You touch my junk and I'm going to have you arrested

[zhelas]

TSA ejects Oceanside man from airport for refusing security check

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/14/tsa-ejects-oceanside-man-airport-refusing-security/

Video/recording of what happened:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7txGwoITSj4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RaFZ1CElU8&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwFh8HQttTQ&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL


SAN DIEGO — John Tyner won't be pheasant hunting in South Dakota with his father-in-law any time soon.

Tyner was simultaneously thrown out of San Diego International Airport on Saturday morning for refusing to submit to a security check and threatened with a civil suit and $10,000 fine if he left.

And he got the whole thing on his cell phone. Well, the audio at least.

The 31-year-old Oceanside software programmer was supposed to leave from Lindbergh Field on Saturday morning and until a TSA agent directed him toward one of the recently installed full-body scanners, Tyner seemed to be on his way.

Tyner balked.

He'd been reading about the scanners and didn't like them for a number of reasons, ranging from health concerns to "a huge invasion of privacy." He'd even checked the TSA website which indicated that San Diego did not have the machines, he said in a phone interview Saturday night.

"I was surprised to see them," said Tyner.

He also did something that may seem odd to some, manipulative to others but fortuitous to plenty of others for whom Tyner is becoming something of a folk hero: Tyner turned on his cell phone's video camera and placed it atop the luggage he sent through the x-ray machine.

He may not be the first traveler tossed from an airport for security reasons but he could well be the first to have the whole experience captured on his cell phone.

During the next half-hour, his cell phone recorded Tyner refusing to submit to a full body scan, opting for the traditional metal scanner and a basic "pat down" -- and then refusing to submit to a "groin check" by a TSA security guard.

He even told the guard, "You touch my junk and I'm going to have you arrested."

That threat triggered a code red of sorts as TSA agents, supervisors and eventually the local police gravitated to the spot where the reluctant traveler stood in his stocking feet, his cell phone sitting in the nearby bin (which he wasn't allowed to touch) picking up the audio.

According to TSA at the time the controversial body scanners were installed, travelers would have the option to request walking through the traditional metal detector but that option would be accompanied by a "pat down."

Why Tyner was targeted for a secondary pat down is unknown.

Asked if he thought he looked like a terrorist, Tyner said no. "I'm 6-foot-1, white with short brown hair," he said Saturday night.

Was he singled out for "punishment"?

Before Tyner was told he was getting a "groin check," a TSA agent is heard on the recording telling another agent "I had a problem with the passenger I was patting down. So I backed down. He was obnoxious."

Tyner is sure he was talking about someone else. On the whole, with a single final exception, he found the agents "professional if standoffish."

He did marvel that while his own situation was being deliberated, many passengers passed through the metal detector and on to their flights with no pat-down. "One guy even set off the alarm and they sent him through again without a pat-down," he said.

Once he threatened to have the TSA agent arrested though, events turned surreal.

A supervisor is heard re-explaining the groin check process to Tyner then adding "If you're not comfortable with that, we can escort you back out and you don't have to fly today."

Tyner responded "OK, I don't understand how a sexual assault can be made a condition of my flying."

"This is not considered a sexual assault," replied the supervisor, calmly.

"It would be if you were not the government," said Tyner.

"By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights," countered the TSA supervisor.

"I think the government took them away after 9/11," said Tyner.

"OK," came the reply.

More senior TSA administrators showed up, and one San Diego police officer. Tyner's personal information was taken down and then he was escorted out of the security area. After he put his shoes back.

His father-in-law, a 40-year retired deputy sheriff, can be heard pleading in the back ground for some common sense.

Tyner went over to the American Airlines counter where an agent, to his amazement, refunded the price of his non-refundable ticket.

Before he could leave, however, he was again surrounded by TSA employees who told him he couldn't leave the security area. One, who kept insisting he was trying to help Tyner, told him that if he left he would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine.

Tyner asked if the agents who had escorted him from the security area would also be sued and fined.

The same man who told Tyner he would be sued and fined if he left, also insisted that he did not tell him he couldn't leave.

So Tyner left.

Two hours later he wrote the whole experience up on his blog and posted the audio files to YouTube.

You could say it has gone viral.

By Saturday evening, 70,000 people had accessed the entry and 488 comments were posted to the blog item. Those comments are divided over Tyner's experience. "Only 5 percent say I'm an idiot," he said.

Far more applaud him for "standing up" to the security forces. Many more people share his disdain for how airport security is conducted.

"People generally are angry about what is going on," said Tyner, "but they don't know how to assert their rights....there is a general feeling that TSA is ineffective, out of control, over-reaching."

If Tyner has touched some undercurrent of resentment, he doesn't want to be the guy who leads the charge to overturn the machines. "I'm not so sure I'm the right person to start a movement," he said.

If he isn't, he can sound at times like he's auditioning for the job.

Tyner points out that every terrorist act on an airplane has been halted by passengers. "It's time to stop treating passengers like criminals and start treating them as assets," he said.

[Nieninque]

Asked if he thought he looked like a terrorist, Tyner said no. "I'm 6-foot-1, white with short brown hair,"

Fucking moron

[Tgo01]

I'm confused. He caused this whole scene because they wanted to check to make sure he didn't have any weapons on him? Am I understanding this right? He's white so he gets a pass but if someone wearing a turban dared to try this they should have shot him on the spot or what?

[zhelas]

I'm confused. He caused this whole scene because they wanted to check to make sure he didn't have any weapons on him? Am I understanding this right? He's white so he gets a pass but if someone wearing a turban dared to try this they should have shot him on the spot or what?

Airport security: Government in our pants
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-1114-chapman-20101114,0,3696372.column

The short and curlies of the story is that airport security has changed again.

If you get singled out of the crowd you can do one of three things.

1) Have the full body xray scan.
(which people have protested about)

if you opt out of this.

2) Have a full body pat down where they cup the breasts and touch the gentiles.

if you don't want to be touched.

3) You will be escorted out of the airport with the possibility that a civil lawsuit will be brought against you.

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html

[zhelas]

Cupping the breasts, I assume would be to see if any ladies are packing plastic explosive implants.

The touching of the gentiles and anus must be for those butt bombs and to see if anything has been shoved up a snatch.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

He clearly wanted his 15 minutes. Who sets down a phone with the video on so you can record it? He knew he was going to be an ass.

It's fucking retarded and I hope the dumbshit goes to jail.

[zhelas]

I don't disagree with your statement. He set out to protest this. In a way he is right to do so. The TSA does not discriminate who they pull out of line. It can be anyone even a child.

What happens if it was your child? Do you want them to get x-rayed? Or do you want some TSA agent to touch your child's genitals?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

You make it sound like it's a not an x-ray machine (which millions of people undergo annually with reasonable risk) and a it IS a pedophile.

These people are there to help increase our safety. If you don't like it, procure other means of transportation.

[Stanley Burrell]

WHERE ARE THE TELEPORTERS?

It's 2010 people. C'mon. 2x.

[Tgo01]

I guess what I meant by my previous post was I don't understand what all the fuss is about. We must be quite a naive country if we don't think terrorism exists and terrorists have been targeting airplanes many years before 9/11 even happened. Do you really want to be on an airplane full of passengers that weren't thoroughly checked to make sure they didn't have any weapons on them?


Cupping the breasts, I assume would be to see if any ladies are packing plastic explosive implants.

The touching of the gentiles and anus must be for those butt bombs and to see if anything has been shoved up a snatch.

Yes people have and I imagine still do hide illegal substances inside of their orifices to try to sneak them past security. It's not like they are doing a full cavity search because I don't think someone can stuff an explosive up there. Wasn't it just a year ago that someone managed to sneak an explosive onto a Detroit bound airplane by concealing it in his underwear? Also shortly after 9/11 didn't someone conceal an explosive inside of his shoes? So why are we so shocked that they must cup the breasts and genitals in order to check for explosives and/or weapons?

[Lord Orbstar]

I don't disagree with your statement. He set out to protest this. In a way he is right to do so. The TSA does not discriminate who they pull out of line. It can be anyone even a child.

What happens if it was your child? Do you want them to get x-rayed? Or do you want some TSA agent to touch your child's genitals?



yes. and they have to masturbate while they do it.

[pabstblueribbon]

WHERE ARE THE TELEPORTERS?

It's 2010 people. C'mon. 2x.

I'd be cool with the tubes from the Jetsons.

But imagine traveling home on a good whiskey drunk through a tube at 60mph. Or following someone that did.

[Latrinsorm]

All I know is so long as they're only touching Gentiles they don't have to worry about an angry and wrathful G-d, so it would appear they've thought this through pretty well.

[pabstblueribbon]

All I know is so long as they're only touching Gentiles they don't have to worry about an angry and wrathful G-d, so it would appear they've thought this through pretty well.

Gentiles gentle genitals.

Say that five times fast.

Actually it's kinda easy. And you sound really weird doing it. To other people in your house. Especially if they don't know why you're doing it.

[Latrinsorm]

Do you want them to get x-rayed?And also, the x-ray system in use here produces less radiation per full scan than the ambient radiation received during five minutes of the flight itself. If you were serious about avoiding ionizing radiation, you wouldn't be dithering about in the stratosphere.

[4a6c1]

Thats right. Dont dither. In our stratosphere. I'm pretty sure thats the point of touching the Gentiles genitals in the first place.

[Lord Orbstar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXgx-4H5RRg


That is Zhelas' son and "friend" getting ready for their trip to the airport

[zhelas]

ROFL!

[Delias]

Generally I insist that anytime someone touches my genitals, they keep going until I finish. If I am getting a free handy every time I go through airport security, I am gonna start flying again.

[Lord Orbstar]

when they do the pat search, just make it awkward. play pocket pool ahead of time so you have a hard on when they grab it, then loudly moan "Fuck YA!" and ask if you cna have the screeners personal phone number.

awkward.

Delias put it very succinctly.

You can also tell them "I was born a woman" and when the female searches you...boom. Sexual harassment lawsuit. Not sure who would be the plaintiff though....

[msconstrew]

Asked if he thought he looked like a terrorist, Tyner said no. "I'm 6-foot-1, white with short brown hair," he said Saturday night.

Oh that's right. I forgot that only brown people can be terrorists. Timothy McVeigh was a fucking freedom fighter, amirite? Moron.


*

Also, last time I flew I was singled out for this enhanced patdown service. It was fairly demeaning. Not only did the TSA rep cup my breasts and feel around my groin area, but I also had to pull up my shirt a bit and expose the inner waistband of my jeans. No explanation on why this was necessary, and I wasn't about to cause a scene because I wanted to get where I was going.

[Showal]

yes. and they have to masturbate while they do it.

And force my kid to watch until they finish and then make my child clean up.

But really, pretty much anyone who asks nice enough is allowed to touch my genitals. Think of it as a bonding experience.

[Gan]

I'm curoius about the following:

1. What legal basis do they have to detain you if you refuse to submit to the security screening and decide that you do not wish to fly on those conditions and try to leave the airport, but yet do not cause a disturbance or break any laws?

