirees, kids) etc., you're talking about a massive productivity drain.

As for the rest of it, none of the defenders of this have in any way addressed the 4th Amendment as it relates to a government agency essentially taking naked photos of you in a public place. This isn't a private enterprise (the airlines) requiring this - this is a governmental agency. Even though driving is a privilege, it still doesn't give the government to stop you and search your car without probable cause. How is this any different?

Furthermore, where does it cross the line for you? If the scanner breaks and the TSA is forced to go to an enhanced pat down for all passengers, are you comfortable with a male screener grabbing the crotch of your 12 year old daughter? What if the TSA started mandating that you had to wear a certain type of clothing so everyone was walking around in a smock? If they required strip searches, is that OK with you? If you're ok with this, how and where is the line drawn?

Finally, there are probably better and proven techniques that are much less intrusive. Read up on the Israeli technique and compare that against the US. Which is less intrusive? And which is more effective?

Originally Posted by DanGarion

If you truly think this could never happen again you are wrong...

No, it couldn't happen again in the same way. If you think it can, I'd be very interested in hearing why you think that.

IMO, the next big attack will either be by private jet or it'll be against a cruise ship in international waters that left a US port. Or it'll be a suicide bomber who is standing in the crowded security line in an airport because that's where you have a group of bunched up people.

[PilotMan]

I don't see how the productivity argument holds much water as the US is tops in productivity in the world.

Security at airports is like a fixed overhead cost in a business. Yes, you could be more profitable if that rent was less, but it isn't and everyone else has to pay about the same so the actual loss in revenue is irrelevant.

You can point out how much time you are losing, but you can argue the same about watching TV or taking a dump. Monetizing every second of the day is useless. Just imagine if we were productive 24/7. Think of the lost productivity.

[PilotMan]

FWIW, the number of people who have to use the new machines or pat downs is minimal when you consider everyone who goes through security. I know they are becoming more prevalent, but right now it's few and far between.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

As an aside, I haven't waited 30 minutes at a restaurant in this decade.

30 minutes x # air travelers per day (1,500,000 or so) = 750,000 lost man-hours per day. Even if you take into account other factors (leisure, retirees, kids) etc., you're talking about a massive productivity drain.

I'd love to see a cite for your 30 minute average, and obviously SOME kind of security is necessary, right? If we give up on explosive detection altogether and just go to straight metal detectors, you're only saving a small amount of time. When you just had carry-on scanning/metal-detectors, you had a lot of idiots who couldn't get through the metal detectors. Everybody's checking their pockets, taking off their belt, going through again and again. Today, people are more prepared, and I doubt the average time in a security line is any longer than it was 15 years ago.

Originally Posted by Blackadar

As for the rest of it, none of the defenders of this have in any way addressed the 4th Amendment as it relates to a government agency essentially taking naked photos of you in a public place. This isn't a private enterprise (the airlines) requiring this - this is a governmental agency. Even though driving is a privilege, it still doesn't give the government to stop you and search your car without probable cause. How is this any different?

I've addressed it, there's no 4th amendment issue here, and this is entirely different. A search at an airline is not as intrusive as either the house or the car search, the government interest is far more compelling. (and the officers have more leeway to stop/search your car than you think, just because the courts have recognized that a car is different because it's mobile, and because you're out on a public road). Nobody is challenging this issue in the appellate courts (who deal with 4th amendment search and seizure traffic stop cases every day), because it's a non-issue.

Read up on the Israeli technique and compare that against the US. Which is less intrusive? And which is more effective?

There's definitely things we could learn from the Israel system but it's not any faster, and people would definitely be bitching about it here. It's mostly based on profiling (you actually get an entrance inteview before they let you on the airport property - how would Americans feel about that?). Heavily armed guards watch you as you walk around. Once you get into the airport -another personal interview. There's like 4 or 5 stages of security, they don't take shit from anyone, and if you look like a dirty Muslim terrorist, they're kicking your ass out of there. That system is very efficient, but I don't know if it's going to fly here. A lot of Americans have this sense of entitlement and are just going to start bitching with TSA employees if they think something isn't fair. Israeli security wouldn't deal with that at all, you'd just be out the door. I'd love to see that blogger go to an Israeli airport with a camera and try to document his experience being uncooperative.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

No, it couldn't happen again in the same way. If you think it can, I'd be very interested in hearing why you think that.

