Slashdot Mirror
Airport Screeners could see X-rated X-rays
AdamBomb writes "Think airport security is bad enough already? Well, the Department of Homeland Security is now planning on rolling out new machines that will allow screeners to actually see through clothing. Could be bad news, though privacy advocates are obviously fighting it."
Most bad government has grown out of too much government.-Thomas Jefferson Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
Choosing the lesser of two evils is a choice for evil.
The human in me thinks this is a twisted invasion of privacy , the man side thinks woo naked chicks sweet job. .I know its wrong and a body is just a body but that is still not a belive that everyone shares and people have issues about this.
However the human side wins out here , this is totaly unacceptable . they will have to have seperat entrances for men and woman as people are uncomfy with a member of th oposite sex seeing them in the all together(not everyone mind you)
If i want sweaty security gaurds seeing me in the buff i will get a website for it , I don't want to have this foist upon me by over zelous national security.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
If you've got nothing to hide, may I see you naked?
No?
How about if I screen you every time you walk through my front door with something that allows me to see you essentially naked, no matter what you feel about that?
Forget asking nicely, get fucking naked, now. I need to make sure you're not carrying anything like a nail file, or a pen.
This falls on the "acceptable security" side for me.
That's great. Meanwhile, the rest of us are trying to enjoy what rights we have left, ok?
Do you think that matters? When my cute neighbor walks naked through her apartment I don't mind starring despite the fact that the view is shitty thanks to the blinds being half closed. ;)
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
This falls on the "acceptable security" side for me.
What then would be unacceptable?
It is thinking like this that would amount to a slippery slope when it comes to fighting the great (and greater) govt.
So today it is more intrusive searches on 100% of all passengers for the sake of reducing body cavity searches for that unfortunate few, does that mean that tomorrow it'll be ok to have cameras in every single home just because "some home is harbouring terrorists"?
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!
Do you know how many websites there are that are exclusive content for mature women, or grandpa's fucking? You might not like the scooer mom, but check out how many MILF websites there are. Lots of people like these 30-50 year old women in pantyhose.
Don't be suprised if these x-ray naked pictures make it to the web. If someone can steal Star Wars Revenge of the Sith, before it made it to theaters, then someone will get these pics on the web.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
"It shows nipples. It shows the clear outline of genitals."
I personally don't care if it goes as far as to show nipples. It's already bad enough if it allows you to see through clothes that people specifically put on to cover body parts they're not willing to show in public.
By that definition, I don't even want them to see through my watch. If they really want to have a look, let them come and ask me to take it off. They already do that with shoes, belts, jackets, hats and whatnot, what's the problem with that?
I'm a frequent flyer and I'm already pissed with the current security measures. They should make those more efficient before thinking on implementing new equipment under the same, flawed policies.
- Otaku no naka no otaku, otaking da!!!
Hmm what keeps someone from storing plastic explosive up their a$$ ? Releaving themselves of it once they get on the plane... Maybe everyone should have full cavity searches before entering the plane... I mean why not, whats a little cavity search when your securtiy is at stake.
What keeps people from filling the metal tubes of their cary on luggage (shoes anyone ?) with explosive, pointy weapons. Lets outlaw any metal framed carry on luggage!!!
There are lots of ways around this and so the advantage is minimal, and the disadvantage is screeners seeing your wife/girlfriend/daughter naked...
No thanks. I take my chances driving on the highway, which is more dangerous than a plane trip, I think we are more than safe enough. Thanks but no thanks.
Im not here now... Im out KILLING pepperoni
If they want to see my hairy ass for five secons, that's fine with me. Just don't ask me to take off my fucking jacket and shoes and go through the metal detector three times.
I don't even perceive this as invasion of privacy. If airlines (or TSA) were smart, they'd run both "old fashioned" and "X-ray" things in parallel. X-ray line would move much faster, so people would be going there even though this means showing someone their hairy asses.
"let anyone who's proven his or her ability and willingness to train to carry a weapon aboard an aircraft do so."