2. What legal basis is there for assessing a civil suit and a $10,000.00 fine if you do leave?

[Asha]

I wonder what would happen if they patted me down and I had a raging hard on?

What happens if you're really really stupid and think it's gay to have a man touch your ding dong and said you'd comply fully if they got a female to check you.

Lot's of questions.

[NocturnalRob]

1. What legal basis do they have to detain you if you refuse to submit to the security screening and decide that you do not wish to fly on those conditions and try to leave the airport, but yet do not cause a disturbance or break any laws?
^^This was my thinking. Here's the actual blog entry if anyone cares to read it: http://jalopnik.com/5690109/you-touch-my-junk-and-ill-have-you-arrested

It's relatively long, but provides further detail. It sounds like there were a lot of airport employees trying to do a lot of things to ensure plausible deniability if they were later asked to defend their actions.

On the other hand, how many millions of people fly each year? This guy needs to stop being such a cock-gobbler and just let someone rub his junk.

[Back]

I’m booking a flight right now just to get frisked. Most action I’ve had in years.

[radamanthys]

I'd just start stripping naked in the terminal. I'd rather everyone see than have to do it where it would be someone's word against mine.

So everybody waiting in line can see my glorious junk.

I might do jumping jacks.

[NocturnalRob]

I might do jumping jacks.
Of vital importance. Don't want to pull a groin muscle. Well...just pull the one.

[Gan]

We're flying to Vegas in January. It will be interesting to see what happens when we all go through security.

Its been 4 years since I spent most of my week flying in and out of airports. I wonder if the IRA terrorist (watch list) guy with the same name as mine is still on the loose. That usually caused a 30 minute delay while I proved that it was not me (although I'm of irish decent.)

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

^^This was my thinking. Here's the actual blog entry if anyone cares to read it: http://jalopnik.com/5690109/you-touch-my-junk-and-ill-have-you-arrested

It's relatively long, but provides further detail. It sounds like there were a lot of airport employees trying to do a lot of things to ensure plausible deniability if they were later asked to defend their actions.

On the other hand, how many millions of people fly each year? This guy needs to stop being such a cock-gobbler and just let someone rub his junk.

I'd think it's obvious why someone should be detained. If I'm in line and get picked, but then I'm like, oh no, never mind I'll be on my way... I'd WANT security to detain them and properly search them. Otherwise it's just one way to test our security with no risk to the person testing it. In other words, I've got a bomb keestered in my ass. I walk up, don't get searched, yay, now I bomb plane. Or, get selected to be x-rayed, and I'm like, oh, have explosive diarrhea, must leave now... to bomb again another day.

Like I said before, don't like the security, procure another means of transportation. Otherwise, STFU and deal with the measures designed to make us all safer.

I don't see how there is any controversy here at all. The person who filmed it should be fined or jailed, or both and not even be a blip on the news radar.

[NocturnalRob]

I'm not disagreeing with you. I think it's silly to be able to allow someone to leave the screening area and airport because, all of a sudden, they "don't feel like it."

Then again, we should probably just get this guy to do all the searches:
http://videosift.com/video/Cops-frisking-is-a-little-TOO-thorough

[Gan]

I'd think it's obvious why someone should be detained. If I'm in line and get picked, but then I'm like, oh no, never mind I'll be on my way... I'd WANT security to detain them and properly search them. Otherwise it's just one way to test our security with no risk to the person testing it. In other words, I've got a bomb keestered in my ass. I walk up, don't get searched, yay, now I bomb plane. Or, get selected to be x-rayed, and I'm like, oh, have explosive diarrhea, must leave now... to bomb again another day.

Like I said before, don't like the security, procure another means of transportation. Otherwise, STFU and deal with the measures designed to make us all safer.

I don't see how there is any controversy here at all. The person who filmed it should be fined or jailed, or both and not even be a blip on the news radar.

As one who has been cited for infringing too far upon the civil liberties of our citizens in past threads (searching of bags in subways, etc.) it would be expected that I would agree with you on this.

But I don't. :(

[CrystalTears]

It's not like these full-body scanners are displaying you naked on a projector for everyone to see. What privacy? You afraid it will show the gerbil in your ass or your little winky?

I'm all for protection of privacy, and I'm no fan of these security measures in place because it takes up way too much time. However they're there, just abide by them as you know they are a part of flying. If you don't want to be a part of it, don't fly. He handled it like an idiot, and there are better ways to express your displeasure with the system than by disrupting it for everyone.

[Gan]

For shits and giggles - let's look at the job description for a TSA agent.
http://www.tsa.gov/join/careers/

http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=90884449&JobTitle=Transportation+Security+Officer+(TSO)&q=security+officer&sort=rv%2c-dtex&cn=&rad_units=miles&brd=3876&pp=50&jbf574=HSBC&vw=b&re=134&FedEmp=N&FedPub=Y&caller=basic.aspx&ss=0&AVSDM=2010-11-09+12%3a30%3a00



KEY REQUIREMENTS:

Must be a US Citizen or US National; be 18 years old at time of application
Be proficient in English; have customer service skills
Dependable & operate with integrity; repeatedly lift/carry up to 70 pounds
Maintain focus & awareness within a stressful environmentenvironment
Meet job-related medical standards and pass background investigation
See Qualifications and Evaluations for additional requirements.Qualifications and Evaluations

QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED:

Have reached his/her 18th birthday at the time of application submission;
Be proficient in English (e.g., reading, writing,
speaking, and listening);
Have a high school diploma, GED or equivalent; OR
Have at least one year of full-time work experience in security
work, aviation screener work, or X-ray technician work.To be considered for initial employment, you must also pass a
pre-employment drug screening test and a background investigation,
including a criminal check and a credit check.

This is a non-critical sensitive National Security position that
requires you to be fingerprinted, photographed, and complete
appropriate security paperwork, including a SF-86 Questionnaire for
National Security Positions. The pre-employment background
investigation must be COMPLETED with favorable results prior
to a final offer of employment and cannot be initiated until
submission of a completed questionnaire.

If your credit check reveals any of the following, YOU WILL NOT
BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS POSITION:

Defaulted on $7,500 or more in debt (excluding certain
circumstances of bankruptcy).
Owe any delinquent Federal or State taxes.
Owe any past due child support payments.Additional background requirements.
https://hraccess-assessment.tsa.dhs.gov/TSOFAQs/BackgroundRequirements.pdf

You must pass all initial training requirements including 56-72
hours of classroom training, 112-128 hours of on-the-job training,
and all initial certification testing.

NOTE: Initial training may require you to travel for up to two weeks
on a full-time schedule.

To maintain employment, you must continue to meet all
qualification requirements described above and agree to:

Participate in and pass random drug screening tests; and pass
all recurrent background investigations, including a criminal check
and credit check.
Participate in and pass all recurrent and specialized training
and recertification tests on a periodic basis.
Demonstrate daily a fitness for duty without impairment due to
illegal drugs, sleep deprivation, medication, or alcohol.Failure to meet these requirements mandates removal from security
screening and may result in termination of employment.

[NocturnalRob]

your little winky?
:wink:

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

What about the job requirements?

[4a6c1]

TSA doesnt pay very well either. :(

[CrystalTears]

For shits and giggles - let's look at the job description for a TSA agent.
http://www.tsa.gov/join/careers/So... what do you take issue with?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

So... what do you take issue with?

Yeah, basically what I wanted to know myself.

[Stanley Burrell]

The credit check is complete bullshit. I can think of so many reasons why an individual could be a mere ~7.5k in debt from a default with no ill intent or stupid spending associated with them. Sometimes you need to overdraw.

Sorry. Random 2¢.

[4a6c1]

Well the classroom training is for licensing, mandated by every state. Same as recertification and random drug screenings. Those are state requirements. On the job training time seems excessive for the industry. Most of everything else there is pretty standard for any civilian officer. The only thing that looks out of place is the travel requirement and sf-86, those seem to be job exclusive.

Are TSA armed? These look like standard job requirements for an unarmed officer. As far as pay goes they make about 8-10 per hour which is pretty low compared to the market standard. Just about every private contractor can at least double that. TSA is pathetic. Ugh. I will never work for the government again.

[Stanley Burrell]

Are TSA armed? These look like standard job requirements for an unarmed officer.

I have the Chief's signature for CA'ing in tactical, because it isn't entirely uncommon that I can be given a temporary acting investigator, which I believe would make me an unarmed petty officer.

Now I just confuddled the eff out of myself. Who's the TSA police Chief? ...I'm'a go with Eddie Rickenbacker. Yeah, that's the ticket.

[4a6c1]

Dude. Sometimes I totally flashlight people in the FACE. Thats right. IN THE FACE.

(not really)

[Stanley Burrell]

Dude. Sometimes I totally flashlight people in the FACE. Thats right. IN THE FACE.

Shining the light in my face, and for what?

Your love of rap music aside, pupillary contraction is a good indicator of teh drugz consumption.

[CrystalTears]

When the two of you talk to each other, it makes my eyes sting.

[4a6c1]

Can we pupillary your contraction?

[Stanley Burrell]

Speaking of which, I should see if I can smuggle one of the foreskin lamps to send Robin for her wanton flashlight fetish.

[4a6c1]

Flashlights are useful in caves. It's really a fetish born out of necessity.

[Stanley Burrell]

^

The only thing that keeps me alive in a cave is my handy fleshlight.

[NocturnalRob]

^

The only thing that keeps me alive in a cave is my handy fleshlight.
If you're in Rojo's cave, you don't need a fleshlight.

[Fortybox]

I think the whole point of this is that government uses fear tactics to gain more control over us.

That's how Hitler rose to power.

I am completely opposed to this invasion of privacy. How far will we go in the name of being safe before we realize our rights are gone. The irony is we won't be safe from our own government soon.

[Warriorbird]

Godwin. Plus TSA is far too ineffectual to ever be really repressive.

[Cephalopod]

That's how Hitler rose to power.


On a scale of 1 to 5 picohitlers, how do you rank this?

[Warriorbird]

On a scale of 1 to 5 picohitlers, how do you rank this?

1 pikaHitler

http://www.cdvagabundo.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/pika-hitler2.jpg

[Fortybox]

On a scale of 1 to 5 picohitlers, how do you rank this?

Hahaha that's awesome.

[Back]

I think the whole point of this is that government uses fear tactics to gain more control over us.

That's how Hitler rose to power.

I am completely opposed to this invasion of privacy. How far will we go in the name of being safe before we realize our rights are gone. The irony is we won't be safe from our own government soon.

The little bubble you live in sounds terrifying.

[Gan]

So... what do you take issue with?


Yeah, basically what I wanted to know myself.

Goes towards mental maturity and responsibility of performing groin checks and reviewing nude scans of individuals and the image retention and distribution capabilities of said scans if these new security measures are going to be required.

[4a6c1]

I think Gan just questioned my mental maturity.

[4a6c1]

Ok. Point.

[Gan]

The little bubble you live in sounds terrifying.


http://maxfawcett.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/pot-kettle-black.jpg

[Gan]

I think Gan just questioned my mental maturity.