My main reason I think it could is because before it did happen people thought the same thing, that nothing like that could happen... But what do I know.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by molson

So you really think that the number of old people who don't want to take of their shoes is a bigger loss to the economy than the number of people who wouldn't feel safe to fly if you minimized security down to the metal detector (it seems like you have a problem with everything beyond that - and that's really the most time consuming thing). And that's not even to mention the hit airlines take when there is a terrorism situation.

There are always going to be paranoid people that worry about everything. That said, how many people really feel more secure because we have to have 3 oz or smaller containers of any kind of liquid, or having to have our shoes scanned, or taking out our laptops from within their bags, or having certain TSA checkpoints deciding nail clippers are not allowed?

And if airlines really were worried that a drawback in the amount of screening measures might scare some passengers off, put together a series of public safety announcements via TV ads to assure the public that security isn't being compromised by cutting back on some of the more ridiculous searches and prohibitions being applied to all travelers.

[DanGarion]

You want to know a massive productivity drain, traffic.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

That said, how many people really feel more secure because we have to have 3 oz or smaller containers of any kind of liquid, or having to have our shoes scanned, or taking out our laptops from within their bags, or having certain TSA checkpoints deciding nail clippers are not allowed?

And if airlines really were worried that a drawback in the amount of screening measures might scare some passengers off, put together a series of public safety announcements via TV ads to assure the public that security isn't being compromised by cutting back on some of the more ridiculous searches and prohibitions being applied to all travelers.

I can't say more, but if you knew some of the information that I am privy to, you wouldn't see those things as ridiculous or arbitrary. Frankly, I would like my place of business to be as secure as possible.

[Greyroofoo]

Ya know with all these productivity drains (airport security, traffic, fantasy football, facebook, twitter etc...) it's a wonder that we're productive at all!

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I don't see how the productivity argument holds much water as the US is tops in productivity in the world.

Security at airports is like a fixed overhead cost in a business. Yes, you could be more profitable if that rent was less, but it isn't and everyone else has to pay about the same so the actual loss in revenue is irrelevant.

Monetizing every second of the day is useless.

good thing you're a pilot, because you'd make a crappy business owner.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by molson

I'd love to see a cite for your 30 minute average, and obviously SOME kind of security is necessary, right? If we give up on explosive detection altogether and just go to straight metal detectors, you're only saving a small amount of time. When you just had carry-on scanning/metal-detectors, you had a lot of idiots who couldn't get through the metal detectors. Everybody's checking their pockets, taking off their belt, going through again and again. Today, people are more prepared, and I doubt the average time in a security line is any longer than it was 15 years ago.

You'd almost certainly be incorrect that the average time in security is the same. I don't think there are any stats on this, but anyone who flew pre-9/11 pretty much walked up to the security screening and walked through. I haven't been able to do that at a major airport this year and I've flown about 50,000 miles.

FYI, it wasn't my 30 minutes. It was Lathums. I'd estimate probably 15-20 on average at any major US airport, though those 1 hour waits sure do ramp up the overall average.

Originally Posted by molson

I've addressed it, there's no 4th amendment issue here, and this is entirely different. A search at an airline is not as intrusive as either the house or the car search, the government interest is far more compelling. (and the officers have more leeway to stop/search your car than you think, just because the courts have recognized that a car is different because it's mobile, and because you're out on a public road). Nobody is challenging this issue in the appellate courts (who deal with 4th amendment search and seizure traffic stop cases every day), because it's a non-issue.

Well, if the courts haven't addressed it, then you can't say it's not an issue. To me, taking naked photos of me or feeling my junk is pretty damn intrusive.

