A Peek At the National Opt-Out Day Numbers

Yesterday was a big travel day for Americans, and the organizers of National Opt-Out Day hoped to use it to highlight widespread, though not universal, dissatisfaction with stepped-up screening measures in US airports, by encouraging people selected for body screening to insist instead on the pat-down alternative. Reader Willtor writes with a story in the New York Times on the effect of the protest: "'39 people had opted out of the body scans in Atlanta by 5 p.m. In Los Angeles, 113 had. One had opted out in Charlotte, N.C. Boston seemed to have something of a mini-spike, with 300.' This is a tiny fraction of passengers, of course. But when I flew out of Boston this afternoon, they had opened a line that led to a traditional metal detector. When I flew out in June all lines went to the nudie scanners. Is it safe to be optimistic that we have been heard and policies have changed? I am not particularly concerned whether we get credit or whether it is reported that the protest fizzled. But it would be nice to know that some of the more invasive theatrics have become optional." According to its organizers, meanwhile, the opt-out protest was a "rousing success." If you traveled yesterday by air, what was your impression?

Comments

Seatac had scanners galore but weren't using them.

[Peganthyrus]

I didn't see anyone getting a pat-down, "enhanced" or otherwise. Just the same old shoes-on-the-xray-belt routine as always.

Entirely predictable.

[Oxford_Comma_Lover]

This was entirely predictable. It's not easy to convince people to let other people--strangers of the same gender--touch them intimately as a form of protest.

It was also predictable that the media would spin it as a failure.

In fact, it probably helped speed security clearances on one of the busiest travel days of the year, because the TSA planned for a larger disruption. At least, that is what I would do, to be safe, and I'd imagine they did it.

The major media covers the story by repeating the TSA talking point that the majority of Americans support the scans. They base this on a Washington Post/ABC poll: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_11222010.html?sid=ST2009122902788

I do think you'd get different numbers if you polled at the airport.

Re:Entirely predictable.

[anyGould]

Agreed - advertising a single "boycott day" sounds great on paper, but it makes it easy to control and spin.

This needs to be an "everyday" thing - "don't be an exhibitionist - avoid the scanners"

Re:Entirely predictable.

[cetialphav]

IMO part of the problem is that they positioned the protest wrong.

Actually, I think they did a pretty good job with this. This protest generated a lot of news stories about these scanners and that is a good thing. Without this protest, any stories about scanners would be filled with quotes from TSA officials about how much this makes us safe and their would be no counterpoint to this. The threat of a great disturbance on the busiest travel day of the year drove lots of stories with people that are critical of the scanners. It also forced the TSA to answer these criticisms in a highly publicized way. The press seems to sense that the TSA arguments seem week and this has led the press to be more skeptical of TSA claims. These are all good things.

Now whether this momentum will continue remains to be seen. I'm not too worried about the number of opt-out's for this day because there are tons of people who would be willing to protest, but happened to not be traveling on protest day. But if it gets into people's heads that it is okay to skip the scanner, then we will see a longer term trend of opt-outs and that will greatly undermine the TSA's position. It is going to take a long, concerted effort to inject some sanity into the TSA.

Re:Entirely predictable.

[Cimexus]

Mod parent up...this is exactly right.

I'm not an American, but my wife is. I therefore enter the US to visit family on a regular basis ... over 20 visits in the last decade. The first time I visited was in 2001, prior to 9/11. The change I have seen in US airports in that time is stunning.

I put up with the slower, more detailed bag x-rays. I put up with the taking your shoes off crap (that you don't have to do in any other country). I put up with the dudes at the immigration desk becoming far more threatening and suspicious and just downright rude.

I ... reluctantly ... put up with the fact that they took first one, then two, and now ALL TEN of my fingerprints on every entry. To put this in perspective, in my country, fingerprints are not used as a form of ID as they seem to be in the US. The only people who have their fingerprints recorded are criminals. So the only people on earth who have a record of my fingerprints are a FOREIGN government (not even my own government has them). Does that seem ridiculous to anyone else? But I digress...