ROFL

You with a gun sounds hot and scary all at the same time.

:help:

[CrystalTears]

Goes towards mental maturity and responsibility of performing groin checks and reviewing nude scans of individuals and the image retention and distribution capabilities of said scans if these new security measures are going to be required.
Jeez Gan, seriously? All this because they're allowed to work as one at 18, so immediately you assume they're all immature and will do screenshots and post everyone's hooha in their locker and breakroom or something? I honestly didn't think you were this closed-minded.

I imagine that after doing a hundred of them in a day, it gets old really fast and not worth mentioning. Unless someone has big hooters, and even then they'll still comment with each other with or without the body scan.

[Gan]

Jeez Gan, seriously? All this because they're allowed to work as one at 18, so immediately you assume they're all immature and will do screenshots and post everyone's hooha in their locker and breakroom or something?
Yes, seriously. I really don't want to assume that they might just as much as I don't want to assume that they would not. Lets abandon the assumptions and work towards eliminating the risk of it happening or eliminate it happening so that the risk does not exist. The higher the requirements are the expected higher quality of personnel are that fill those positions.



I imagine that after doing a hundred of them in a day, it gets old really fast and not worth mentioning. Unless someone has big hooters, and even then they'll still comment with each other with or without the body scan.
So I'm supposed to feel more at ease because of what you imagine? Some grownup doing a groin check on my wife or child (or me) is OK if you imagine that they do it all day long?

Seriously?

Seriously, no thanks.

My delimma is what I'm to expect when we fly in January.

*Go through my bags and luggage all you want. Just keep your hands off my person and my family.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Goes towards mental maturity and responsibility of performing groin checks and reviewing nude scans of individuals and the image retention and distribution capabilities of said scans if these new security measures are going to be required.

So your objection isn't really about the security at all, but the people who work there. I think that's a fair objection, but I disagree with it. I'm assuming because you only have to be 18, you think they'll be immature. I'm sure you can think of some 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 year olds who'd also be immature. Just at virtually minimum wage, I doubt their candidate pool is very deep beyond HS grads.

As far as the system, someone will figure out how to export data. Doesn't matter the medium, someone will do it. I just doubt very much anyone will want to see a scan of my junk, so I'm OK with it.

Maybe I trust the government too much (lol), but on this topic, I'd rather they did it than not at all. I just have to trust that they'll have oversight and screening to prevent abuse. I concede that abuse will happen though, at some point - just need to make sure there are safe guards for that as well.

[Gan]

My objection is with both the methods and the people responsible for the implementation of said methods.

[Lord Orbstar]

I think the whole point of this is that government uses fear tactics to gain more control over us.

That's how Hitler rose to power.

I am completely opposed to this invasion of privacy. How far will we go in the name of being safe before we realize our rights are gone. The irony is we won't be safe from our own government soon.

Until you are blown out of the air by the next Muslim terrorist...at which point you will regret your stance enroute to the ground in burning wreckage. If you're still conscious of course.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

The higher the requirements are the expected higher quality of personnel are that fill those positions.

And the higher the pay... who pays for those ultra mature, well trained, highly qualified agents?


*Go through my bags and luggage all you want. Just keep your hands off my person and my family.

Therein lies the problem. You can't find a box cutter, shoebomb, etc... if you don't screen the people traveling.

[CrystalTears]

So I'm supposed to feel more at ease because of what you imagine? Some grownup doing a groin check on my wife or child (or me) is OK if you imagine that they do it all day long?No what I'm saying is that I think you're exaggerating the possibility. Perhaps I'm undermining it, so that's a fair trade. However it stands to reason that if you are dealing with the same thing over and over again, after a while any fun you acquired from it will be gone because of the tedious nature of it. It's a job. You claiming that 18 year olds are just getting the job so that they can grab hootch all day is assuming a GREAT deal.

Why do you trust doctors, nurses, or anyone else that has to touch you? Because they're not 18?

[Lord Orbstar]

The jizz in my pants video would be appropriate here

[Fortybox]

Until you are blown out of the air by the next Muslim terrorist...at which point you will regret your stance enroute to the ground in burning wreckage. If you're still conscious of course.

Well I wouldn't have to worry about that if our government would stop policing the world.

But you're right. These muslims are just evil and want to keel us for the sake of it. It couldn't be because of our meddling in their affairs.

The concept of blowback is a farce I guess.

[Gan]

And the higher the pay... who pays for those ultra mature, well trained, highly qualified agents?
The same people who pay for the one's already in existence. Make up for it by cutting spending somewhere else. I'm willing to trade off that expense for the 400 million dollar study to see who cocaine effects beaver reproduction.




Therein lies the problem. You can't find a box cutter, shoebomb, etc... if you don't screen the people traveling.
You can with hiring quality people who do their job dependably and with existing methods already in place, without having to resort to invasive image scans or groin searches. Focus on what is broken without having to resort to new methods that exist simply because they are treating the symptoms instead of the underlying problem.

[Gan]

No what I'm saying is that I think you're exaggerating the possibility. Perhaps I'm undermining it, so that's a fair trade.
;)



However it stands to reason that if you are dealing with the same thing over and over again, after a while any fun you acquired from it will be gone because of the tedious nature of it. It's a job. You claiming that 18 year olds are just getting the job so that they can grab hootch all day is assuming a GREAT deal.
I never claimed that people go to work at TSA so they can grab crotch or view detailed body scans. You made that assumption. I'm saying that because it exists - the door has been opened for abuse. Said abuse is now exacerbated due to the quality of people hired for said positions.



Why do you trust doctors, nurses, or anyone else that has to touch you? Because they're not 18?
Because of their training, education and age/maturity. Please tell me you are not equating nurses and doctors to TSA inspectors.

[Latrinsorm]

You can with hiring quality people who do their job dependably and with existing methods already in place, without having to resort to invasive image scans or groin searches. Focus on what is broken without having to resort to new methods that exist simply because they are treating the symptoms instead of the underlying problem.Are you proposing that there is a way to search someone as comprehensively as a full body image without being as invasive as a full body image?

[NocturnalRob]

For that special someone:

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lby5tgfFR61qzpwi0o1_500.jpg

[CrystalTears]

Because of their training, education and age/maturity. Please tell me you are not equating nurses and doctors to TSA inspectors.Okay not doctors. How about EMT? Massage therapists? Nurses aid? Aren't they all subject to possible abuse? They don't have high education and/or maturity level but we still have to trust they will do their job responsibly.

[Gan]

Are you proposing that there is a way to search someone as comprehensively as a full body image without being as invasive as a full body image?

Can you tell me 1 method of search/scan that has been used to a high degree of success at airports when implemented correctly and dependably prior to the full body image scan?

[Lord Orbstar]

Crystal Tears...you are being realistic. This is the internet. You must use demogoguery to get your point across.

[Gan]

Okay not doctors. How about EMT? Massage therapists? Nurses aid? Aren't they all subject to possible abuse? They don't have high education and/or maturity level but we still have to trust they will do their job responsibly.

EMT's have a high degree of training and objectivity considering the circumstances in which they are deployed.

Massage therapists - FUCK YEA! Especially the ones who give us the happy endings.

Nurses aid - do not touch my nether regions - they change my sheets, empty my bed pans, bring me water, take my blood pressure and a myriad of other ancilliary tasks. Any procedure that requires me to have my private parts fondled are done by nurses or doctors. That's how we roll in Texas. ;)

[Parkbandit]

Guy was looking for trouble.. glad he got inconvenienced for it.

Don't like the rules? Then don't fly.

[Delias]

I gave up on reading this after I got in my handjob crack.

[CrystalTears]

EMT's have a high degree of training and objectivity considering the circumstances in which they are deployed. About the same as a TSA. There's no maturity class for either.


Nurses aid - do not touch my nether regions - they change my sheets, empty my bed pans, bring me water, take my blood pressure and a myriad of other ancilliary tasks. Any procedure that requires me to have my private parts fondled are done by nurses or doctors. That's how we roll in Texas. ;)But subject to abuse as well.

Seriously, how do you train maturity? Do you know the difference between a mature 20 year old or a pervert 40 year old if they both behave in the appropriate way?

Be upset with the security measures in general and how they could be improved, but don't tell me it's because they could be immature.

Let's hope a 20 year old male beach lifeguard never has to save your life because a jellyfish landed on your junk. He may want to fondle you!

[Latrinsorm]

Can you tell me 1 method of search/scan that has been used to a high degree of success at airports when implemented correctly and dependably prior to the full body image scan?No, I don't know of any method as reliable as a full body image scan, whether THz or x-ray. That's why I fully support them, and why I asked you if you knew of any alternatives.

[Gan]

No, I don't know of any method as reliable as a full body image scan, whether THz or x-ray. That's why I fully support them, and why I asked you if you knew of any alternatives.

What method, if it were used properly would have found the boxcutters for 9/11?

What method, if it were used more frequently would have found the underware bomber, or shoe bomber?

Its not difficult to to answer. Especially if you have any experience as a frequent flyer. ;)

[Gan]

Don't like the rules? Then don't fly.

Bottom line, this is the end conclusion until customers find a reasonable alternative or substitute good/service.

[Gan]

About the same as a TSA.
Not in Texas.



But subject to abuse as well.
Anything is if you want to split hairs.



Seriously, how do you train maturity? Do you know the difference between a mature 20 year old or a pervert 40 year old if they both behave in the appropriate way?
Your logic fails at appropriate. Perversion is abnormal behavior and by definition is inappropriate in our society. By your definition is maturity not trainable but an inherent trait that people are born with?



Be upset with the security measures in general and how they could be improved, but don't tell me it's because they could be immature.
At the risk of being repetitive, I'm upset at both.



Let's hope a 20 year old male beach lifeguard never has to save your life because a jellyfish landed on your junk. He may want to fondle you!
I've never known a jellyfish to be life threatening based on proximity of sting. And last I checked, benadryl or worst case (anaphalyctic shock) Epi is not administered to the groin area in the worst cases.

Stop trying to link genital fondling with life saving treatment, its not apples to apples and you know it. TSA security screening and a healthcare worker performing life saving measures are two completely different animals, unless said TSA agent were performing CPR and or using a PED during a cardiac arrest.

Bottom line, I think it is inappropriate to require full nude scans unless the passenger's garb prevents a normal pat search or wand search - and that's a stretch since other techniques (walk through metal detectors, hand swab chemical detectors) are still available. I also think its inappropriate to change the technique of the pat down search to include groin cavity or breast shifting as part of the search, especially when the other methods mentioned above are available. Doubly so in the case of searching minors.

That being said, if I want to fly then I will have to abide by until I can either alter policy by voicing my opinion or not giving the airlines my business. Both of those actions are still free for me to pursue (for now?).

[Gan]

Touching
Sensitive
Areas

[Tgo01]

Gan I'm really not following your argument here. Your whole problem seems to be young people man handling you or your family, can't you just opt for the full body scan? Or is the problem then that they'll see your naughty bits? Have you ever had to stay in the hospital for a week or so? Chances are dozens of people have seen you in varying degrees of undress then. Did you demand they all be at least 30 years old with college degrees or what?

