What happens when you refuse to pose for TSA or be sexually molested to fly.

Status
Not open for further replies.

jmsprovan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
2,192
Location
Alba
I'm done being nice about that point. Come up with something relevant or GTFO you damned troll.
Well the security measures won't be disappearing overnight, so it really is a decision between dealing with it or not flying.

Your point was to vote for politicians that are either opposed to or in favor of TSA's existence. You missed the point about daily accountability for TSA operations, of which there is none.
More bureaucracy is never a better alternative.

The majority of air travelers haven't been through the "enhanced screening" and most are only seasonal and probably are only getting their first look at the procedures that were only implemented a month ago. I'm not telling people what to think, they are seeing security, I see the infringing on my civil rights - the security argument is flawed because a dedicated jihadist won't be deterred by these security protocols so we end up having to pick either our right to be secure in our persons or our right to travel freely within our own nation.

Call me nuts, but I don't think that we should have to decide between two inalienable rights.
If there is one testament to the system working so far is that there have been no attempted hijackings or bombings of planes departing from within the US since 9/11.

That doesn't mean its perfect, though.

Gee, what a great attitude. Are you going to say "tough luck" when the TSA invades train stations, subway stations, bus stops,
the word i'm thinking of starts with an F, and ends with a G, can you fill in the blanks for me?

Unless there is a major shift in the technological level of the scanners, there is simply too many people using Trains, Subway and Buses to scan them all, it works for Air Travel because it is a relatively niche transport method with a relatively low footfall.

The majority of travelers are apathetic morons.
Most travellers care about getting to where they need to be and nothing else, travel is not fun even without security protocols so most people won't go actively looking for more things to make their travelling a worse experience.

Where did I read ... just because the majority agrees on something, that doesn't make it right. A century ago, the majority of people agreed that slavery was A-OK.
It would essentially take a revolution in the minds of travellers or a severe change in the mindset of politicians to make the status quo change, people whining on the internet this is not.
 

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
21,906
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 Nissan XTerra Off Road, 00 VFR800, 07 ST1300
Travelers are essentially having their trips held hostage, you either comply or TSA will hold you at security until you miss your flight, then send you away with an $11,000 fine. The problem is that most people don't have the spine to stand up to authority figures. See: Milgram.
 

jmsprovan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
2,192
Location
Alba
Travelers are essentially having their trips held hostage, you either comply or TSA will hold you at security until you miss your flight, then send you away with an $11,000 fine. The problem is that most people don't have the spine to stand up to authority figures. See: Milgram.
Flights are expensive and often important, unless they had lots of disposable income most people wouldn't consider being a whiteknight against authority a good tradeoff for a fine and a missed flight.

It may be obedience, but so is adhering to the speed limit and not shooting randoms in the street with your 2nd amendment right.
 

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
21,906
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 Nissan XTerra Off Road, 00 VFR800, 07 ST1300
Flights are expensive and often important, unless they had lots of disposable income most people wouldn't consider being a whiteknight against authority a good tradeoff for a fine and a missed flight.

It may be obedience, but so is adhering to the speed limit and not shooting randoms in the street with your 2nd amendment right.
Are you really that thick?
 

IceBone

Blue Wheel Hipster
DONOR
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
27,173
Location
Slovenistan
Car(s)
Audi A5 Quattro
Oh, come on, don't be gentle, where's the obligatory "If I wanted my own comeback, I'd have wiped it off your mum's face."?
 

mpicco

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,388
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
R19
If there is one testament to the system working so far is that there have been no attempted hijackings or bombings of planes departing from within the US since 9/11.
It's worthy to mention that no significant arrests of people who have been stopped at the security checkpoints as possible hijackers have been made either, if I recall correctly.
 

Quiky

Isn't really scary, honest
STAFF MEMBER
Joined
Aug 21, 1995
Messages
5,447
I have tried to clearly explain what I believe and the reasons why I have come to that conclusion; I have made every attempt to back up my opinion with outside sources.