Guns + Planes = Cabin depressurisation
Specialised weapons are required for planes. So letting every dirty Harry wanabee to take a gun on board is hardly sensible.
How do you tell who is a terrorist and who are the "good people". Better to get rid of all the guns. That is why I feel safer in the UK.
My little Linux and tech blog
Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.
--Abraham Lincoln
Quack, quack.
Guns + Planes = Cabin depressurisation
Guess again.
Hollywood isn't very big on getting the physics right. If you put a bullet through an airplane window, people do not get sucked out to plummet to their deaths.
So letting every dirty Harry wanabee to take a gun on board is hardly sensible.
I think you missed where I mentioned that one should have to qualify to carry a concealed weapon on an aircraft.
How do you tell who is a terrorist and who are the "good people".
You can't, that's the point: If you try to disarm everyone, you lose, since the bad people won't comply. When that asshole shot up the train on Long Island in the mid 1990's, he was able to reload twice before the passengers on the train realized he wasn't going to stop, and jumped him. When someone goes berserk like that, the thing you need the most is a rational person with his own weapon, who is prepared to use it.
Better to get rid of all the guns.
Better still to simply rewrite the laws of physics so that firearms aren't lethal, but that's not going to happen either.
That is why I feel safer in the UK.
Do a bit of research: Ever since your government made your local criminal element quite certain that you're unable to defend yourself, crime in the UK is way up.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
the terrorist only have to pull of a scam and inpersonate an peace officers to get arms onboard and hi-jack a plane.
They can do that already.
I will also point out, that if a terrorist succeeds in getting a firearm aboard an aircraft, the chances of there being an Air Marshall on the flight are very slim, unless it happens to be an El Al flight.
Israel actually spends the money to protect each and every flight, since they're actually interested in security, not just the appearance of doing something.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Airline security is so strange. No metal cutlery, no pen knives, nothing vaguely weapon-like in hyour hand luggage, advanced scanner technology everywhere on boarding.
But can I take these four bottles of duty-free vodka which can be turned into extremely sharp weapons in about five seconds in my hand luggage? Of course you can sir.
How in the living fuck did the parent get modded Funny? Insightful? Interesting? Depressing and angry-making beyond belief? All yes. Fucking funny?
/rant
Some points to consider:
1) It's true, sheeple - IIRC, the majority of (all?) examples given are actually real.
2) Given it's true, it's a fucking disgrace. It's cause for armed rebellion in the streets, not a few confortable chuckles.
I always avoid content-free posts from people carping about the moderation system, but Jesus Fucking Christ on a crutch.
Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
Just because it's another guy who's looking at me, doesn't mean it's OKAY. Some people may be very uncomfortable with their body. Why should they have to get naked every time they go on a flight?
...I'm fine with that. Better still, how about enforced nakedness on the plane? ... Or I store the plastic explosive up my arse/ass?
Technology's not the answer. The USA not behaving in a way which leads people to hate it so much that they're willing to die for the cause IS.
Releaving themselves of it once they get on the plane...
WTF... why is holding a stinky bomb in your hand better than having it stuck up your ass? (I mean, not that I want it up my ass)
Unless it is a hijack not a suicide bombing...
bah, planes suck.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Look, I've already been subjected to the security gropefest a couple times. I'd take the X-ray *any* day over that. In my mind, this is a restoration of some of my rights ... I don't have to worry about being fondled.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Ah.. this is the classic "do something really really bad so you can do the lesser bad with people applauding you for it" system.
It's people like you who let this happen.
You say 'However, turning down a scan you would probably get a strip search'
Did you ask what your options were, or did you meekly walk into the mmw radar unit ?
As for the gender issue, how do you know the person looking at you naked is not gay? How do you know they are NOT getting a sexual kick from this ? How does that possibility make you feel?
Before you stepped into this thing, did you find out what the long term and medium term effects of millimeter wave radar are ? Are you aware of any public studies that verify the safety of these scans on humans ?