On a related note can't they just design these machines so there is no way to save the pictures to begin with? They just stay on the screen for 1-2 minutes, long enough to check for weapons and the like? I know nothing about these machines so maybe this is impossible...maybe they already do this?

[4a6c1]

Ok so since we are still on the subject of maturity you know who else has to grope a bunch of nono areas to look for bombs? The military. Oh cool lets discuss the collective maturity level of the Unitied States Military. Or not. What concerns me more than the policy itself is who supports it. Obama....has spoken publicly about how awesome it is. So did he just declare the United State to be a war zone?

[Tgo01]

Obama....has spoken publicly about how awesome it is. So did he just declare the United State to be a war zone?

Good point, the terrorists already won when Obama got elected.





Before everyone goes crazy I'm just making fun of the ultra right (maybe.)





(no really I am.)

[4a6c1]

Also I am officially siding with the group who thinks it is not ok for non-doctors to be looking at pictures of xrayed children. Oooooh. Double negatives are delicious.

[Tgo01]

Also I am not siding with the group who thinks it is not ok for non-doctors to not be looking at pictures of xrayed children.

Better.

[4a6c1]

You fickle pickle.

[Paradii]

I've never known a jellyfish to be life threatening based on proximity of sting. And last I checked, benadryl or worst case (anaphalyctic shock) Epi is not administered to the groin area in the worst cases.


Irukandji Jellyfish are quite deadly. And the closer the sting is to a major artery, the more dangerous it is. Like the femoral artery that runs near your groin.


http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/pourmecoffee/y0Mtvy595Evs9MXLATZDpNVs9Uv2Rd6uthcGBe19q5IEcao6jK l9ZUFLBYZj/the_more_you_know2.jpg

[Gan]

Irukandji Jellyfish are quite deadly. And the closer the sting is to a major artery, the more dangerous it is. Like the femoral artery that runs near your groin.


http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/pourmecoffee/y0Mtvy595Evs9MXLATZDpNVs9Uv2Rd6uthcGBe19q5IEcao6jK l9ZUFLBYZj/the_more_you_know2.jpg


Describe, in detail, the treatment for a life threatening sting in the groin then.

Specifically what antidote/medicine is administered and where in order to stabilize the patient. Here's a clue - its not administered at the site of the sting.

Not to mention that this scenario is in no way comparable to a TSA agent scanning individuals or baggage at an airport - where the expectation of privacy is considerably less than if the person were in a life threatening situation.

Decent troll post though - even with illustration.

[Gan]

Gan I'm really not following your argument here. Your whole problem seems to be young people man handling you or your family, can't you just opt for the full body scan? Or is the problem then that they'll see your naughty bits? Have you ever had to stay in the hospital for a week or so? Chances are dozens of people have seen you in varying degrees of undress then. Did you demand they all be at least 30 years old with college degrees or what?
For Christ sake. Follow the thread closer and you'll see my issue with the new policy. Then you'll have the answer to your questions.



On a related note can't they just design these machines so there is no way to save the pictures to begin with? They just stay on the screen for 1-2 minutes, long enough to check for weapons and the like? I know nothing about these machines so maybe this is impossible...maybe they already do this?
The article in the OP and related articles state that not only are they stored, they are also viewed and stored on machines that have distribution capabilities.

[diethx]

Have you ever had to stay in the hospital for a week or so? Chances are dozens of people have seen you in varying degrees of undress then. Did you demand they all be at least 30 years old with college degrees or what?

Did you seriously just compare trained medical professionals to derp derp power-tripping TSA douches? Really? Baby raptorjesus is crying.

Also, I read an article a year or two ago about how the full body scanners weren't supposed to be able to save and/or store images, however they found that in one airport, they WERE being saved. Fuck that noise! I'm so glad I don't ever have to fly.

[diethx]

The article in the OP and related articles state that not only are they stored, they are also viewed and stored on machines that have distribution capabilities.

I totally didn't read the article in the OP, but yeah that's pretty much what I read last year or the year before. I remember all the talk when these scanners were first being introduced - on and on about how they have no capacity to save/store so people didn't have to worry about it. What a surprise, that was all bullshit.

[Tgo01]

For Christ sake. Follow the thread closer and you'll see my issue with the new policy. Then you'll have the answer to your questions.

I have read the thread, I guess what I meant to say is I just don't understand what your problem with the policy is. I mean...I understand what you're saying, just don't understand why you feel it's such a big deal and quite frankly nothing you can say will make me understand it so I guess this whole thing has been an exercise in futility.


Did you seriously just compare trained medical professionals to derp derp power-tripping TSA douches? Really? Baby raptorjesus is crying.

I did, whatcha gonna do 'bout it? Because we all know people in positions of trust don't abuse that trust.

[diethx]

I did, whatcha gonna do 'bout it? Because we all know people in positions of trust don't abuse that trust.

I'm gonna call you retarded. That's about it though!

[CrystalTears]

I'm gonna call you retarded. That's about it though!
They are positions of trust, regardless of whether they are life-altering or not. You assume trust and responsibility of people when you entrust your life and/or body to someone else. A TSA agent is not a doctor, but is just someone checking for dangerous materials, which is their job. To assume that people in this job are automatically immature because of lack of higher education does not compute. There are LOTS of cases of doctors, those really highly educated people, who do immature things all the time. They get fired or reprimanded for it, and I don't see why TSA would be any different.

I still don't see what the big deal is with the images. Afraid someone on the PC is a TSA agent and is going to take a picture of your junk and post it on the internet?

:lol: Power-tripping douches. The TSA? Yeah okayy.

[Delias]

I'm gonna call you retarded. That's about it though!

As I remind my friends who work with the retarded, I gave to special Olympics this year, so I get to say Retard all I want. That's how it works, don't blame me, I don't make the retard-rules.

[diethx]

They are positions of trust, regardless of whether they are life-altering or not. You assume trust and responsibility of people when you entrust your life and/or body to someone else. A TSA agent is not a doctor, but is just someone checking for dangerous materials, which is their job. To assume that people in this job are automatically immature because of lack of higher education does not compute. There are LOTS of cases of doctors, those really highly educated people, who do immature things all the time. They get fired or reprimanded for it, and I don't see why TSA would be any different.

I still don't see what the big deal is with the images. Afraid someone on the PC is a TSA agent and is going to take a picture of your junk and post it on the internet?

:lol: Power-tripping douches. The TSA? Yeah okayy.

Yes, i'm terrified that someone from the PC is a TSA agent and is going to post my junk on the internet. That's exactly it.

I don't see TSA agent as a "position of trust". And I feel that doctors, who have been trained specifically to be delicate around people's junk, are not even in the same ballpark.

But yes, it's all because i'm afraid someone on the PC might see me naked. Either that... or it's the fact that I don't want someone I don't know and isn't specifically trained (extensively) in that field, seeing me naked? Crazy, I know.

:thumbup:

[Parkbandit]

Yes, i'm terrified that someone from the PC is a TSA agent and is going to post my junk on the internet. That's exactly it.

I don't see TSA agent as a "position of trust". And I feel that doctors, who have been trained specifically to be delicate around people's junk, are not even in the same ballpark.

But yes, it's all because i'm afraid someone on the PC might see me naked. Either that... or it's the fact that I don't want someone I don't know and isn't specifically trained (extensively) in that field, seeing me naked? Crazy, I know.

:thumbup:

Fucking prude.

[zhelas]

http://www.drudgereport.com/tsa1.jpg

Nope these images can't be saved. Some of these images don't end up in the training rooms. They don't get images of these of children.

This issue has gone viral. Opt out of flying? Sure why not. These scanners might be the state of the art for detecting devices. But they won't detected powdered bombs. In fact they would not have detected that underwear bomb.

[Showal]

DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN THAT MAN HAS A BIG ONE

[AnticorRifling]

So having not read the PC all weekend and picking thru 11 pages of this I get:

Hitler
Jellyfish
Retards
Showal looking at penis (pretty standard really much like Godwin's Law the longer a thread on the PC gets the higher the chance of Showal looking at penis)

Did I miss anything?

[CrystalTears]

Either that... or it's the fact that I don't want someone I don't know and isn't specifically trained (extensively) in that field, seeing me naked? Crazy, I know.
But they're not really seeing you naked. It's like a chalk tracing of your body. The images aren't saved.

Personally I'd rather they do a quick body scan image than to have the pat down.

[diethx]

But they're not really seeing you naked. It's like a chalk tracing of your body. The images aren't saved.

Personally I'd rather they do a quick body scan image than to have the pat down.

They have been saved though - that's been a point of contention. I totally agree with you in that i'd rather have a body scan than a pat down if they're going to be touching my vagina/breasts... but while i'm uncomfortable about some random douche seeing it quickly, i'm far more concerned about the image being stored and/or transmitted. No, I don't feel as if i'd be singled out for that, but it's still a concern and it makes me choose not to fly.

[Showal]

Did I miss anything?

Apparently you missed the opportunity to effectively moderate. Did you see that someone posted a picture of huge dong? That HAD to be a TOS violation. You shouldn't keep pictures like that up just to make me happy.

[AnticorRifling]

I can't see most pictures at work. I'll assume it's staying up there because Cele approves.

[Showal]

They have been saved though - that's been a point of contention. I totally agree with you in that i'd rather have a body scan than a pat down if they're going to be touching my vagina/breasts... but while i'm uncomfortable about some random douche seeing it quickly, i'm far more concerned about the image being stored and/or transmitted. No, I don't feel as if i'd be singled out for that, but it's still a concern and it makes me choose not to fly.

if it is a concern, I wil gladly volunteer and examination of your breasts and genitals. At least you somewhat know me.

[CrystalTears]

They have been saved though - that's been a point of contention. I totally agree with you in that i'd rather have a body scan than a pat down if they're going to be touching my vagina/breasts... but while i'm uncomfortable about some random douche seeing it quickly, i'm far more concerned about the image being stored and/or transmitted. No, I don't feel as if i'd be singled out for that, but it's still a concern and it makes me choose not to fly.
From what I've read, they can only be saved in test mode, which is why we even see scanned images right now. The modes can only be changed by an agent with Z access. Out of the 50,000+ agents, only about 45 of them have this type of access, and most of those do not even work in the airport itself.

The image is seen by one person in a separate area so that people passing by cannot see the images. They are not allowed to have any devices on them while in the separate room. Once the person is cleared, so is the image and then the next person is viewed.

[diethx]

if it is a concern, I wil gladly volunteer and examination of your breasts and genitals. At least you somewhat know me.

You're a peach!

[CrystalTears]

Apparently you missed the opportunity to effectively moderate. Did you see that someone posted a picture of huge dong? That HAD to be a TOS violation. You shouldn't keep pictures like that up just to make me happy.
You consider that a huge dong? Hehe, so a small one is a vagina?

[diethx]

From what I've read, they can only be saved in test mode, which is why we even see scanned images right now. The modes can only be changed by an agent with Z access. Out of the 50,000+ agents, only about 45 of them have this type of access, and most of those do not even work in the airport itself.