But this year when I entered I had to go through the damn nudie scanners. Now I realised I could opt out, and I did. But as a foreigner, they really gave me the once over. Now let me clarify here - I'm Australian - I speak English, I'm white, I have no criminal record, and I in no way would be considered a 'high risk' profile. But they made it very clear that they didn't want scary foreigners like me opting out of the scanning. And frankly, next trip, I will just go through the damn scanner. The alternative took ten times longer and was far more invasive and left me with a bad impression of the US as a whole. I thought the fingerprinting was the final straw for me but no, this is ridiculous.

So yes, the TSA is terrifying. They make the alternatives to the scanner very unattractive due to the lost time and increased questioning. So people 'preferring the scanner' is not because the like the idea. It's just the lesser of two evils.

It's a real shame - I love visiting the US. For all it's flaws it's a fascinating country. But GETTING there is such an awful experience that I would never do it if not for the fact I have family there. The American tourism industry must REALLY be hurting, because everyone I talk to here says "oh I'd love to go to the US, but all that security and fingerprinting ... no thanks". They all go to Europe or Asia instead.

Re:The TSA has not changed policy

[IICV]

Yup, that's what I've been hearing - that the TSA is shutting down the naked people scanners today, presumably in order to deflate the number of people who opt-out of naked people scanning.

What I would really like to see is the number of people who went through the naked people scanners, as a percentage of the total number of passengers passing through airports today. If the TSA was purposefully shutting down the naked scanners in order to deflate the number of people who can object to going through them, then that sort of manipulation would show up in such a statistic.

Re:Get used to the Police State...

[larry bagina]

Senate confirmation doesn't prevent someone from being fired (cf Andrew Johnson, 17th President. Particularly his impeachment). John Pistole (TSA chief douchebag) or Janet Napolitano (DHS chief cunt) could stop them today. Barack Obama could stop them today (either by telling them to stop, or firing her cottage cheese ass for gross incompetence, or with an executive order).

Re:The TSA has not changed policy

[Abcd1234]

Yup, that's what I've been hearing - that the TSA is shutting down the naked people scanners today, presumably in order to deflate the number of people who opt-out of naked people scanning.

Actually, I strongly suspect it's because, let's face it, the scanners hurt overall passenger throughput, which would make a bad travel day absolutely horrendous.

Which, of course, is really quite ironic: during a period when you probably want real, functional security procedures the most (ie, when the most people are traveling), the TSA has to ratchet down their policies in order to handle the load...

Mine is:

[fyngyrz]

I've completely opted out of flying commercially since 2001. That's a protest that allows me to vote with my wallet. It has transferred tens of thousands of dollars away from the airlines, and I expect that trend to continue. In the interim, I've very much enjoyed driving about the nation, traveled internationally via cruise ship (though that is now beginning to suffer similar indignities as commercial passenger service), and learned that "luxury" train travel in the US appears to be something descended from Torquemada's collection of techniques.

The first car ride I took (that I can recall) was in 1959; like many American males, I've had a vibrant interest in cars since very early on. I've owned quite a number of them across the years. From that perspective, most of today's vehicles are amazingly well made, comfortable, handle extremely well, and are stupendously reliable - truly a joy for me to drive. That, combined with a lifelong passion for photography, and I have to say driving is something I've happily rediscovered over the last decade. Occasionally I rent a higher end vehicle that I would not normally have the opportunity to drive for a cross-country run; I can't even begin to tell you how much fun that can be if you actually enjoy driving. Large portions of the American west, particularly around the Rockies, still offer driving challenges worth taking on... it gets considerably more tedious, road-wise, as you get closer to the coasts (55 in what is essentially a supercar is kind of annoying), but on the other hand, the photo ops become quite numerous, so I sort of change objectives as I go.

I would suggest that if driving is an option you can consider, this is a much more effective -- and fun -- way to protest the approach taken by the government and the airlines. Like it or not, money is the longest, strongest lever you can apply in this society. Writing "TSA sucks" on yourself or going to the checkpoint in a kilt, sans underwear... these things don't really accomplish much, other than get you your ten minutes of infamy.

Re:Mine is:

[c6gunner]

It's not the airlines that are pushing for this shit. They can do trend-analysis just fine, too. If their numbers suddenly take a nosedive after the implementation of operation anal probe, you can bet your sphincter that they'll figure out the cause real fast.