Originally Posted by molson

There's definitely things we could learn from the Israel system but it's not any faster, and people would definitely be bitching about it here. It's mostly based on profiling (you actually get an entrance inteview before they let you on the airport property - how would Americans feel about that?). Heavily armed guards watch you as you walk around. Once you get into the airport -another personal interview. There's like 4 or 5 stages of security, they don't take shit from anyone, and if you look like a dirty Muslim terrorist, they're kicking your ass out of there. That system is very efficient, but I don't know if it's going to fly here. A lot of Americans have this sense of entitlement and are just going to start bitching with TSA employees if they think something isn't fair. Israeli security wouldn't deal with that at all, you'd just be out the door.

Yeah, that entrance interview consists of exactly two questions. "How are you doing" and "where are you going". Having flown in and out of Israel a couple of years ago, I found their system far less intrusive and much faster than ours. There are quite a few levels of security, but it's amazing how little you're impacted by those levels.

Originally Posted by DanGarion

My main reason I think it could is because before it did happen people thought the same thing, that nothing like that could happen... But what do I know.

In fact, many people thought things like that could happen. It was written about in a number of books, presented as a real danger to both the Clinton and Bush administrations prior to 9/11 and so forth. Tom Clancy had the dramatic denouement of his bestselling novel a plane crashing into the White House!

Furthermore, passengers were specifically taught to not fight a hijacking attempt. It was SOP - let the hijackers do their thing and it'll all get resolved peacefully. There are countless examples of this and a few of 'em were even made into TV movies. Now, the passenger mindset is entirely different. The psychology has entirely changed.

So, in this day in age, with passengers prepared to defend themselves, with reinforced pilot doors that stay locked, with air marshals aboard many planes...do you still think 5 men armed with only box cutters could realistically hijack a USA passenger plane?

[molson]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Yeah, that entrance interview consists of exactly two questions. "How are you doing" and "where are you going". Having flown in and out of Israel a couple of years ago, I found their system far less intrusive and much faster than ours. There are quite a few levels of security, but it's amazing how little you're impacted by those levels.

It's definitely quick and efficient if you're white/jewish/otherwise don't fit the profiles. Focussing on people individually has a lot of merit when it comes to security. I just can't see that happening here though. Whatever screening process we use, it has to be the same for wheelchair-bound grandma as it is for young Arab male.

I don't know why this post has an exclamiation point. I didn't put it there on purpose.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by molson

It's definitely quick and efficient if you're white/jewish/otherwise don't fit the profiles. Focussing on people individually has a lot of merit when it comes to security. I just can't see that happening here though. Whatever screening process we use, it has to be the same for wheelchair-bound grandma as it is for young Arab male.

I don't know why this post has an exclamiation point. I didn't put it there on purpose.

No doubt there is an fair element of profiling, but not every young Arab male is going to be singled out for questioning. It's far, far more subtle than that. They're looking for subtle physical reactions to the questions - much the same things that police/FBI interrogators do. Things like pupil dilation, breathing patterns, eye flicker, nervousness, getting flushed, rapid speech, etc. They're trained to look for certain physical signs and then recommend additional screening from there. It's pretty fascinating stuff regarding pattern recognition.

No doubt that there is more intensive questioning if you start to fall outside the patterns, but it's damn effective stuff...far more effective than our system. It's how the Israelis caught a 32 year old Irish woman who was carrying Semtex.

And that wheelchair-bound grandma? It's been long known that wheelchairs would be one of the best ways to smuggle in a firearm by building the components into the frame of the chair itself.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I can't say more, but if you knew some of the information that I am privy to, you wouldn't see those things as ridiculous or arbitrary. Frankly, I would like my place of business to be as secure as possible.

Information that says that more than a tiniest fraction of the flying public are potential saboteurs? Because that's my issue with all of this - we're all subject to a certain level of intrusion and inconvenience regardless of the fact that nearly all of us are not reasonable suspects.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Information that says that more than a tiniest fraction of the flying public are potential saboteurs? Because that's my issue with all of this - we're all subject to a certain level of intrusion and inconvenience regardless of the fact that nearly all of us are not reasonable suspects.

So you are OK with someones civil liberties being violated as long as it isn't yours.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

So, in this day in age, with passengers prepared to defend themselves, with reinforced pilot doors that stay locked, with air marshals aboard many planes...do you still think 5 men armed with only box cutters could realistically hijack a USA passenger plane?