The image is seen by one person in a separate area so that people passing by cannot see the images. They are not allowed to have any devices on them while in the separate room. Once the person is cleared, so is the image and then the next person is viewed.

I understand how they're supposed to work - the fact that it can be abused is more than enough for me to choose not to fly (especially when i've always hated flying to begin with).

[AnticorRifling]

I understand how they're supposed to work - the fact that it can be abused is more than enough for me to choose not to fly (especially when i've always hated flying to begin with).

You realize that everything, everywhere, at anytime, can be abusificated right? The key is to realize it doesn't matter. When I'm walking thru the airport I don't think "OH SNAP some dude making 10 bucks an hour is looking at Commander Deep Dive and he might save the pic and show other people"!

I do however hope the new skymall is in because I heard it's got a dog cage with massage and vibrating water bottle.

[CrystalTears]

You realize that everything, everywhere, at anytime, can be abusificated right?
I'm so using that word from now on.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I don't particularly care about my body being seen but I want to see more data/information about the health risks. Frankly, I'm not just going to blindly trust the TSA that it's perfectly safe when scientists who are well-versed in this technology have raised a lot of unanswered concerns about the amount of radiation this exposes the skin to. I also know that if the machines are not absolutely properly calibrated they can burn you- that concerns me so I'll opt for the pat-down, even if it means my junk is groped.

[Cephalopod]

Dave Barry learns of a condition he has: blurred groin (http://www.npr.org/2010/11/15/131338172/humorist-dave-barry-and-the-tsa)



Last week he went through a TSA full-body scanner. What the screeners saw they did not like.

And, Dave Barry, you discovered that you are suffering from a rare disorder. What exactly is that disorder?

Mr. DAVE BARRY (Humorist): They told me I have a blurred groin.

BLOCK: A blurred groin?

Mr. BARRY: Yeah. I was in that machine, like a phone booth thing where they make you hold your arms up and then it sends a scan of your naked body to -they claim - a TSA person in another room. But it could be to Bangladesh to hacker - you don't know where.

BLOCK: But word came back you have a blurred groin. Did you know that this was?

Mr. BARRY: Yeah. They were letting everyone else go. Everyone else had a nice sharp groin, I guess. But when I went through they pulled me aside and put me in this kind of like little pen. And after like, I don't know, three or four minutes of standing there I asked one of them why am I here. And he said, you have a blurred groin. And I went what? Because you hate to find this out at the airport.


(worth a listen for a few chuckles)

[Tgo01]

I'm gonna call you retarded. That's about it though!

Well then, I'll just take my ball and go home.

[AnticorRifling]

I don't particularly care about my body being seen but I want to see more data/information about the health risks. Frankly, I'm not just going to blindly trust the TSA that it's perfectly safe when scientists who are well-versed in this technology have raised a lot of unanswered concerns about the amount of radiation this exposes the skin to. I also know that if the machines are not absolutely properly calibrated they can burn you- that concerns me so I'll opt for the pat-down, even if it means my junk is groped.

Please call me prior to your flight. I will intern my ass off as a TSA agent at that airport. Thanks.

[NocturnalRob]

that concerns me so I'll opt for the pat-down, especially if it means my junk is groped.
fixed

[Back]

Please call me prior to your flight. I will intern my ass off as a TSA agent at that airport. Thanks.

Hey I’m booking my flight to Urhandia right now. Details in PM.

[NocturnalRob]

Hey I’m booking my flight to Urhandia right now. Details in PM.
I hear that place is suffering from a really bad syphilis outbreak right now.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

fixed

I gotta get some action somehow.


In all honesty, I don't get why we don't adopt security/airport policy like Israel's.

[Back]

I gotta get some action somehow.


In all honesty, I don't get why we don't adopt security/airport policy like Israel's.

This. We evacuated a bus station because someone left a stray paper bag.

We do consult the Israelis on many things and checkpoint security is one of them. Hey, they know how it works both ways.

[Gan]

They are positions of trust, regardless of whether they are life-altering or not. You assume trust and responsibility of people when you entrust your life and/or body to someone else. A TSA agent is not a doctor, but is just someone checking for dangerous materials, which is their job. To assume that people in this job are automatically immature because of lack of higher education does not compute. There are LOTS of cases of doctors, those really highly educated people, who do immature things all the time. They get fired or reprimanded for it, and I don't see why TSA would be any different.

I still don't see what the big deal is with the images. Afraid someone on the PC is a TSA agent and is going to take a picture of your junk and post it on the internet?

:lol: Power-tripping douches. The TSA? Yeah okayy.

If all you got out of this discussion is that I appear afraid to have images scanned of my person - then I'm sadly going to have to admit that the discussion was completely futile. :(

[Back]

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/political-pictures-sarah-palin-resistence-futile-assimilated-look-a-like.jpg

[CrystalTears]

If all you got out of this discussion is that I appear afraid to have images scanned of my person - then I'm sadly going to have to admit that the discussion was completely futile. :(
I didn't quote you, so I wasn't referring to you. I gave up trying to understand what your problem with the system is.

[diethx]

You realize that everything, everywhere, at anytime, can be abusificated right? The key is to realize it doesn't matter. When I'm walking thru the airport I don't think "OH SNAP some dude making 10 bucks an hour is looking at Commander Deep Dive and he might save the pic and show other people"!

I do however hope the new skymall is in because I heard it's got a dog cage with massage and vibrating water bottle.

Hence the difference - you don't care and I do!

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Relevant:

http://i.imgur.com/h7rMo.jpg

[zhelas]

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2010/11/500x_tsa-humor-book.jpg

[AnticorRifling]

Hence the difference - you don't care and I do!

I said it doesn't matter. Not that I don't care. Quit putting words in my mouf!

[diethx]

I said it doesn't matter. Not that I don't care. Quit putting words in my mouf!

Oh my bad, I guess I assumed that you saying you only thought about Skymall meant you didn't care. SORRY OKAY MISUNDERSTANDING JEEZ BE CLEARER NEXT TIME!

[AnticorRifling]

Are you saying Skymall doesn't matter?!

[NocturnalRob]

Quit putting words in my mouf!
With all that cock in there, I don't think there's enough room.

[diethx]

With all that cock in there, I don't think there's enough room.

omg mindreader.

[AnticorRifling]

With all that cock in there, I don't think there's enough room.

I knew the joke was there when I typed it, just wanted to see if you were awake yet.

[diethx]

I don't think Rob's weenie really counts as "all that cock", btw. Maybe "that tiny bit of cock".

[NocturnalRob]

DOES TOO COUNT!!

[Parkbandit]

I gotta get some action somehow.


In all honesty, I don't get why we don't adopt security/airport policy like Israel's.

Because they use RACIAL PROFILING!!!!!!!¡ ¡¡!!

[Sean]

Is this guys 15 minutes up yet? Personally, I would have just walked through the booth, beats a pat down any day of the week.

[Latrinsorm]

But they won't detected powdered bombs. In fact they would not have detected that underwear bomb.I can't speak for backscatter x-ray, but THz detectors absolutely would detect the materials you describe, in addition to chemical agents such as anthrax. Terahertz also has the advantage of being non-ionizing and completely harmless to humans (we actually emit it), so even that negligible risk is removed.

[Clove]

Said abuse is now exacerbated due to the quality of people hired for said positions.I read the TSA job requirements you posted and it seems like they're looking for someone who is:

Over 18.
Fluent in English.
Has completed a minimum high school education or has sigificant related job experience.
Is current with their taxes.
Is current with child support.
Hasn't any serious credit issues.
Is not using illegal drugs.
Has no criminal background.
Does not show up for work intoxicated or otherwise unfit.

This individual is assumedly willing to meet these requirements in exchange for a starting wage of 8.00-10.00 dollars an hour?

This doesn't sound like the base requirements of an immature, irresponsible person to me. In fact I would be surprised if many experienced, educated professionals you are willing to trust with more serious matters were able to meet these standards (especially the drug, taxes and credit elements).

[Parkbandit]

With the exception of taxes and child support, those requirements have been the minimal requirements of most jobs.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Is this guys 15 minutes up yet? Personally, I would have just walked through the booth, beats a pat down any day of the week.

My thoughts as well. Although that police officer in the video who grabs the guys penis cracks me the fuck up.

[Clove]

With the exception of taxes and child support, those requirements have been the minimal requirements of most jobs.I'm going to have to ask for a source for this. I've never had to submit to a criminal background check or drug screening. On the flip side every employer has been very interested in my credit and in some cases my tax status.

An 18-24 year old can very easily get a job that pays 8-10 an hour without having to meet most of those requirements.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I'm going to have to ask for a source for this. I've never had to submit to a criminal background check or drug screening.

Me either!

[AnticorRifling]

Every job I've had has required a background check, financials check and a drug test. There I countered YOUR MOVE!

[Parkbandit]

I'm going to have to ask for a source for this. I've never had to submit to a criminal background check or drug screening. On the flip side every employer has been very interested in my credit and in some cases my tax status.

An 18-24 year old can very easily get a job that pays 8-10 an hour without having to meet most of those requirements.

Maybe you should have applied to companies where you have some responsibilities. Working in the hotel industry for 20 years, we had ALL of our employees do drug and criminal background checks. Anyone who touched any money had to have a clean credit report.. so that was any front desk clerks, restaurant servers, gift shop and of course all managers. You can use me for the source, since I was the one that had to approve all hires and make sure all these checks were in place.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Working in the tax world for the past 6 years, we didn't do background checks or credit checks on anyone until 2 years ago.

Source: Me.

[AnticorRifling]

Working in the tax world for the past 6 years, we didn't do background checks or credit checks on anyone until 2 years ago.

Source: Me.

So you have them now?

Source: You.

Or are we just talking about the good ol'days because I thought this was a current events kind of thing.

[Parkbandit]

Working in the tax world for the past 6 years, we didn't do background checks or credit checks on anyone until 2 years ago.

Source: Me.

But you do them now?

Grats on getting with the times!

[CrystalTears]

Maybe you should have applied to companies where you have some responsibilities. Working in the hotel industry for 20 years, we had ALL of our employees do drug and criminal background checks. Anyone who touched any money had to have a clean credit report.. so that was any front desk clerks, restaurant servers, gift shop and of course all managers. You can use me for the source, since I was the one that had to approve all hires and make sure all these checks were in place.
Every corporation I've worked for has not required a criminal background check or initial drug screening. I've only had that occur once and it was when I was getting hired at a security company.

Needing a credit check when handling money is a given though.

[Parkbandit]

So you have them now?

Source: You.

Or are we just talking about the good ol'days because I thought this was a current events kind of thing.

FUCK YOU

[AnticorRifling]

FUCK YOU

HAHAHA PWNT!

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

So you have them now?

Source: You.

Or are we just talking about the good ol'days because I thought this was a current events kind of thing.

Considering TSA has been around more than 2 years, it's a valid counter argument.

Source: Logic.

[Parkbandit]

Considering TSA has been around more than 2 years, it's a valid counter argument.

Source: Logic.

You suck.. come to Dunemaul.

