Slashdot Mirror
US Congress Tries To Cut Body Scanner Funding
OverTheGeicoE writes "The Electronic Privacy Information Center reports that the US House of Representatives is trying to cut funding for new airport body scanners from next year's budget. This would prevent the TSA from installing 275 new scanners in airports in FY 2012, at a cost of $76 million."
I'm contacting my representatives offices tonight to ask that they support this. If you can't beat them with logic and reason, beat them with funding.
Why don't they do the RIGHT thing and DISMANTLE the god damn TSA?
I see no problem with this. Then again I always believed that behavior profiling is a better method of screening anyway. It's very hard to train yourself to not set off behavioral queues for evasion, and so on, unless you've had a head injury that screws everything up.
Om, nomnomnom...
I hate those machines. I travel a lot, and I'm worried that (1) the radiation levels are higher than the manufacturer claims, and (2) it does nothing to protect us from terrorism.
Machines can only go so far. You have to have intelligent, well trained and highly motivated people on the scene.
A friend who was traveling in China recently told me that when he went through airport security there, it felt like he was in a modern, free country. Then when he came back to American airports, it felt like he was in a backward dictatorship.
The fact that they won't let us bring a 4 oz. or 6oz. yogurt, or a bottle of pure water, or a tube of what is obviously toothpaste, does not make us safer. It inconveniences us. I love yogurt and it's ridiculous that it can't be carried through security. Go ahead, open it, sniff it. It's milk, not nitroglycerine, or a binary explosive. Water is water. Toothpaste is toothpaste.
I also miss traveling with my little flat Swiss card which contains a one inch knife and a scissors and a tweezers. It was so convenient and I used it all the time. They confiscated the knife twice, because I forgot to remove it from my backpack before traveling. So I just stopped carrying it at all.
They blanket ban these things because they don't trust their employees to be intelligent enough to recognize the difference between a dangerous weapon and a bottle of shampoo or Coke. We're not safer, we're just angrier and hungrier as a result.
Ok I'm getting off my soap box now :(
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
A few Congressmen will make get a lot of press for this--defending our rights, standing up against the TSA for the common man, etc. Then at the end of the day, they'll back down and nothing will ever come of it. It's just to get themselves some positive press. They have no intention of really accomplishing anything.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The market really should decide. Some people want to feel safe, so if people are willing to pay to board a flight that has been screened, then the service should be available. But if people want to board a plane with no screening, that should also be available to them.
That is the best idea I've heard in a long time. Plus, you can make the screened flight cost extra! Just how much is "safety" worth to those people?
The obvious counterargument to this is that even "unsafe" planes can be made to fly into buildings, and I'm not even a big fan of a lot of these TSA measures.
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
The headline here was written by someone who either doesn't understand the process or was being sloppy. Congress as a whole isn't trying to cut scanner funding. Republicans in the House of Representatives -- just one house of Congress -- are trying to cut funding. Even if it passes the House, it won't pass in the Senate. And Obama wouldn't sign it if it DID pass both houses of Congress. But on the basis issue of accuracy, it's wrong. "Congress" isn't trying to do anything at this point on this issue.
Yes? Do you have a point that everyone doesn't know already? We also know that the scanners are useless. Being expensive and useless, is it wrong to try to save money?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Not if it's impossible to enter the pilot compartment from the passenger compartment.
That is all.
ouse Republicans are doing this to save money. They don't give a damn about privacy or the Fourth Amendment, the porn scanners are bad because they cost money.
You've got half the answer: they're bad because they cost money and they do not contribute to safety. If there were any evidence at all, or even particularly reasonable assumptions, that these things are an important improvement in safety, these Republicans would certainly not be spending their time, effort & political capital trying to shut them down.
Dogs ARE better, but they don't have lobbyists. More money to be made selling a tech solution. Therefore we ended up with the most expensive solution, not the best.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
A friend who was traveling in China recently told me that when he went through airport security there, it felt like he was in a modern, free country. Then when he came back to American airports, it felt like he was in a backward dictatorship.
I went to Canada a few years ago. The Canadian customs officer I spoke to on the way in was friendly, polite, and asked me a few intelligent questions about my business there, and then waved me through. Coming back I was greeted by a squad of armed surly guards that were dressed like they were extras from the movie 'Brazil'. They were far more concerned with my 'papers' than anything else, and were even less friendly when I didn't have my passport with me. It was double plus ungood.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
It's about time that Congress started overseeing this program. After standing in line for 50 minutes today at DFW going through security I can attest
at what a failure this whole program has been. Huge lines, angry passengers, inappropriate touching and civil rights violations all in the vain attempt to make people feel safe.
After I finally got past the ID/Boarding Pass Check what did they do? They deferred me through the Metal Detector instead of the Backscatter device. There were already three people in line for the Backscatter screening.
I'm sorry, this is one program that
a) It hasn't been proven safe. Scientists have called for an independent study and one hasn't been done. We're taking huge risks with people's health here by not doing the proper checks and analysis.
b) It hasn't been proven to stop anything. The TSA is always looking for "the last attack." Like taking off your shoes. Humm, after Richard Reid, has anybody tried attacking us with shoes except that incident with George W. Bush in Iraq a few years ago?
c) It delays people traveling through airports. You may as well stop everybody in line and ask them 20 questions ala the "Bridge Keeper" "What is your name? What is your Quest..."
d) Give up already, if all you want to do is give me a weekly proctology and rectal exam, fine just make sure you check the oil at the same time and I have these corns on my feet from standing in TSA lines I'd like you to look at as well. Just do the pat downs on everybody. That way everybody gets the sensation of the back of a hand in a rubber glove.
e) Stop with the gizmo widget fantasies. I'm sorry Secy. Napolitano was out of line for ordering these things to begin with and shame on congress for giving them the money, or were they funded out the the ARRA $787Billion?
I travel through airports every week and the lamest thing of all? Your Congressmen and Senators don't go through any of that. They have private entrances, they get VIP treatment. They need to go through the same hassles, stand in the same lines and deal with the same rubber gloves all without their special VIP identification. I'm sure if Al Franken or Kay Bailey Hutchinson had to go through this shit there would be some changes!
I saw people freak out today because they missed their flights, I saw airline counter agents have to work and rebook people and re-route them all in the name of making them safe when they fly. Bullshit! There's probably a higher probability that a Canadian Goose will down my plane than a terrorist.
Congress needs to step up and do the right thing here and step in where these retards at DHS have clearly overstepped their bounds.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
If they're trying to save money, they're looking in the wrong place. $76 million is a pittance. It's 1% of TSA's budget and .002% of the overall budget..
And, when you consider the number of terrorists they've caught with them, you can calculate the reasonable cost per terrorist caught to determine how economical these are for each terrorist captured: OK, $75,000,000 divided by 0 terrorists cost = *%^# stupid calculator must not be working right, keeps coming up with some weird error message.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.