It depends do they each have 3 oz. of liquid on them?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

I'd love to see that blogger go to an Israeli airport with a camera and try to document his experience being uncooperative.

So would I, now that you mention it. Might even pay a few bucks to watch that on PPV.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

So you are OK with someones civil liberties being violated as long as it isn't yours.

I'm OK with searches that have a probable cause. I have a problem with the default assumption that everyone flying is a possible terrorist.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm OK with searches that have a probable cause. I have a problem with the default assumption that everyone flying is a possible terrorist.

and what is your criteria for determining probable cause that is cheaper and faster than what we have now?

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm OK with searches that have a probable cause. I have a problem with the default assumption that everyone flying is a possible terrorist.

I am unaware of any government security in the US, Canada, Europe, ect that works only on profile, or that assumes that certain people aren't a threat and just lets that group of people past. Even pre 9/11 security didn't work like that. Hell, even lax security doesn't work like that. Lax random screening assumes that everyone is a possible threat.

What you are suggesting is just flat out bad security. And an invitation for a seemingly ordinary person with an axe to grind against God knows who to do something horrific.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

I am unaware of any government security in the US, Canada, Europe, ect that works only on profile, or that assumes that certain people aren't a threat and just lets that group of people past. Even pre 9/11 security didn't work like that. Hell, even lax security doesn't work like that. Lax random screening assumes that everyone is a possible threat.

What you are suggesting is just flat out bad security. And an invitation for a seemingly ordinary person with an axe to grind against God knows who to do something horrific.

I'm suggesting rolling standard security back to pre 9/11, not more than that. As for profiling or other means, take a look at what Israeli airport security is like:

http://www.huliq.com/10061/john-tyne...rity-better-us

[Tigercat]

That tiered level of security at every airport and the training needed to implement it would cost more than we spend now at TSA. And without saying too much, I will say that you would be surprised how much of that TSA already does. The general public just doesn't notice it because it is not as visible. There are whole career branches in the TSA that deal with security measures that most of the public doesn't realize exists.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

That tiered level of security at every airport and the training needed to implement it would cost more than we spend now at TSA. And without saying too much, I will say that you would be surprised how much of that TSA already does. The general public just doesn't notice it because it is not as visible. There are whole career branches in the TSA that deal with security measures that most of the public doesn't realize exists.

Cool!

[jeff061]

Yeah. All we the public see is them checking shoes and banning toner cartridges the day after...

[Tigercat]

The most obvious and visible example:
http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/bdo/index.shtm

(Linking to a public page rather than risk saying things I shouldn't!)

[Alan T]

I didn't see this posted in this thread, if it was I apologize!

hxxp://gizmodo.com/5690749/these-are-the-first-100-leaked-body-scans

Seems pretty on topic for this discussion at least!


Anyhow, I fly out on Saturday night. I'll let you all know if my hyperactive three year old gets me arrested for not standing still in the security line

[molson]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

The most obvious and visible example:
http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/bdo/index.shtm

(Linking to a public page rather than risk saying things I shouldn't!)

Interesting. It could be a coincidence, but this weekend, I was in Vegas with a friend, and at the airport, she somehow got her cell phone stuck in the liner of her coat. We just couldn't get it out. I eventually had to use my keys to rip a part of the coat, to reach in and get the phone. Later on, inside the gate, after we parted ways, she was pulled aside for some kind of extra security. I wonder if someone was watching the whole coat liner thing and found it suspicious, like we were exchanging/drugs/contraband. I'd like to think they were watching people that closely, and using some kind of Israeli-style profile techniques.

[JediKooter]

I would like to see higher hiring standards at the TSA. Minimum of a bachelors degree required to even be considered for the job and that degree has to be somewhat related to the job as well.