Or did you meekly go the way the shepherd told you to ?
Furrfu!
To the best of my knowledge, there are no independant studies verifying the safety of these devices for regular scanning.
;)
As far as I know, pregnent women may opt to NOT go through the trial devices at heathrow. This to me implies that there is a level of risk involved that I am not prepared to accept.
There are also no clear guidelines on vetting the staff that will use these. Sure, you can only scan people of the same sex, but that doesn't exclude homosexual screeners. The whole point of same-sex screeners is to remove any sexual element from the scan, but it doesn't do that at all.
And let's not forget the 'Think of the children' angle of course
I guess this is just one more reason for me to keep my foreign investment out of the USA and take it somewhwere else. This does completely fuck up my 30th birthday plans of course, but I'll find somewhere else to go.
It is not always a case of being meek, It is more of choosing the lesser of inconvenience. Air travel is stressful enough without having to annoy the security guards. So you say no. The chance they will go carry on then is very slim. You will most likely at least put aside so the so the guards manager can come in and determine the next step. That and the number of people behind you that you are inconveniencing who will be pissed off at you thus making your trip that much more miserable. Except for all this extra security in the airport. Why not make the door for the airplane pilot bullet proof and locked from the inside. That alone would have stopped 9-11. Secondly armed guards should be on all public plains in case of crazy guy trying to kill everyone. 3rd to improve security make the seats a little bigger and make sure the people who are traveling are comfortable so you get less of the crazy non-terrorest people who are so fed up about the trip they get violent.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Innocent man herby defined as man who waited up in order to shoot a fleeing criminal in the back.
I guess there's a reason in the US that the postman doesn't walk up the drive.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
Why not make the door for the airplane pilot bullet proof and locked from the inside. That alone would have stopped 9-11
You don't really think that do you? Seriously, there's traffic between the cockpit and the cabin all the time - so there has to be a communications link
How many people that you really want flying an airplane would be able to handle the execution of dozens or (on large planes) hudreds of people? How many eight year old girls would it have to have their throats cut before you or anyone else opened the door?
Sure, it might be the best thing for the country to prevent the hijacking of a plane like that - but the country and any victims in question are far away and poorly defined in our minds. The little girl with a razor blade to her throat standing in a pool of her fathers blood is right outside the door.
I'm not sure I'd want to be able to condem her to death to save the aircraft. I'm not sure I'd want someone with that level of detachment flying my plane.
This is hard stuff - and no simple solution is going to solve it.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
Besides which, the golden age of hijacking planes is now over. No group of passengers or crew is going to allow it anymore. Pull any shit on a plane and you'll get your ass tackled by every person on the plane. If they somehow still succeed, the government will have no problem blowing a civilian aircraft out of the sky now that they know what their alternatives are. I got even money on any single fighter pilot being able to pull the trigger on civilians, which is one of the reasons they scramble two.
The more I see stuff like this, the more I'm inclined to believe that no one in the government has any idea how to actually keep its citizens safe. I'm think that this, like many other "security measures" since 9/11, is a placebo designed soley to comfort an ignorant population by making them think that someone is actually doing something useful. Certainly a naked X-ray is a much more comforting thought than is the idea that you could be on the receiving end of an air-to-air missile if someone does actually succeed in hijacking your plane...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Ok, so you keep her from having her throat slit so that she can survive to die in burning horror as the Hijacker crashes the plane into a target of opportunity? How is this doing anyone a favor.
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
It's not your "right" to get on the plane. It's very simple. If you want to get on it, you agree to comply by the screening rules. Your rights are not being taken away here, you don't have to fly if it's that big of a deal for you.
Do a bit of research: Ever since your government made your local criminal element quite certain that you're unable to defend yourself, crime in the UK is way up.
Go read the CIA world fact book on crime numbers, especially those like robery and (attempted) murder for the USA and for example the UK, you may be in for a surprise.