Source: World of Warcraft

[NocturnalRob]

HAHAHA PWNT!
What is "Things AR says after he has sex with his wife?"

[Gan]

Every job I've had has required a background check and a drug screen.
Two of which have required state and federal screening (FBI, DPS, etc.)

[Rinualdo]

Aside from college era jobs, mine have all required a fairly through investigation.

[AnticorRifling]

Considering TSA has been around more than 2 years, it's a valid counter argument.

Source: Logic.

So because you haven't had to do a background check prior to 2 years ago you feel that's the standard?

Source: Wait..what?

Can you show me their hiring requirements from 2001 to make your argument logical? Or do companies never change those?

I think your reaching SHM. And I would agree with PB that most corporate jobs have required those standard checks for a long time now. Again every single position I've held in my working life (excluding working on the family farm and family resturants) has required them. Now granted that time frame doesn't span the 60+ years of PB but still it's way more than 2.

[CrystalTears]

I suppose it's fair to say that the jobs themselves depend on the degree of background checking needs. Office jobs such as IT, business management, and such do not require such background needs. Certainly not in any of the ones I've worked at.

[AnticorRifling]

Aside from college era jobs, mine have all required a fairly through investigation.

Through what?

[AnticorRifling]

I suppose it's fair to say that the jobs themselves depend on the degree of background checking needs. Office jobs such as IT, business management, and such do not require such background needs.

Negative. Maybe from industry to industry but IT is what I (pretend to) do and all of them require(d) fins, background, drug.

[CrystalTears]

Negative. Maybe from industry to industry but IT is what I (pretend to) do and all of them require(d) fins, background, drug.
Then the region perhaps? As I have said, I've gone through those once. :shrug:

[Rinualdo]

Through what?

Through my thoroughly piss-poor spelling.

[Gan]

From McDonalds website: (at a minimum they do background checks)

http://www.mctexas.com/careers/apply-online/14995/



During the past 5 years, have you ever been convicted of, pled guilty to or pled no contest to, a crime, excluding misdemeanors and traffic violations? *

If yes, describe in full:

(*A conviction will not necessarily bar you from employment)
Applicants are not required to disclose sealed or expunged conviction records or the existence of such records.

Please let us know if you have ever been convicted of a crime.
Are you or have you ever been a sex offender registered with any federal, state or local government agency, including any listing on a public web site? *


I certify that I have read this application and the information on it is complete and correct. I understand that any omissions or misrepresentation of information is grounds for dismissal.
I authorize the persons, employers, schools and organizations listed on this application to give you any information concerning my employment and other pertinent information they may have, personal and otherwise, and release all parties from all liability and damages that may result from furnishing this to you.
I acknowledge that I am applying for employment with an independently owned and operated McDonald's franchisee, a separate company and employer from McDonald's Corporation and any of its subsidiaries.
I acknowledge that the owner of this McDonald's franchise reserves the right to amend or modify any of its handbooks or policies at any time and without prior notice. These policies do not create any promises or contractual rights between this employer and its employees. At this independently owned and operated McDonald's franchise, employment is at will. This means an employee is free to terminate his/her employment at any time, without any reason, with or without cause, and the franchise owner retains these same rights. The owner of this independently owned and operated McDonald's franchise is the only person who may make an exception to this, and any exception must be in writing, addressed to a particular individual, and signed by the owner.
This independent McDonald's franchise is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Various federal, state, and local laws prohibit discrimination on account of race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability or veterans status. It is this McDonald's franchise policy to comply fully with these laws, as applicable, and information requested on this application will not be used for any purpose prohibited by law.
I understand that as a part of the procedure for my employment application an investigative consumer report may be made concerning my character, general reputation, personal characteristics and mode of living. Upon written request, additional disclosure concerning the complete nature and scope of the investigation will be provided. If I am denied a job based either wholly or in part because of information contained in an investigative consumer report, I will be provided the name and address of the reporting agency that supplies the information.

[CrystalTears]

I'll contend that checks may be conducted more in the last 2-3 years than previously. I worked at McDonalds while in high school and I didn't have a background check conducted. Oh well.

[AnticorRifling]

Then the region perhaps? As I have said, I've gone through those once. :shrug:

Possibly. You damn East coasters with your lax standards.

[CrystalTears]

Possibly. You damn East coasters with your lax standards.
They'll hire any old bitch over heah. :D

[Parkbandit]

I think your reaching SHM. And I would agree with PB that most corporate jobs have required those standard checks for a long time now. Again every single position I've held in my working life (excluding working on the family farm and family resturants) has required them. Now granted that time frame doesn't span the 60+ years of PB but still it's way more than 2.

http://www.godieinafire.com/Pics/Misc/diaf.jpg

[Gan]

:lol:

[Clove]

Maybe you should have applied to companies where you have some responsibilities. Working in the hotel industry for 20 years, we had ALL of our employees do drug and criminal background checks. Anyone who touched any money had to have a clean credit report.. so that was any front desk clerks, restaurant servers, gift shop and of course all managers. You can use me for the source, since I was the one that had to approve all hires and make sure all these checks were in place.So that means most jobs require this then. I work for companies that don't waste money screening a restaurant server for pot or bad credit.

I know, I know. I'm only saying this because I don't like how the elections turned out.

[Sean]

I don't know anyone in my field who has subjected themselves to background, drug, or credit checks of employment. But ancedotes are sitll awesome.

[Gan]

Its interesting that employees with fiduciary responsibilities are not pre-screened for credit/debt issues.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

So because you haven't had to do a background check prior to 2 years ago you feel that's the standard?

Source: Wait..what?

Can you show me their hiring requirements from 2001 to make your argument logical? Or do companies never change those?

I think your reaching SHM. And I would agree with PB that most corporate jobs have required those standard checks for a long time now. Again every single position I've held in my working life (excluding working on the family farm and family resturants) has required them. Now granted that time frame doesn't span the 60+ years of PB but still it's way more than 2.

I am the epitome of white collar America. I've worked fortune 500 companies for the past 18 years. I have never had a background check, drug check or even my references checked.

There are lower positions in both industries I worked in, that do require it now (both deal with credit cards, one deals with SSNs), but only very recently has that become a requirement for entry level positions. MY position(s) have NEVER required it, still don't, and I have access to SSN, CC, and every bit of personal information in my current company as I work in HR. My only restriction is I'm black listed from buying/selling stock at certain times of the year.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I also think you may be confusing a background check, credit check and criminal check. Each of them have a tremendous amount of variance as far as what is done. Some criminal checks actually have clerks going to courts pulling paper documents, some just scan a database.

Saying McDonalds has a background check comparable with the TSA background check is very likely apples to oranges. Seems intentionally obtuse to me, but if it's true I'd share concerns. Since only people at McDonald's and the TSA know the extent of the checks, I doubt we'll ever know.

[Liagala]

Background check discussion is boring. Can we please get back to groping and/or photographing naughty bits?

[NocturnalRob]

Background check discussion is boring. Can we please get back to groping and/or photographing naughty bits?
^^ this

[CrystalTears]

Saying McDonalds has a background check comparable with the TSA background check is very likely apples to oranges. Seems intentionally obtuse to me, but if it's true I'd share concerns. Since only people at McDonald's and the TSA know the extent of the checks, I doubt we'll ever know.
There's a difference between a POSSIBLE background check and a REQUIRED background check. Most companies have a clause in their application stating that everyone is subject to a background check at the discretion of the company, but that doesn't mean they absolutely will do it. It's an expense to do it for everyone, especially a company with as much turnover as McDonald's.

[zhelas]

http://www.13wham.com/news/local/story/Pat-Down-at-Airport-Too-Up-Close-Too-Personal/81u8F_uhYkeLo_pg3NHWWA.cspx

I guess you can get your handjob when going through security.


Rochester, N.Y. - We've heard concerns about new security screening procedures at airports--one man from Texas says he was in appropriately searched at a Florida airport.

Thomas Mollman's attorney says the TSA's behavior is no different than sexual assault.

Mollman had recently undergone surgery and was on pain medication, and when he forgot to remove his cell phone walking through security, he was pulled aside.

That's when Mollman said he was searched three separate times, the final time, underneath his pants, on the skin.

"I was wearing shorts at the time…between the underwear right on the skin, all the way around the back, all the way around my front--360 degrees--touched inappropriately here and here, Mollman said."

Mollman plans to file a complaint, but the TSA released a statement saying that pat-downs make good security sense.

The TSA also reminds travelers that they have the right to have a traveling companion present when they're searched.

[diethx]

I once had to take a drug test to work in a supermarket deli. I told the manager i'd probably fail, but I didn't and he hired me anyway, lol.

[Tgo01]

I had to take a drug test to push carts at a local grocery store when I was younger. Guess they were afraid I might get high, jump on a moving cart and land on my stomach and pretend I was super man.

[4a6c1]

^Obviously you never even considered that. No thought put into that scenario whatsoever. lulz.

[Tgo01]

Hey I never said I didn't do it.

[Warriorbird]

I had to take a drug test to push carts at a local grocery store when I was younger. Guess they were afraid I might get high, jump on a moving cart and land on my stomach and pretend I was super man.

I do that without getting high.

[Showal]

Wait ... you can have a travelling companion present? My girlfriend would LOVE to watch me get groped 360 degrees by a man in a blue uniform in public.

[Gnome Rage]

Holy shit. I was watching AFV and now the 700 club is talking about this.

It was so funny seeing an old man say "If you touch my junk"

[Showal]

Holy shit. I was watching AFV and now the 700 club is talking about this.

It was so funny seeing an old man say "If you touch my junk"

Shut up or you'll get the 360 under the pants.

[AnticorRifling]

I am the epitome of white collar America. I've worked fortune 500 companies for the past 18 years. I have never had a background check, drug check or even my references checked.

There are lower positions in both industries I worked in, that do require it now (both deal with credit cards, one deals with SSNs), but only very recently has that become a requirement for entry level positions. MY position(s) have NEVER required it, still don't, and I have access to SSN, CC, and every bit of personal information in my current company as I work in HR. My only restriction is I'm black listed from buying/selling stock at certain times of the year.

I've worked for the government/DoD, fortune 500, fortune 100, and private sector in the last 13. (Go me?!)

Do you think maybe the industry you work in is behind the times and because of lax previous standards and something going wrong it's now trying to play catch up and correct itself? Hell shouldn't you be trying to get those in place as HR? Or at the very least encouraging your security side to put something in place to prevent shrinkage and potentially non productive and/or hostile work environments?

Blackouts on buying stock....isn't that every employee of every public traded company everywhere?

I don't understand why you think just because you personally some how got into a position that SHOULD require all of the proper checks that it's standard.


Again since I've gone across several sectors and each and every time I've submitted to every check we've talked about I'd be more inclined to believe that is, and should be, the standard.


Saying McDonalds has a background check comparable with the TSA background check is very likely apples to oranges. Seems intentionally obtuse to me, but if it's true I'd share concerns. Since only people at McDonald's and the TSA know the extent of the checks, I doubt we'll ever know.