Second, I'd like to see some actual consistency from airport to airport when going through the security line. Kind of like if I go to a McDonalds in Florida, I know that a Big Mac is going to taste exactly the same as the Big Mac I got in California. Example: I wear hat 99% of the time and if it's day time, I wear sunglasses. When I go inside, I usually put the sunglasses on my hat so I don't lose them. One airport will have me take the hat off before going through the metal detector, another airport will have me put my sunglasses through the xray machine and another will just completely ignore the fact that I have a hat on and another will ask me to take my hat off after I've gone through the metal detector and show them the inside of my hat. If this is done to keep people off guard, I'm fine with that. HOWEVER, what I am NOT fine with is the fucking attitude I get from the TSA screeners when I don't automagically know which one they want me to do. Which leads me to believe that each airport has its own set of rules instead of just mixing it up to keep people guessing.

[CU Tiger]

Bachelors Degrees?
Didn't you see the salary posted previously. I imagine its tough to find folks with diplomas!

What loses me is, are we concerned with the destruction of a single plane and its passengers, or the use of a plane to harm many others.

As others have suggested if the intent is to kill a large number of people on a single craft cruise ships should be a major target Id think. Also I can imagine a scenario that was alluded to where 5 passengers have 3oz of liquid each or whatever. But you aren't sailing that cruise ship into times square, and you will never again take over a plane with a box cutter.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Bachelors Degrees?

Yes, most definitely. Something that is as important as keeping terrorists away from and off of planes, should not be relegated to just anyone that can fill out a job application. It's just that my standards for something as important as that are a bit high.

Didn't you see the salary posted previously. I imagine its tough to find folks with diplomas!

I didn't see the salaries and I admit that I am painting with a wide brush, but, given the current quality of TSA employees, I can't imagine it being very high. You get what you pay for. I do admit there's some that do seem to be doing a good job, but, they are the exception and not the rule. I don't think I would be too far off the mark if I said the TSA talent pool is rather shallow.

What loses me is, are we concerned with the destruction of a single plane and its passengers, or the use of a plane to harm many others.

As others have suggested if the intent is to kill a large number of people on a single craft cruise ships should be a major target Id think. Also I can imagine a scenario that was alluded to where 5 passengers have 3oz of liquid each or whatever. But you aren't sailing that cruise ship into times square, and you will never again take over a plane with a box cutter.

My opinion is, planes and other modes of mass transportation are the least of our concerns. The poisoning of our water or food supplies or the manipulation of the stock market are bigger concerns in my opinion. While things like crashing a plane into something or blowing up a cruise liner result in shock and horror, their long term affects aren't as lasting as an economic, biological, or chemical attack, which would be much more crippling to everyone.

I don't disagree with you, I just think that there's too much attention spent on reactionary measures instead of proactive measures. The chickens have already left the coop and closing the coops doors (TSA security measures) doesn't really do much to help at this point. Had there been better coordination between the various agencies, there's probably a good chance those 19 hijackers never would have been in the US. The problem isn't the passengers, the problem is the bureaucracy and the political infighting that goes on between agencies.

[Tigercat]

30k for a Government job isn't that bad. It is a low mid-range (GS-5) pay area. Lots of people leave jobs that pay a lot more to get guaranteed benefits and the job security/mobility combo it offers. And besides, that is the rock bottom pay level for TSA anyway.

Bachelor degree requirement isn't a bad idea, police departments are starting to institute that requirement more and more as well. You might be surprised who is working the 23k-30k jobs in the Federal government though. At both the park service and at TSA I know plenty of people with Master's(I could almost count myself) and Doctorates(Park Service, not TSA) working those jobs.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

30k for a Government job isn't that bad. It is a low mid-range (GS-5) pay area. Lots of people leave jobs that pay a lot more to get guaranteed benefits and the job security/mobility combo it offers. And besides, that is the rock bottom pay level for TSA anyway.

Bachelor degree requirement isn't a bad idea, police departments are starting to institute that requirement more and more as well. You might be surprised who is working the 23k-30k jobs in the Federal government though. At both the park service and at TSA I know plenty of people with Master's(I could almost count myself) and Doctorates(Park Service, not TSA) working those jobs.

For the purpose of disclosure, I do not have a degree other than my high school diploma. I have tons of college credits (probably enough for almost 2 degrees), but, no degree. However, I work in an industry that doesn't involve public safety or national security.