The reasoning you follow sounds oh so logical and is used a lot by proponents of 'the rights to bear arms', but it has one simple flaw that seems to rather be confirmed:
More guns means more people get killed by them, no matter who have the guns, it ALWAYS results in more people getting killed. It is people who do this and not the guns, but the guns enable it.
I see, so because you don't want to take a fucking cruise ship, suddenly it's your right to fly on planes with no security measures?
Today folks, we will learn about a clause of this great document that says, more or less, you have many, many rights, and that it doesn't have to be listed in the Constitution or some other document for it to be a right. That's correct, it does not have to be listed, to be a right.
One example, plucked right out of the air (pun intended), is the right to travel freely. You don't have to present documents or internal passports to move within the US.
So, not do you only have the right to fly, technically, it is a violation of your rights to make you present identification.
But it gets better. You have the right to enter into contracts as you see fit, as an adult, but not into contracts that violate any of your rights... you can't sell yourself into slavery. One example of a contract you can enter into is paying $500 to fly to some city on the other side of the country. An example of a contract that is invalid, giving up your right to very intimate privacy such as revealing your nipples and buttcrack to a airport screener in return for being allowed to board.
you don't have to fly if it's that big of a deal for you.
Maybe he does have to fly. I can think of any number of contrived scenarios where there is no other option, really. Some quite plausible. A parent is dying on the other coast, and you only have a few hours left. Rocketcar Taxi Services is out of business for breaking speed laws...
But it does not matter. It could be the shallowest reason, or no reason at all. The entire point of having rights, is that you don't need to ask for permission to exercise them, or justify their use. And even if we're going to get into tired arguments about abuse of rights, if such a thing is possible, not wanting to be digitally undressed by a TSA mouthbreather just to go on a trip is not one of them.
Wow, our tax dollars at work. They should all be fired, especially for the "we're sorry, but we have to follow procedures" part.
How many of these have to happen, how often, before Mullah Jihadster can slip right through because they are wasting time checking toddlers for C4?
You're making sweeping generalizations here. I can think of some that are commonly made about Mexico and its citizens that you would probably refute as well.
The odds passengers being killed by a vigilante is way lower than being killed by a terrorist. Essentially, it's clear that terrorists intend to kill and are not bargaining with anyone. This makes it about a 100% chance that someone will be killed when terrorists attack
Except the probability that terrorists are on a given plane is extremely small, where as every plane would have a large number of armed people on board.
Even if we accepted that the situation would always be better off with armed people, in the case of a terrorist attack, you have to factor in the possibility of injury or death, due to anything from accidental firing, a paranoid "vigilante" who mistakenly thinks someone is a terrorist, or people who cause trouble or get into fights (just because a person isn't someone we would consider a "criminal" doesn't mean they're not some random nutter, or never turn angry and start a fight or whatever).
I can't say which situation would be worse, but then neither can you. You have to look at what will happen on any flight, not just flights with terrorists on board. Personally I'd rather risk it with no guns.
It is my choice to make those areas private. If I don't want you or anyone else seeing those parts that is the end of the discussion as far as I am concerned. This constitutes a violation of your basic human rights. I choose to not let you see this. PERIOD. Who cares what societal norms are. Even if nudity is more or less accepted if I choose to not be nude that is my choice. Its a pretty simple case to me. You could even argue that this violates your fourth amendment rights (unreasonable searches and seizures).
Jeremy
My 2 year old son gets flagged as a suspect
Well, of course not picking on your 2 y.o. son with a one way ticket and instead picking on a 20 y.o. man with a one way ticket would be discriminatory. Thank your local ACLU chapter for the treatment your received. Instead of profiling suspicious characters, the screeners have to pick on everyone, even if 2 y.o. or 90 y.o. or they'll be in serious trouble. If they hadn't done picked on your child, they'd have been fired.
I don't think any healthy person has anything to hide. But...
For all those who've had major surgery, wear adult diapers, colostomy bags, have stomas, preoperative transexuals, hemaphrodites and other private matters of which they may not want their travelling companions or the minumum wage "security" guard at the airport to know about, I can see some good reason to be concerned about their privacy.