It's not apples and oranges at all. Just because one might be more through (spelling brought to you by Rinauldo) doesn't mean they aren't providing an appropriate level of detail for the position in question.

When I processed applicants for security clearance(s) for my unit, or if they were moving to a new unit where it was required I'd process it so they didn't get to the new assignment and sit around waiting on it, the level of detail was dependant on the level of clearance but it was still the same basic process. Checking backgrounds. When I process new hires it's the same thing a process to check if the candidates background is favorable for employment. Is it the same level of detail as the EPSQ/SF-86 process? No. Is it adequate for making a decision on "Do I want this person in my company and having any kind of inside access to my assets/business"? Yes.

Again this is coming from doing both government/DoD screenings (both as an applicant and as the administrator of said screening) and from public (large publicly traded company) sector screenings (both as an applicant and as the administrator.

[NocturnalRob]

AR, just calm down and buy a shirt.

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbzsnqSy431qzpwi0o1_500.jpg

[AnticorRifling]

Can't see it at work and I'm downloading a bunch of shit on my new phone atm so I can't check it there for awhile. I'll assume the shirt just says I'm awesome.

[Gan]

That shirt rocks.

[zhelas]

Each person who walks through the full body scan should receive a T shirt showing their nude scan.

[Gan]

I am the epitome of white collar America. I've worked fortune 500 companies for the past 18 years. I have never had a background check, drug check or even my references checked.

MY position(s) have NEVER required it, still don't, and I have access to SSN, CC, and every bit of personal information in my current company as I work in HR. My only restriction is I'm black listed from buying/selling stock at certain times of the year.

Somehow I find this hard to believe, that you have access to the HR personnel files of the company you work for and yet you've never had a background check.

Really hard to believe.

[Tordane]

Really hard to believe.

Seconded.

[Cephalopod]

Somehow I find this hard to believe, that you have access to the HR personnel files of the company you work for and yet you've never had a background check.

Really hard to believe.

IT people frequently have de facto access to this sort of information, without a full background check, especially in companies with small IT departments.

[AnticorRifling]

IT people frequently have de facto access to this sort of information, without a full background check, especially in companies with small IT departments.

Again wtf? That's just horrible practice and shouldn't be considered standard by anyone. See my rant above, hell currently I'm in a small company (20-40 employees) and I had to do all of the, what I consider, standard checks prior to accepting an offer.

[Liagala]

Somehow I find this hard to believe, that you have access to the HR personnel files of the company you work for and yet you've never had a background check.

Really hard to believe.

I find it very easy to believe. I work for a small company, and I have all that access without a background check. Even in large companies, if he's been there a long time, it's very possible that he bypassed the checks. Start out 10-15 years ago as a paper-pusher who barely has access to the trash bin, so there's no need for background checks. Over time, he slowly gets promotions with just a tiny bit more access each time. By the time he reaches a level where he sees sensitive information, he's probably been with the company longer than his boss has, so no one even thinks to check him.

Now that's settled, can we please get back to the more interesting side of the conversation? LOL @ the Homeland Security t-shirt.

[Tordane]

IT people frequently have de facto access to this sort of information, without a full background check, especially in companies with small IT departments.

I can see this. Many people have no clue what their IT department actually has access to so it would make sense for smaller companies to not comprehend what Johnny and his server room has on them. I know I surprise upper management from time to time when I have to tell them something they didn't realize was tracked or available to me.

[Cephalopod]

Again wtf? That's just horrible practice and shouldn't be considered standard by anyone. See my rant above, hell currently I'm in a small company (20-40 employees) and I had to do all of the, what I consider, standard checks prior to accepting an offer.

Many years ago, I worked at a 24x7 call center that was run by a daughter-company of a Fortune 500. I was the SysAdmin of the datacenter that went with this daughter-company and had de facto access to all information on all servers in the (daughter) company, including insurance information for millions of customers. The parent company was VERY strict with their information security policies, but this was a glaring hole in a number of their daughter companies. When I left the company, I helped them fix this. Just sayin', though... best practices are frequently not followed.

(Keep in mind this was also in the late 90s, so network security was a much younger discipline then.)

I did have to have a drug test, but I was not subjected to a background check.

[Gan]

IT people frequently have de facto access to this sort of information, without a full background check, especially in companies with small IT departments.

A fortune 500/100 company would have a very competent risk management/HR/IT department with permissions, security protocols, and internal policies where access to said information would require if not demand the person with access to have been screened and cleared by a background check.

Not buying it.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Some NJ Legislators seem to have a little problem with the TSA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H9HNEtrvEE

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Somehow I find this hard to believe, that you have access to the HR personnel files of the company you work for and yet you've never had a background check.

Really hard to believe.


Seconded.


I find it very easy to believe. I work for a small company, and I have all that access without a background check. Even in large companies, if he's been there a long time, it's very possible that he bypassed the checks. Start out 10-15 years ago as a paper-pusher who barely has access to the trash bin, so there's no need for background checks. Over time, he slowly gets promotions with just a tiny bit more access each time. By the time he reaches a level where he sees sensitive information, he's probably been with the company longer than his boss has, so no one even thinks to check him.

Now that's settled, can we please get back to the more interesting side of the conversation? LOL @ the Homeland Security t-shirt.

Believe it or not, it's true.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

A fortune 500/100 company would have a very competent risk management/HR/IT department with permissions, security protocols, and internal policies where access to said information would require if not demand the person with access to have been screened and cleared by a background check.

Not buying it.

Just my opinion, but my IT department is not what I would consider cutting edge. We keep client information safe from outside eyes, but employees, especially ones like me with database, sql and programming knowledge and access, can get to most anything.

[AnticorRifling]

Just my opinion, but my IT department is not what I would consider cutting edge. We keep client information safe from outside eyes, but employees, especially ones like me with database, sql and programming knowledge and access, can get to most anything.

Threats to data are rarely caused by an outside source. That doesn't take cutting edge to figure out.

Now if you realize this to be true why aren't you trying to change policy?

[Warriorbird]

Middle management inertia is very very common in companies of all sizes.

[Gan]

Just my opinion, but my IT department is not what I would consider cutting edge. We keep client information safe from outside eyes, but employees, especially ones like me with database, sql and programming knowledge and access, can get to most anything.

More importantly how would all of those employees feel if they knew that their personal information was open to people who supposedly do not have a background check and with no checks in place to protect that information from getting into unauthorized hands? And that their management knew about it and yet did nothing to prevent or secure said information?

LOL what company do you work for again?


Threats to data are rarely caused by an outside source. That doesn't take cutting edge to figure out.

Now if you realize this to be true why aren't you trying to change policy?

Bingo.

[zhelas]

Duncan Blasts TSA Pat-Downs, Body Scanners

http://duncan.house.gov/2010/11/duncan-blasts-tsa-pat-downs-body-scanners.shtml

WASHINGTON – Congressman John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-Tenn.) blasted the Transportation Security Administration Wednesday during a speech on the floor of the House of Representatives for invasive “pat-downs” of U.S. citizens and the role lucrative government contracts played in the use of body scanning machines at airport checkpoints.

Duncan, former Chairman of the House Aviation Subcommittee and the current top Republican on the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, said: “Unfortunately, for the traveling public, big brother never makes a mistake, so I am not surprised they are trying to defend the purchase of these scanners.”

The text of Rep. Duncan’s speech is copied below:

Mr. Speaker:

A nationwide revolt is developing over the body scanners at the airports, and it should.

Hundreds of thousands of frequent fliers who fly each week are upset about getting these frequent doses of radiation.

Parents are upset about being forced to have their children radiated or being touched inappropriately by an unrelated adult.

There is already plenty of security at the airport, but now we are going to spend up to $300 million to install 1,000 scanners.

This is much more about money than it is about security.

The former Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, represents Rapiscan, the company which is selling these scanners to his former department.

Far too many federal contracts are sweetheart, insider deals.

Companies hire former high ranking federal officials, and then magically, those companies get hugely profitable federal contracts.

The American people should not have to choose between having full-body radiation or a very embarrassing, intrusive pat-down every time they fly, as if they were criminals.

We need a little more balance and common sense on this.

[4a6c1]

Ooooh. Perspective.

[Latrinsorm]

The American people should not have to choose between having full-body radiation or a very embarrassing, intrusive pat-down every time they fly, as if they were criminals.

We need a little more balance and common sense on this.In questions of science, what we absolutely need more of is good ol' down-home common sense.

[AnticorRifling]

In questions of science, what we absolutely need more of is good ol' down-home common sense.

I'm glad we both agree that touching people's junk is a science.

[Latrinsorm]

It is when you touch it with RAY DEE A SHUN.

[4a6c1]

Ohhhh. What is that?!! What is that theory that states contrary thought is conductive to intuitive thought. WHAT IS IT CALLED.

Cannot properly refudiate (oh yes i did). Cannot remember theorum name. Sad sad.

[zhelas]

DA promises to prosecute overly touchy pat downs

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/peninsula&id=7793386

...The charge -- sexual battery.

"If it is skin to skin, if someone were to take their hand and put it underneath somebody's blouse and touch someone inappropriately and go skin to skin, that's a felony, and if it's done simply over the clothing, according to California law, that's a misdemeanor," Wagstaffe said.

...As for the assurance that the images from body scanners are never saved, tech blog Gizmodo obtained 100 saved photos after filing a request through the Freedom of Information Act, just a few of the 35,000 photos that were stored on a machine at the federal courthouse in Miami.

[Gan]

Imagine that. Saved images getting out to the public.

Who'dathoughtthat?

[Gan]

In questions of science, what we absolutely need more of is good ol' down-home common sense.

$ounds like it's more a question of money...

[CrystalTears]

Imagine that. Saved images getting out to the public.

Who'dathoughtthat?
They're not recognizable, and they're not linked to the person.

[zhelas]

They're not recognizable, and they're not linked to the person.

The images you see there had their resolution purposely reduced. The images at the airports are more enhanced. They can be saved. Folks have to hope that the promise never to make them public is kept.

[4a6c1]

So has anyone actually been to the airport since all this has started? I'm concerned mostly with what procedures they are taking with children under the age of 5.

[Liagala]

I'm concerned mostly with what procedures they are taking with children under the age of 18.

Fixed, and this. Someone shop up a picture of a bunch of 12-year-olds at the airport, with pedobear in a TSA uniform plz.

[Sean]

Fixed, and this. Someone shop up a picture of a bunch of 12-year-olds at the airport, with pedobear in a TSA uniform plz.

You can't just ask SR to pose with some kids?

[4a6c1]

LOL. I was going to go to Nova Scotia for Xmas to visit family. Obviously I cant if some airport proposes I let them feel up my toddler and/or take naky pictures of her. :(

[zhelas]

So has anyone actually been to the airport since all this has started? I'm concerned mostly with what procedures they are taking with children under the age of 5.

http://www.myvidster.com/video/600891/Video_of_TSA_Screener_Accosting_3_Year_Old_Child_a t_Security_Checkpoint

Ask at the ticket counter to make sure your child is not scheduled for extra screening.