I don't know what more you want from me, but I don't think that my behavior in this thread qualifies as trolling, and I'm a bit insulted by the accusation.
TSA is primarily staffed by a bunch of power-tripping slack-jawed underachievers who consistently fail to detect someone walking through their security checkpoints with hand grenades in their pockets because they are too busy groping old ladies and selecting uniformed military personnel returning from Iraq for additional security screenings.
There is a difference between posting facts, and claiming that we are too busy raping you to keep the flights secure. Keeping this simple: I've been through all the screening in multiple airports. They don't grope you. They don't rape you. They don't molest you. The full-body scans don't show your genitals. And the machines work.

TSOs are trained the same way, at every class. Nearly all of them follow the training, and perform their job correctly. Those few complaints you see about improper screening are due to human error-- where the operator/TSO screws up. The agency as a whole didn't fuck up-- that PERSON did.

There are over 28,000 flights per day in the United States. Lets say with 75% capacity on all those flights, we have 1.5 million people flying per DAY. Now how many problems do you see per day about TSOs? Taking a totally random number here, but say there were 1500 complaints that day about how people feel they were treated while going through a security checkpoint, and complained to the media. While that number sounds amazingly large, that represents a 0.01% problem rate with screenings. The actual rate of problems is much less than that, so don't take that as an official number.

So what is my point? You are taking the very FEW problems that occur and blowing them out of proportion.

Also, I'm going to call bullshit on this one:
TSA has no agency responsible for policing it's workforce and handling complaints. If you have a problem with local cops you can go to Internal Affairs, another police department (such as State Police if you have a problem with City Police) or the FBI.
WRONG.
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0644.shtm
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.
I will even quote it, JUST FOR YOU;
The Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties reviews and assesses information concerning abuses of civil rights, civil liberties, and profiling on the basis of race, ethnicity, or religion, by employees and officials of the Department of Homeland Security.
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0373.shtm
That is the primary agency under DHS, TSA has their own;
http://www.tsa.gov/research/civilrights/index.shtm

I originally wrote the above this morning, and after reading your additional postings today, my respect for you is gone. Calling us rapists and molesters is absolutely unacceptable. I will not reply to your deluded posts any further, and have placed you on my permanent ignore list on the forums.
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
There is a difference between posting facts, and claiming that we are too busy raping you to keep the flights secure. Keeping this simple: I've been through all the screening in multiple airports. They don't grope you. They don't rape you. They don't molest you.
When was your last flight? If it was before the end of October, you have not yet had a chance to experience the new procedures.

The full-body scans don't show your genitals.
Enough so that one could make a judgment on size.

And the machines work.
If, by "work", you mean that they accomplish the task if displaying hard-edged objects on your person, beneath your clothing, then, yes, they work.

However, I maintain that:

1. There are no transparent, legitimate research studies as to their medical effects (ie.: cancer, male sterilization, etc.) because the TSA won't allow it. Everyone should know, by now, to always err on the side of medical caution. You never assume that radiation is safe, simply because it's a small dose.

2. It may only be a crude facsimile, but it still violates my right to privacy from the government. The 4th Amendment doesn't just say no nudies, but, security against searching and seizing "houses, papers, and effects".

3. Someone willing to blow up a plane is willing to do it by blowing up their colon / stomach / empty-space-where-their-spleen-was / whatever. The scanners can do absolutely nothing to detect this. To what effect, then, to they "work"?

Calling us rapists and molesters is absolutely unacceptable.
Fair enough; "rapists" is extreme and incorrect. You are not raping anyone.

Molesters? Not so extreme.