Doctors take oaths and take patient privacy seriously. Airport security?
And there's nothing to stop a suicidal nutcase from packing their chest cavity with explosives. Should this be a full x-ray?
If this goes anywhere, I bet the company selling this junk has some relationship with a politician.
Wow, how did you get it into your mind that the only alternative to a strip search, is a pat-down? I'd rather take my chances with just the metal detector.
For example I shudder when I see the huge snaking queues caused by heightened security at most airports. It would be absolutely trivial to take out a hundred people and severely injure several hundred more in any major US airport. How so? Wait for some popular holiday (e.g. this weekend) and walk in the front door with a suitcase full of high explosives and nails. Then locate the huge winding security line and detonate the bomb.
Once that becomes ineffective, shift to other venues where people gather - malls, cinemas, concerts, nightclubs etc.
Typical neocon bullshit ... hell, it's not even neocon, it's right out of the reagan playbook.
"Look, I have to abridge everyone's rights, the ACLU made me do it. So strip, grandma, so we can all be safe."
You're either a cretinous Fox News slave or you're knowingly mendacious. Either way, fuck you. I've become a permanent member of the ACLU along with other whining pansies like Bob Barr and Dick Armey.
I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
Sir, the airline doesn't make these rules. They are mandated rules by the Federal government. So, no, another airline could not present with an alternative scenario in which your privacy is not invaded. They all have to do it because a corrupt government says so. As we must repeat incessentantly, lest anyone notice a problem with the statement, after 9/11 everything changed. That's right: Everything. Nothing is the same and so be forced to give up your privacy to travel freely in this country is perfectally acceptable. Pay no attention to the list of rights enumerated on the country's Constitutional document. These are not the droids you are looking for.
I'm sure most people would. It's not like they're going to X-Ray only the people who would have been strip searched though, they're doing it to everyone. Maybe if they only did this to people who failed at the metal detector and/or did something else to spook security then they would be subjected to the X-Ray people might have fewer problems with it.
Why not make the door for the airplane pilot bullet proof and locked from the inside... Secondly armed guards should be on all public plains in case of crazy guy trying to kill everyone.
Funny, both these precautions are routine in El-Al flights. There was one El-Al hijacked plane. In 1968. Never since. And it has been tried, and foiled by these exact measures.
That said...
First, it costs.
Having a few highly trained armed guards in each and every flight... this isn't cheap. Now imagine you are a commercial American airline. Who would pay for that? Locking the door to the cockpit only works as long as people on both side of the door are willing to die - or see others die - to keep it closed. Now, imagine that was a prequisite to being hired as air crew in a commercial Americal airline. Would you find enough employees? How much extra would you need to pay to those you do find?
Second, security meausures in El-Al flights are even tighter than the new security routines in American flights since 9/11. The main difference is that El-Al security is free to focus on effectiveness as opposed to political correctness. This means that profiling is used heavily to achieve the same level of security with the minimal hassle.
I believe that for legal reasons, American security is barred from only giving the 3rd degree treatment to an angry-looking 25 year old Arab-descent man who has spent several years in Afganistan with no family in the USA, while ignoring a 70-year old grandmother flying with her grandchildren back to their parents from Disney world. The current solution is to give everyone the 3rd degree - so you see the man, the grandmother and her grandsons taking off their shoes together so some poor soul can sniff them for explosives.
In an Israeli airport, the grandmother would sail through security, while the man's luggage would go under a microscope while he is being thoroughly questioned to see if he really is what he claims to be. And before someone draws the racist card - when I flew from Athents to Israel in the late 70s, everyone went through the same 3rd degree, without any exceptions. And today, if you are a 25-year old WASP idealistic female who has spent the last 6 months volunteering in the occupied territories and is carrying some presents from her new found boyfriend there to his family back in Europe, she'd get the same 3rd degree. And it just might save her life, even if she's newly pregnant by him (what, you thought someone willing to blow up a plane full of innocent people would care? Guess again - this did happen).