That being said and playing the 'if I was in charge' game...I would slash the amount of people that work for the TSA, require a degree that is related to the field or close to it, rely more on technology (electronic & animals), raise the salaries to a minimum of 45-50K a year and require that the agents be rotated after a certain amount of time at one place, much like the military. People with Masters and Doctorates would be the ones in management and would be paid more because of that.

I'm not surprised at all. I know a few people that work for the government and some have advanced degrees and are not making nearly as much as they would if they were working for a corporation, but, they like what they do. It may sound like I'm belittling people who do not make a lot of money or have a degree, but, I'm not. I see it no different than being a doctor and the requirements they have to go through in order to work. It's THAT important that they have the training and education. I just don't see it currently with the TSA. I don't quite know how to put it, but, I want that TSA agent to be there because that individual is the right piece to the puzzle, not because they have the ability to fill out an application.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I have a problem with the default assumption that everyone flying is a possible terrorist.

Newsflash: they are.

And the painful naivety of denying that illustrates one of the biggest security challenges of all.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Newsflash: they are.

And the painful naivety of denying that illustrates one of the biggest security challenges of all.

Poor terminology on my part I guess - the vast, vast majority of fliers, probably 99.99% are not likely terrorist suspects.

[JediKooter]

Computer virus Stuxnet a 'game changer,' DHS official tells Senate - CNN.com

This is the stuff that is more dangerous than someone refusing to go through a body scanning machine.

[Matthean]

Bah! Site looks like a The Onion wanna be site, so link removed.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

Computer virus Stuxnet a 'game changer,' DHS official tells Senate - CNN.com

This is the stuff that is more dangerous than someone refusing to go through a body scanning machine.

SHUT DOWN THE INTERWEBZ!!!

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Underclothes That Display The 4th Amendment When X-Rayed by TSA

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Underclothes That Display The 4th Amendment When X-Rayed by TSA

That is damned cool I have to admit

[fantom1979]

That is pretty funny. I wonder if the TSA has seen anything like this yet.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

Shoot, right now, I'd be happy if someone touched my junk through my clothes.

Originally Posted by JediKooter

Hmmmm....I wonder if they'd be mad if I just kept going through the security check.

Jedi, is this you?

Man arrested after ejaculating during TSA pat-down : Dead Serious News

Man arrested after ejaculating during TSA pat-down

A 47 year old gay man was arrested at San Francisco International Airport after ejaculating while being patted down by a male TSA agent. Percy Cummings, an interior designer from San Francisco, is being held without bail after the alleged incident, charged with sexually assaulting a Federal agent.
According to Cummings’ partner, Sergio Armani, Cummings has “multiple piercings on his manhood” which were detected during a full body scan. As a result, Cummings was pulled aside for a pat-down. Armani stated that the unidentified TSA agent spent “an inordinate amount of time groping” Cummings, who had apparently become sexually aroused. Cummings, who has a history of sexual dysfunction, ejaculated while the TSA agent’s hand was feeling the piercings. The TSA agent, according to several witnesses, promptly called for back up. Cummings was thrown to the ground and handcuffed.
A TSA spokesperson declined to comment on this specific case, but said that anyone ejaculating during a pat-down would be subject to arrest.

[jeff061]

Lol.

Still though, I'm not following how any of this is his fault?

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

fake

[jeff061]

Heh, assumed so.

Clicking elsewhere on that sight confirms it.

[Tigercat]

The machines that are in use in most airports with new machines may not see that tshirt.

One of many misconceptions is that there is only one type of new imaging technology being used throughout the country and that it uses X-rays. There are two types, AIT machines and backscatter machines. AIT are the ones that are massively being rolled out. They use a form of radio wave technology, not X-rays. Backscatters are used in a few of our major US airports (and maybe a few small ones I don't know about?) and do use a form of X-ray technology.

[jeff061]

I was aware there were 2. Am not aware of why that matters. Beyond one of them(forget which) seeming to garner more health related concerns.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Jedi, is this you?

Man arrested after ejaculating during TSA pat-down : Dead Serious News

I'm not gay and I'm not 47.