[Liagala]

LOL. I was going to go to Nova Scotia for Xmas to visit family. Obviously I cant if some airport proposes I let them feel up my toddler and/or take naky pictures of her. :(

Pedo-playboy FTL

[CrystalTears]

The images you see there had their resolution purposely reduced. The images at the airports are more enhanced. They can be saved. Folks have to hope that the promise never to make them public is kept.
And I'm just saying there is no way to determine who any of those people are. There are no details to those images and they are not identified by who they are images of.

When THAT element is compromised and they all have a name attached to them, then we'll have a valid discussion. Until then, a scanned image of me floating around that does not state it is me does not bother me.

[AnticorRifling]

Why wouldn't the toddler get screened like everyone else?

Same reason people used to hand little kids grenades and run them into a camp. Ohh little kid let's help BLAMMO. It's not pretty, it's not fair, and it sure as shit isn't right. But it does happen.

Anyone flying regardless of age, gender, color, etc. needs the same amount of screening. It needs to be equal across to board to prevent gaps used to by those seeking to do harm. I'm not saying that means with the current systems everything is cool but whatever solutions and procedures are implemented there should be no special passes.

[4a6c1]

http://www.myvidster.com/video/600891/Video_of_TSA_Screener_Accosting_3_Year_Old_Child_a t_Security_Checkpoint

Ask at the ticket counter to make sure your child is not scheduled for extra screening.

:(

[Sean]

Why wouldn't the toddler get screened like everyone else?

Same reason people used to hand little kids grenades and run them into a camp. Ohh little kid let's help BLAMMO. It's not pretty, it's not fair, and it sure as shit isn't right. But it does happen.

Anyone flying regardless of age, gender, color, etc. needs the same amount of screening. It needs to be equal across to board to prevent gaps used to by those seeking to do harm. I'm not saying that means with the current systems everything is cool but whatever solutions and procedures are implemented there should be no special passes.

AR leading the fight on terror babies.

[Liagala]

And I'm just saying there is no way to determine who any of those people are. There are no details to those images and they are not identified by who they are images of.

When THAT element is compromised and they all have a name attached to them, then we'll have a valid discussion. Until then, a scanned image of me floating around that does not state it is me does not bother me.

How do you feel about cases where someone sends naked pictures (no face included) to a significant other, and then those pictures show up on the internet? Assuming there's no name attached, that's perfectly okay? I don't see it. It's a violation of trust. They trusted their SO, and the general public trusts the government. Either way, that trust is violated. The fact that there's no name on the picture doesn't change that.


Anyone flying regardless of age, gender, color, etc. needs the same amount of screening. It needs to be equal across to board to prevent gaps used to by those seeking to do harm. I'm not saying that means with the current systems everything is cool but whatever solutions and procedures are implemented there should be no special passes.

This however, I can agree with. The current system is absolutely not the way to do it, but whatever we do come up with should be something that we can comfortably institute across the board, for every single passenger on every single plane. I have no idea how the chemistry/physics/whatever works, but could we build a scanner that analyzes the chemical makeup of whatever passes through it? If it finds something that isn't normally included in people/clothing, they get pulled out for a wand search thing. That would be more effective and far less invasive.

Hell, even the current porn and/or groping couldn't detect something shoved up some guy's ass or a woman's vagina.

[CrystalTears]

http://www.myvidster.com/video/600891/Video_of_TSA_Screener_Accosting_3_Year_Old_Child_a t_Security_Checkpoint

Ask at the ticket counter to make sure your child is not scheduled for extra screening.
I'm not seeing what was so horrible. If you read the story of why this even happened, she was holding a teddy bear. It was taken away to be scanned, so she immediately threw a tantrum. While going through the metal detector, it went off twice. At that point they needed to check. The TSA person patted down her arms and legs. I didn't see any violation going on there. She was being checked like anyone else, and while in the hands of her mother.

So kind of the father to stand back and watch it if he was so upset about it so that he can get his 15 minutes of fame too.

[CrystalTears]

How do you feel about cases where someone sends naked pictures (no face included) to a significant other, and then those pictures show up on the internet? Assuming there's no name attached, that's perfectly okay? I don't see it. It's a violation of trust. They trusted their SO, and the general public trusts the government. Either way, that trust is violated. The fact that there's no name on the picture doesn't change that.There's a huge difference between removing the face on a picture that has the rest of the detailed body revealed, compared to a chalk outline of a figure with no details of any kind.

[zhelas]

I'm not seeing what was so horrible. If you read the story of why this even happened, she was holding a teddy bear. It was taken away to be scanned, so she immediately threw a tantrum. While going through the metal detector, it went off twice. At that point they needed to check. The TSA person patted down her arms and legs. I didn't see any violation going on there. She was being checked like anyone else, and while in the hands of her mother.

So kind of the father to stand back and watch it if he was so upset about it so that he can get his 15 minutes of fame too.

I don't defend the father, mother or the tsa agent. What made me sick was the fact that it was poorly handled. There is no reason to put a 3 year old through that.

[CrystalTears]

I don't defend the father, mother or the tsa agent. What made me sick was the fact that it was poorly handled. There is no reason to put a 3 year old through that.
If patting down a child's arms and legs after the metal detector goes off is poorly handled, then she's not getting on the plane until the mother completely undresses the child. Is that better?

[4a6c1]

I'm not seeing what was so horrible. If you read the story of why this even happened, she was holding a teddy bear. It was taken away to be scanned, so she immediately threw a tantrum. While going through the metal detector, it went off twice. At that point they needed to check. The TSA person patted down her arms and legs. I didn't see any violation going on there. She was being checked like anyone else, and while in the hands of her mother.

So kind of the father to stand back and watch it if he was so upset about it so that he can get his 15 minutes of fame too.

Ok what makes me not okay with this is imagining how I would explain it to my daughter, if she ever asked. Which is basically how I make all my decisions these days.

"Mom, why do you tell me that I shouldnt talk to strangers because some strangers might want to touch me inappropriately but then police at the airport are allowed to touch me inappropriately."

In my view they arent special. They arent doctors, they arent doing it. Fin.

[Sean]

Ok what makes me not okay with this is imagining how I would explain it to my daughter, if she ever asked. Which is basically how I make all my decisions these days.

"Mom, why do you tell me that I shouldnt talk to strangers because some strangers might want to touch me inappropriately but then police at the airport are allowed to touch me inappropriately."

In my view they arent special. They arent doctors, they arent doing it. Fin.

And then you're okay with not flying so it's fine.

[zhelas]

If patting down a child's arms and legs after the metal detector goes off is poorly handled, then she's not getting on the plane until the mother completely undresses the child. Is that better?

You know, I don't have the right answer. Fortunately some of the senators agree that it was poorly handled and a re evaluation of the system is in order.

[AnticorRifling]

Ok what makes me not okay with this is imagining how I would explain it to my daughter, if she ever asked. Which is basically how I make all my decisions these days.

"Mom, why do you tell me that I shouldnt talk to strangers because some strangers might want to touch me inappropriately but then police at the airport are allowed to touch me inappropriately."

In my view they arent special. They arent doctors, they arent doing it. Fin.

Mommy why did they let that kid on who had C4 in his drawers and it blew up the plane and killed 400 people? I thought we looked for stuff like that.

Other people will use kids as a weapon. Fin.

[4a6c1]

And then you're okay with not flying so it's fine.

I might need to fly. But yeah. I guess I wont be doing it anytime soon.

[zhelas]

And then you're okay with not flying so it's fine.

Just because one buys a ticket to fly doesn't give the government the right to ignore a person's civil rights.

[4a6c1]

Mommy why did they let that kid on who had C4 in his drawers and it blew up the plane and killed 400 people? I thought we looked for stuff like that.

Other people will use kids as a weapon. Fin.

Where do we draw the line? If they dictate that every 1 of 10 people must do a cavity search. Really? You want to start teaching your kids that privatized authority figures are allowed to pass the normal boundaries of human decency. Ok thats you. I'm not. I dont think I'm the only one either.

Question everything questionable.

[Parkbandit]

Just because one buys a ticket to fly doesn't give the government the right to ignore a person's civil rights.

Actually, it does. You don't have a right to fly.. and as such you must abide by their rules and policies. You don't like it? Don't fly.

[CrystalTears]

Ok what makes me not okay with this is imagining how I would explain it to my daughter, if she ever asked. Which is basically how I make all my decisions these days.

"Mom, why do you tell me that I shouldnt talk to strangers because some strangers might want to touch me inappropriately but then police at the airport are allowed to touch me inappropriately."

In my view they arent special. They arent doctors, they arent doing it. Fin.
What's inappropriate? Do you mean at all? Patting down arms and legs while in your arms supervising is inappropriate?

[Gan]

Fixed, and this. Someone shop up a picture of a bunch of 12-year-olds at the airport, with pedobear in a TSA uniform plz.

.

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2010/11/500x_tsa-humor-book.jpg

[zhelas]

Actually, it does. You don't have a right to fly.. and as such you must abide by their rules and policies. You don't like it? Don't fly.

It is true that one doesn't have to fly.

So how effective are these scans and searches? Would they have detected the underwear bomb? Will they detect an explosive inserted in the anus or vagina? What do you do for folks who have had extensive radiation from past illnesses and have been informed by their doctors not to be exposed to this radiation?

There are religious groups that find this offensive, not because they would be hiding an explosive.

A parent explains to their kids it is not right for strangers to take naked photos of them or to be touched in such a way but it is okay for a TSA stranger to do so?

I agree safety IS important but are we absolutely sure with the current setup that this is the proper balance?

[Cephalopod]

Fixed, and this. Someone shop up a picture of a bunch of 12-year-olds at the airport, with pedobear in a TSA uniform plz.

I posted a Pedo-TSA pic a few days ago!

Here, have another:
http://i.imgur.com/zB7xt.png

I can't add a picture of 12 year olds, because it will flag the FBI's attention. They have a special trace on me.

[CrystalTears]

Just because one buys a ticket to fly doesn't give the government the right to ignore a person's civil rights.
It's unfortunate that this is the policy at the moment. I'd prefer if the searches were conducted by the airlines and they can decide what level of security they require and then it can be an individual decision about what airline to chose. Right now, you're kinda screwed no matter who you choose.

[Liagala]

There's a huge difference between removing the face on a picture that has the rest of the detailed body revealed, compared to a chalk outline of a figure with no details of any kind.

This (http://www.forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=1198887&postcount=104) is a lot more than just a chalk outline. You can very clearly see the whole package, and even a suggestion of face. To some people, that suggestion of face may be anonymous enough that they're okay with it. I'm not.

[CrystalTears]

This (http://www.forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=1198887&postcount=104) is a lot more than just a chalk outline. You can very clearly see the whole package, and even a suggestion of face. To some people, that suggestion of face may be anonymous enough that they're okay with it. I'm not.
That wasn't the kind of images I had seen that were typical of scanner images. I was under the impression they looked more like this (http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/1I/esq-naked-body-scan-image-tsa-111710-xlg.jpg)or this (http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2008/12/19/image4678491g.jpg) or this (http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2010/11/tsa-release-images-2-050808-726403.jpg). So which is it?