At any rate, anyone who complains about how harsh the new security checks is should read the enraged accounts of people who raised too many "suspect" flags in an Israeli airport. The reason the country puts up with it is because it works, and the public is indifferent to the hardship suffered by a negligible fraction of mostly foreign passengers. You have to admire the fact the American people put up with this "equal mistreatment". Good for you, really. I just wonder how long you can keep it up. It is a horribly inefficient way of going about it.
I think it is great that once the Americans have been put in this awkward position, they are throwing technology (that is, money) at the problem. For example, see explosive sniffers are now standard, which saves a lot of "open your luggage, please". Having machines that see through clothes would be a great way to give everyone equal treatment while minimizing the hassle. As for privacy issues - even assuming the pictures are playboy-perfect (which they aren't), what exactly is the problem? Believe it or not, but we are all rather alike.
I predict you wouldn't even see whoever is looking at the pictures (for an additional $0.02, it would be a "she" for women and a "he" for men - there, feel better?). They'd be off at some booth to the side, so all you will experience is "stand here for a second, please... bzzzz... thank you, move along, nothing to see here".
You have the right to enter into contracts as you see fit, as an adult, but not into contracts that violate any of your rights... you can't sell yourself into slavery. This is, um, how to say this ....? I think the words "totally false" come into mind. Some rights are waivable. For instance, I have the right to a jury trial if I am accused of a crime. I can, however, plea bargain with the prosecutor and give up my right to a jury trial in exchange for a charge of a lesser offense. This happens all the time.
I have the right for police officers not to search me without probable cause. I can, of course, consent to a search for which there is probable cause.
I have the right to a jury trial in certain courts and certain jurisdictions for many civil actions; I can waive those rights (in many states) by signing a contract that requires that disputes be arbitrated.
Now, some things -- like your status as a free person -- are not waivable. Those rights are very few and far between.
Most personal rights, however, are very waivable. Including the one about people looking at your buttocks. Yes, folks, you heard it here first: a porn star's employment contract is enforceable, despite the U.S. Constitution!
The real reason the contract argument is drop-dead stupid is that there is no contract that requires me to subject myself to an invasive search. Take a look at the conditions of carriage -- see anything there saying they can see me naked? I didn't think so.
It's a federal regulation, not a contract. And that's why the privacy argument matters.
Read Bujold. Free (as in
Freedom is risk. It's that simple.
We should not be so afraid of risk that we are willing to give up freedom and privacy. We put up with greater risks every day and don't take such extreme precautions. We drive down the street in 2 ton weapons within feet of people we don't know. We go to work in buildings with hundreds of people we don't know. Risk is all around us. As a matter of fact, the entire US system of government is based on increased risk in favor of freedom.
Don't believe me?
A simple example is the basic idea that a person innocent until proven guilty. That assumption assures that more guilty people will go free than innocent people will go to jail. We, as a society agree we are willing to walk among dangerous criminals so that we do not endanger the freedom of individuals. Why is this any different? What are my chances of being involved in an attack on a plane? How much will this reduce that risk? Is it worth the loss in personal dignity? Wait till airport X ray photos end up on some fetish internet site. I say it's not worth it.
The whole risk for freedom idea also implies that we all share responsibility for our own safety and that of others. The people on the 9-11 flight that crashed in PA were right. They took matters into their own hands and did not rely on a protecting government, which is incapable of helping anyway, to save them. Their death, though completely tragic, was a victory & a wake up call. I can't say for sure how I would have acted before 911 but I am sure now.
The passengers on the other flights were told to stay calm and all would be OK. The thought being that they would be released by their captors or that they would be rescued. Both assumptions put the responsibility of their personal safety in someone else's hands.
Both are wrong.
Dunno how you'd hijack a plane with a freaking knife after 9-11.
What worries me far more than the terrorists is the continual erosion of civil rights that far too many seem happy enough about: A free society bent on cooperation has at most to worry about psychopathic freaks in the world; an oppressive state that curtails freedoms and imposes its will with increasing force breeds discontent and enemies.