U.S. Justice Department said:
Sexual Molestation: unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape. This includes sexual touching and fondling.
Sorry, but permission granted under the threat of extortion (change your mind and we'll fine you $11,000) and coercion (consent or you'll miss your flight) is not permission.
 

brydie76

Viva Las Clarksonistas!
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
3,053
Location
Australia
Car(s)
2012 Suzuki Swift Sport/Aprilia Sportcity 200
This thread went from a good discussion to just being pathetic. I think everybody needs to realise that arguing it on the internet is not going to change other people's minds, the rules, or anything else. All it does is make you angry and give you a bigger e-penis if you "win".

How about everybody agrees to at least tone it down, and agree to disagree, mmkay?

*insert obligatory group hug picture here*
 

wooflepoof

Watermelon Connoisseur
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
5,047
Location
Texas
Car(s)
Genesis Sedan 3.8
1. There are no transparent, legitimate research studies as to their medical effects (ie.: cancer, male sterilization, etc.) because the TSA won't allow it. Everyone should know, by now, to always err on the side of medical caution. You never assume that radiation is safe, simply because it's a small dose.
Yes you do, because we already understand how x-rays and other forms of radiation affect the body. They're no different just because they're coming from a machine you don't like. If the dosage is below harmful levels, its below harmful levels. This is the most idiotic of all the arguments I've heard and is no different from the people who whine about microwaves and cell phone radiation.
 

mpicco

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,388
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
R19
There are over 28,000 flights per day in the United States. Lets say with 75% capacity on all those flights, we have 1.5 million people flying per DAY. Now how many problems do you see per day about TSOs? Taking a totally random number here, but say there were 1500 complaints that day about how people feel they were treated while going through a security checkpoint, and complained to the media. While that number sounds amazingly large, that represents a 0.01% problem rate with screenings. The actual rate of problems is much less than that, so don't take that as an official number.

So what is my point? You are taking the very FEW problems that occur and blowing them out of proportion.
Isn't taking a few problems that occur and blowing them out of proportion the whole idea behind airport security?
Before what follows, my respects to anyone who has lost their lives in any kind of airplane disaster, be it terrorism or not

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080529151230AAunYft said:
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics of the DOT keeps track of commercial passenger traffic for the United States.

Here's a link to their website.

For the 12 mnths. ending Feb. 29, 2008 there were 735 million passengers/366 days= about 2 million passengers per day on average.
The 2000's decade is coming to a close, that's 10 years, 7,350,000,000 passengers flew. Of those, 216 perished in the 9/11 attacks, the only terrorist attack of the decade. So that is 216/7,350,000,000 or 1/34 027 777
The chances of getting hit by lightning[2]: 1/750 000
The chances of getting hit by a car: 1/18 585

Even with the previous screening techniques, the chances of getting killed in a terrorist attack were already very slim. I just have to agree that these new procedures are unnecessary, and I know I'm not american, but more often than not, practices in america tend to carry on to Europe for some reason and I'd very much not like to be subject to this myself. Even in the 70s when terrorism was rampant, air travel still was the safest way to travel.
I'm not saying at all that taking measures to make the chances of getting killed in a terrorist attack even less aren't commendable, but at which price? (not even talking about money but violation of privacy)
 

mpicco

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,388
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
R19
The 2000s decade ("noughties") is over since about 11 months :tease:
There was no year 0 so the first year was 1 AD, the decade ends december 31st at midnight of the year 10, new decade starts 11AD. Fast forward 2000 years, it's still the same. Decade started in January 1st 2001 and will end in about a month. Thanks for the stupid correction. In any case the numbers still apply.
 

mpicco

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,388
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
R19
If we consider decades starting at 0s, then the first decade AD only had 9 years which is bollocks. If scholars agree centuries and millenia start at 01's, then so should decades. In any case, it was entirely not my point, and it would not change anything I said if you include the year 2000 or not. I'm quite tired of you narf calling people on the tiniest details not being accurate when those details are not even relevant for the point being made just for the heck of being right and then adding the idiotic :tease: smiley. It doesn't make you look smart, it makes you look like a trolling ass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top