They went about this the WRONG way.

[Khyber]

If they wanted to cause some issues and slowdowns, everybody flying should have been hiding metal and more all over their person.

Or everybody should have shown up with a large knife.

What's the TSA going to do, then?

Not much since they're sorely outnumbered.

Re:They went about this the WRONG way.

[Anonymous Coward]

They're "outnumbered" until they lock down the airport, shut down all the roads, and the tac teams show up. If you're talking about numbers, you'd better be armed with something better than a knife, because they'll have assault rifles and tear gas (and rubber ammunition if they're feeling generous).

Not smart, and not even a good idea, considering.

Better stunt

[Anonymous Coward]

Any time there's an opportunity to ask a someone in federal government a public interview question, ask: "Now that your government has first-hand knowledge of my genitals, how do you feel about their shape? Do you think about them at night? Do they satisfy you?" Expect to get thrown out, but convince enough people to do it and the media would have a field day.

Re:The TSA has not changed policy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I was all set to opt-out on Wednesday but they just sent me through the regular metal detector like they used to before this whole mess started. Opt-out numbers aren't so meaningful if you don't even have the chance to opt-out.

Re:It's worse.

[fnj]

OK, the thugs in charge of the US want to create an estranged and disenfranchised domestic enemy for some strategic purpose. They will get it. I just hope it surprises them, exceeds their plans, takes them by the throat, strangles them all and kicks the gang of thugs into the sewer where they belong.

Re:Why do I care?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about this, fly clothed but every person has a knife at their disposal. Now tell me what could one or two terrorists do with their knives when faced with 150 others also armed with knives? AND keep in mind, the cockpit is locked.

Re:Well played, TSA, well played

[Apuleius]

By turning the scanners off, they tacitly admitted that the public's discontent is a bigger issue than Al Qaeda.

Now we just have to make them say it outright.

Cut to the chase

[roman_mir]

Let's cut to the chase already.

What they really want is for every house to have a scanner like that on the entrance, so you are scanned and/or patted down every time you enter and exit your house and every other building (and of-course every mode of transportation as well, including the buses, planes, trains and automobiles, yachts and ships and dirigibles and even you bikes.)

This is actually very amusing to me, as I was born in the USSR and one of our best satirists ever (Zhvanetsky) had a few monologues, where he described the soviet experiences in a half-imaginary way

Here is one of the monologues (my translation):

As usually, you are going somewhere, the face as usually is facing forward; The back of the head has no clue.
All of a sudden from behind:
- Continue moving!
- I am continuing.
- So go as you are going.
- I am going as I am going.
- Take a little to the right.
- Will take... taking.
- Don't talk!
- I am silent.
- Stand there, don't look back!
- Standing. Not looking. Letting something pass on the left. What is that behind me?
- DO NOT LOOK BACK!
- Not looking.
- OK, you are free to go!
- Yes, I am free!

here is another one, please don't get on my case for the translation style, it's difficult to translate something well anyway, and to make it even remotely funny while doing so is just ... very hard and I was trying to keep to the way the monologue was read, which was with leaving many of the necessary verbs out of the text on purpose, to create an 'air' of the idea that not every word needs to be spelled out for the listener.

Turnstiles.

At the end of every street need to set up turnstiles. Obviously, you can walk this and that way, as much as you want, but this is pure lack of responsibility - going wherever you want. So at the end of each street set up the turnstiles. Nothing special. They should let everybody through for now without any questions. Don't be afraid. Only the ricketting noise lets you know... And the security guards with sleeve insignia. Let them stand there and let everybody through. For now. Just their presense, just the steel stare... You are coming towards them - the face is burning up, you pass them - you back is burning up. And they are not asking anything... yet. This is the entire effect. And it's increasing the discipling. And at any moment you can lock everything up. Those with special commands have access to any house, etc.

By the perimeter of the plaza - until the security checkpoint. A man is walking along the fence, with the hands moving over the fence. Let's suppose three, four times he moves the hands over the fence - and into the security checkpoint, where NOBODY is stopping him, though the security guards are standing there of-course. Special paint on the fence, easy to check the fingerprints, this and that, etc. My god, nobody REALLY will be taking the fingerprints off the fence, don't worry about it. But in case there is some emergency... the fingerprints are right there and what are you going to do? For now of-course, let them go through without showing any papers. Though to have the papers on your person, that's for sure, just in case they mustc check, some emergency, etc. So obviously as you are coming closer towards the guard there, you already want to show something. To come through without showing - that's only to be suffering in doubt. In time you won't mind any of the checks. It will be a shame to walk around unchecked. All the more so - to come of a sudden and somewhere, as you do now. Or to yell - "my house is my castle" - that's just from internal immorality.

But IN the corridors you don't need to put security guards. For now. You have to start at the entrance, of-co

Re:Seatac had scanners galore but weren't using th

[itwerx]

Seatac is one of the few airports with TSA staff who have a reasonably sane approach to this BS. I've had two positive interactions with them recently.
      First was my young daughter being selected randomly for one of their more extreme searches. The TSA staffer who was on point for those clearly wasn't happy but grimaced and waved her over, ready to follow the rules no matter how insane. An apparently higher ranking TSA person stopped him though saying quietly, "C'mon, it's a little girl", with a bit of a look that made it clear she thought he was being a moron.
      The other time, also recent, we had forgotten we had some bottled water in the bottom of one of our backpacks and they found it at the x-ray machine. No problem though, they just examined it fairly closely and then let it pass.

Re:Missing data

[aclarke]

Yeah. I live in Canada and will no longer travel to the US if I can at all avoid it. I'm actually going to a conference in Edinburgh instead of Dallas, TX in a couple months, in large part to avoid the US. It will cost me less and be more fun too. Citizens of most countries (Canada included) seem hell-bent on bending over and letting our governments shaft us, but as in most things, America seems to be leading the way.

My experience at BOS

[BillX]

It was going to be grand. I had worn my nicest boxers, with a button-fly to ensure no actual laws would be violated, even accidentally (giving a valid reason to jail me). No belt, loose-fitting jeans. When the man asked to to step into the scanner, I would politely accept, step inside and, when his back was turned, drop 'em.

"Oh-h say can you SEE, by the dawn's early LIGHT!..."

Amid the lengthy mouse-maze queue of holiday travelers, a few lightbulbs would come on as the irony began to sink in. Nervous TSA officials would move in. Maybe they'd react, pulling me aside by force, ordering me to shut my face and put my pants back on. Maybe I'd get through the whole thing before being tased into submisison.

"In the land of the FREE, and the home of the BRAVE!..." *dzzt!* *thud*

What really happened:

My gf and I show up at the Logan Airport security checkpoint. It was a ghost town. We present our boarding passes (not IDs); I swear I see a tumbleweed blow by. Every TSA lane is staffed, but where are the passengers? There are exactly two travelers ahead of us, in separate lanes, and nobody behind. They're gone by the time we get our shoes off and all our crap onto the conveyer. Dropping my pants for a handful of screeners and zero travelers suddenly doesn't seem worthwhile any more.

  My gf (who is not particularly bothered by the body scan) steps into the scanner, and I get waved through the metal detector, despite there being two other open scanners and nobody behind us in line. Cheery TSA guy at the metal detector says he likes my t-shirt. If I was a bad guy, you'd have seen it on the news already, because this "screen" was a complete joke. Afterward, I realized I was so busy contemplating my own "security theater" performance that I left my laptop in its case inside my backpack. They didn't care. My gf had separately forgotten to unpack her big bag o' liquids. They didn't care.

Conclusions:
TSA's "solution" to both the holiday crush and the potential protests was to drop the theater act and just let everyone sail on through. To me, this speaks volumes about both their perceived effectiveness and value of the new "enhanced" security processes. I can't say to what extent the potential for protests was a factor in this, but if it was, this was a doubly-brilliant move on the part of the TSA. The best way to stop a protest cold is to take away its audience, and that is exactly what happened here. Meanwhile, everyday sheep travelers are probably marveling at how painless the process was today - on the busiest travel day of the year! - and making associations between this and the new body scanner procedure. Well played, TSA, well played.