Is it just me or is all this fear over security a sign that we are stuck in a vicious circle of paranoia that's becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy?
--Udo.
I'm amazed at the fact that people are so fearful of terrorists that they would allow this. The murder rate in America is between about 10,000 and 25,000 people. Even at the low number, each year about four times more Americans get murdered by fellow Americans than died in 9/11.
We don't allow ourselves to be randomly strip searched at the mall, in bars or before entering our cars, yet we're far more likely to be murdered in those places than on (or by) a plane. Why do we look at run-of-the-mill murder as something that we can't afford to give up our rights to prevent, but terrorism as something that is so fearful that almost anything is fair game.
I don't think I'm in a position to not travel on a plane, but I can still protest if they impliment this. I will find a non-metalic substance that's high contrast to one of these machines and I'll spell out the words "go fuck yourselves you nazi whores" on my chest or back, but under my shirt. The only people who will see it will be the screeners. I will continue to be completely cheerfull and cooperative in every other way. After they get finished looking at my cock and my ass cheeks with their machines, I dare those mother-fuckers to accuse me of being crude or mean to them.
TW
So you're one of those people who are relieved and dance in joy when gas falls from $2.60 back down to $2.49?
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
Heh, by the book. I believe they're really sorry, they were probably just minimum-wagers following a procedures list, any deviation from which would incure their PHB's wrath, whos's also just a little guy afraid of what would happen to his job if the MIB hear of said deviation.
What a sorry little world we live in. Who wants to hitch a ride outta here, the next spaceship is flying by next Thursday.
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
Nice troll, BTW.
Sure, I can stop every rapist too.
Ok, sure, I get to violate the rights of a lot of other people, and lock up lots of innocent people, but I can stop every rapist.
IMHO, Israel does the same thing, perhaps to a less extreme degree than my example.
Problem is, we have a society that predicates itself on treating people equally. We don't (or at least our ideals/constitution say we shouldn't) single out particular individuals for "special" treatment, good or bad - unless we have reliable information that this specific individual poses a significant risk.
Likewise, we'd rather let a few murderers go if getting every one of them requires locking up (or executing) innocent people too.
Look how many false "confessions" there are. You think airport screening is any different?
Issue is, that super invasive security measures at an airport will simply force those people to attack at another weak spot. You guys have done real well against the suicide bombers too huh? (Oh, I forgot, you are moving on and violating a whole lot of more people by putting up your "security" fence now...)
So, with enough loss of rights, privacy and drag-netting a lot of innocent people I can stop all crime too. However, I'd really rather not exist in such a society. It's only a matter of time till you yourself become one of the "suspects" and life really sucks then.
No thanks.
This is the real reason we have a government/republic that's designed with inefficiencies that are supposed to guarantee equal treatment of all individuals. (And yes, I know full well it's not actually that well done in practice - and it anguishes me on a regular basis...)
Cheers,
Greg
You know...I'm worried abit about all this X-Ray exposure...it isn't like this is a really SAFE technology. For someone that travels a lot, this could potentially be dangerous. I worked in radiology for awhile, and it is serious business. Are the going to outfit the TSA agents with full lead aprons? I prefer to only be irradiated when absolutely necessary for medical reasons....
Wonder when the first airport security cancer lawsuits will take place?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
while ignoring a 70-year old grandmother flying with her grandchildren back to their parents from Disney world.
In an Israeli airport, the grandmother would sail through security,
Sounds like a loophole to me.
Consider the grandmother who has had all of her children killed by the Israeli army and their home bulldozed. She is too old to work, her life and the lives of her grandchildren depended on the support of her now deceased kids. Without them, her grandchildren will probably end up on the Palestinian street and dead before they reach 20, she'll be dead in two years because she can no longer afford the treatment for her diabetes.
They've got motive and with the help of Hamas they've got the means and enough false id to pass as jewish. They can sail right through those profile-based security checks carrying enough sarin in mickey-mouse thermoses to kill everyone on that plane in minutes.
Profiling works by focusing your attention on people with certain characteristics and by necessity relaxes your attention on the people who don't fit the profile. As soon as your enemy figures out how to avoid your profile, his job gets 10x easier.
The government has no rights. None whatsoever. Absolutely not one right at all.
The government has only limited powers granted it by the people through the Constitution.
A fundamental misunderstanding of this issue is a common problem, apparently it is not taught well in general education. No one can make educated and rational decisions about the government if they do not understand this fundamental underlying concept.
If the People wish to limit the Government's actions, even in national defense, because of infringements on personal rights and liberties, it is the People's prerogative to do so.
Jim
Wouldn't this also increase the cancer rate over your lifetime if you travel alot too?
Because the purpose of these security measures isn't actually to make people safe, it is to make people feel safe and happy with government. Image matters more to Americans than does substance. The more of a pain in the ass they can make airport security, the greater your sacrifice, the more real the illusion and the safer Joe Sixpack feels and the more likely he is to vote for and go along with the current administration. Okay, so maybe I haven't hit the nail square on the head, but it is my best guess as to why it is being done so stupidly.
Even with no new measures, do you really think a 9-11 style hijacking could work again any time soon? IMO, if a terrorist pulls a box cutter, that guy is going to have a dozen passengers subduing him in nothing flat. (Didn't something like this happen to the "shoe bomber?" There would possibly be only minor injuries. The reason it worked before was that everyone expected to come out of it alive if they did nothing.
http://www.marxist.com/
Safety measures can't stop anyone that wants to hurt people. Even if you put a dozen arm guards in each plain, and have to go through every type of scanner.
If I was a terrorist, who could stop me from entering a plane, a bus, a supermarket, an underground parking lot and blowing up the building thus killing a lot of people? It is impossible to stop people if they want to hurt other people. The only way is to reduce the number of people that would want to hurt you.
A good strategy in order to achieve this is to:
- Stop killing people for oil.
- Stop supporting juntas in south america and Middle East.
- End the warmongering
- Stop funding extremists in the world. Most of the terrorist aattacks in the US were made by ppl that used to be funded by the us goverment a few years back (e.x. Talibans)
It's the buzzword effect. It turns off the parts of the brain responsible for critical analysis. "Terrorism" is probably the most powerful buzzword ever invented, edging out even "for the children".
... crap, I think I just invoked Godwin's Law :/
;)
As to relative odds, your chance of dying in an accident in your own home is far greater than your chance of being murdered (in your bed or elsewhere). So with safety in mind, lets ban individual houses, and all live in nice safe enclosures
As to your high-contrast message (an excellent idea! Do come back and let us know when you do it!) I suggest putting it square across your ass, so they're forced to take a good close look if they want to read it.
[Wondering if metallic "temporary tattoo" ink would work]
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
for underwear which has a high contrast on these things.... Maybe ceramic-composite plates similar to those used in certain types of body armor....
Honestly... This is fundamentally *bad* technology. If it can easily be manipulated, it is even worse technology.....
Honestly, we are setting ourselves up to be more vulnerable rather than less. A tightly organized terrorist group could cause *more* damage to the US using very little force than they could prior to Sept 11th. Consider the following scenario:
1) Terrorists engage in a large number of fake plots. Maybe leaving luggage stuffed with weights and paper in airport restrooms, giving annonymous tips about ships importing produce being contaminated with chemical and/or biological agents, etc. As a result air traffic is largely shut down in this country, as are produce imports.
2) Once people discover that these are all hoaxes, a real attack is set off somewhere. Security is either distracted or not taking it seriously. So the damage is greater. THis could be kept up for a while. Bear in mind that the goal of terrorism is to scare us into being manipulated. We are well on the way to giving them that.
What we need to do is focus on how to minimize the impact of attacks and then work carefully to find political ways to cut terrorists off from their support base. Prevention is less important than containment.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP