Frustrated with Airline Security? Try These.

[Disneyphile]

Please (http://www.cafepress.com/FlyWithFreedom1).

I made these this morning. ;)

[CoasterMatt]

Don't think of it as a TSA patdown, think of it as getting to second base with Uncle Sam.

[€uroMeinke]

really, I think the TSA could have done a better job of selling this as a complementary hand job to each traveler

[Alex]

So long as they manage the lines so that people willing to use the scanners aren't slowed down by people who opt out I'm all in favor of them having issues since I have no issues at all with the scanners.

But I'm sure that the TSA agents will quickly grow immune to all the t-shirts and comments they will get.

[Disneyphile]

I still want to orgasmically moan if they ever touch me. ;)

[Chernabog]

S
But I'm sure that the TSA agents will quickly grow immune to all the t-shirts and comments they will get.

I was just reading an article on how it was doing the opposite, and they were getting depressed and upset having to do their jobs with people who are mean and/or have less than spectacular hygiene.

And Obama is between a rock and a hard place on this one. If he said "these measures are too stringent!" and something happened on a plane, he'd be blamed.

[katiesue]

I think I'll take the pat down, it's the closest I'll have gotten to getting lucky in quite some time :)

[Morrigoon]

Having read some information that conflicts with the TSA's assurances of safety for the backscatter x-ray, and combined with my strong family history of cancer, I'd opt for pat down too.

T: I posted a link to your shop on FB. That has the potential to make you a few bucks, well done!

[BarTopDancer]

In case you missed it elsewhere (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/11/18/another-tsa-outrage/).

[Ghoulish Delight]

Eh, I find that story mostly lame. Who the fuvk at this point doesn't know that nail clippers aren't allowed on airplanes? His gun was, by rule, unloaded. Just because he has special permission to carry that doesn't mean he's exempt from all other rules. Get over it and remember to take your damned nail clippers out.

Yes, the nail clippers rule is pretty stupid, but its stupidity is completely independent of him carrying his unloaded gun by special permission.

[BarTopDancer]

It was an entire flight of military personnel flying back from the Middle East forced to debark and be re-searched... after previously clearing security and customs and being contained in a secure facility where they had no contact with anyone or anything not already cleared by the TSA and customs.

That's the absurd part.

[JWBear]

Redstate? Really? REDSTATE?!

[Morrigoon]

Apparently the TSA sucks badly enough to unite red and blue against it? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of thing?

[Chernabog]

There are some really awesome trips to take on the Amtrak :)

[lashbear]

Who the fuvk at this point doesn't know that nail clippers aren't allowed on airplanes?.
Don't forget that I accidentally (really!) walked through USA international security with a Waiters Friend (Corkscrew & Knife combo) in my carry-on luggage that was put through the scanner. I gave it to a very surprised barmaid in the transit lounge.

[Moonliner]

Don't forget that I accidentally (really!) walked through USA international security with a Waiters Friend (Corkscrew & Knife combo) in my carry-on luggage that was put through the scanner. I gave it to a very surprised barmaid in the transit lounge.

Added to quotes for posterity.

[Ghoulish Delight]

It was an entire flight of military personnel flying back from the Middle East forced to debark and be re-searched... after previously clearing security and customs and being contained in a secure facility where they had no contact with anyone or anything not already cleared by the TSA and customs.

That's the absurd part.
Don't care. Someone screwed up and missed it the first time. So what? He still shouldn't have had it.

The absurdity has nothing to do with that fact that he was military, that the entire plane was military, that he was carrying an unloaded weapon, or any of the other circumstances. It's absurd that nail clippers are banned, the particulars around this instance of someone being "caught" with them are irrelevant to me.

[Kevy Baby]

Oh fine GD, just be all logical and everything!

When I flew out of John Wayne Airport (Orange County - SNA) on Sunday, there were body scanners or pat downs (at least that I saw). I don't think there are any yet in Des Moines (DSM), but I will let you know after I fly out today.

I am really on the fence about this. On the one hand, I am ambivalent as to whether I am scanned - if someone gets off on looking at my junk, then have at it. On the other hand, I am concerned as to whether we are having our personal liberties slowly chipped away at.

And as far as the hazard to one's health and/or effectiveness of the scanners, I believe it is too soon to say conclusively one way or the other on them. Yes, either side can point to expert testimony either way (on either point: safety or security) saying yea or nea, but who knows who is right. Eventually it will be found out that the machines cause (fill in the blank) cancer, but as with most measures like this, we will probably never know what it prevented.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

SNL's TSA Sketch (http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/message-from-tsa/1261478/)

[Gn2Dlnd]

On the other hand, I am concerned as to whether we are having our personal liberties slowly chipped away at.

Really? You can't tell?

[BarTopDancer]

Redstate? Really? REDSTATE?!

Not that it matters but someone sent me the link. So yes, redstate. Not everyone who is liberal is so far to the left they can't fathom looking at a site that might be from the other side. Sorry if I offended your delicate sensibilities. Or not.

Don't care. Someone screwed up and missed it the first time. So what? He still shouldn't have had it.

The absurdity has nothing to do with that fact that he was military, that the entire plane was military, that he was carrying an unloaded weapon, or any of the other circumstances. It's absurd that nail clippers are banned, the particulars around this instance of someone being "caught" with them are irrelevant to me.

Exactly! It's pointing out the absurdity of nail clippers being classified as a weapon. An unloaded gun can still cause a lot of physical damage.

I am really on the fence about this. On the one hand, I am ambivalent as to whether I am scanned - if someone gets off on looking at my junk, then have at it. On the other hand, I am concerned as to whether we are having our personal liberties slowly chipped away at.

Ditto.



The last time I flew they confiscated my friends can of deodorant but didn't' see the corkscrew in my carry on.

[Stan4dSteph]

Who the fuvk at this point doesn't know that nail clippers aren't allowed on airplanes?Nail clippers are allowed (http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2002/press_release_0104.shtm).

[Disneyphile]

I've heard that a bunch of guys are vowing to wear kilts (traditionally) and "opt-out" tomorrow. :evil:

Makes me want to wear a short skirt with no panties until I'm through security next time I fly. ;)

[JWBear]

Not that it matters but someone sent me the link. So yes, redstate. Not everyone who is liberal is so far to the left they can't fathom looking at a site that might be from the other side. Sorry if I offended your delicate sensibilities. Or not.

1) I'm not a liberal.

2) I look at plenty of sites, both left and right. Heck, I've even been to Fox News a few times. However, Redstate makes Fox look like Huffington Post. It's pure paranoid lunacy.

3) My sensibilities aren't nearly as delicate some here.

[€uroMeinke]

or maybe just fly with a trenchcoat

[Moonliner]

Makes me want to wear a short skirt with no panties until I'm through security next time I fly. ;)

or maybe just fly with a trenchcoat

My concern is the next time I take my teenage daughter on a trip.

Yes dear, you have a choice. Stand over there if you want them to take naked pictures of you or over here if you want to have Agent Pat get to third base with you.

[sleepyjeff]

or maybe just fly with a trenchcoat

:snap:



Yes dear, you have a choice. Stand over there if you want them to take naked pictures of you or over here if you want to have Agent Pat get to third base with you.

That would make a great Amtrak commercial!

[lashbear]

if someone gets off on looking at my junk, then have at it..
...and yet you still won't send me that photo... :rolleyes: :p

[wendybeth]

Speaking purely for myself, I have zero probs with a scan or a feel-up. The first, because I don't fly that much and so doubt the dreaded rays will do any more harm than my proximity to Hanford, and the second because it happens so seldom any more.;)

Seriously, I think flying, like driving, is not a 'right' but a privilege- and if you have nefarious plans to blow up my plane, I'd like your sorry ass to be busted beforehand. I'm not sure if the TSA's latest measures will be any more effective than prior ones, but something has to be better than nothing. It's a weird world we live in these days, and it's only going to get worse.

[Moonliner]

:snap:
That would make a great Amtrak commercial!

Except that Amtrak is already making plans. (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/130549-next-step-for-body-scanners-could-be-trains-boats-and-the-metro-)...

[Ghoulish Delight]

As overboard as airline "security" has become, the last time I traveled by Amtrak I was shocked at how little security there was. Namely, zero. No metal detectors, no baggage screening, you were actively encouraged to leave your bags unattended. And this was post-Madrid bombing.

I don't know whether to be shocked that there hasn't been an incident involving a train yet, or extra annoyed at the airport kabuki because there hasn't been an incident involving a train yet.

[sleepyjeff]

Except that Amtrak is already making plans. (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/130549-next-step-for-body-scanners-could-be-trains-boats-and-the-metro-)...




Just Wow, Amtrak has a lot of stops at stations that are not even manned....I just don't see how they can keep all those stops open if they try to do airport type security for the train.

I wonder, if they do somehow figure out how to secure the trains will they move on to city buses; taxis; elevators? Will each and every one of us have to report to a block captain before leaving our home for work each day?

Sometimes I wonder if the terrorists have already won:eek:

[Alex]

I think we should just have a general policy of saying that so long as the terrorism-related death rate is less than 0.001% (or whatever number) then current security measures are acceptable.

Quantify the level of acceptable risk and then accept that risk when it happens. That's the big problem I see behind all the stupid security. People say they're willing to accept a certain level of risk but then when the negative possibilities actually happen they end careers demanding to know why it wasn't prevented.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

What makes me think of the word "flabbergasted" is that the scanners have not been fully tested for safety. Have.Not. (http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/11/17/opt-out-of-backscatter-x-ray-whole-body-scanners) Eff that.1) I'm not a liberal.Um, what?

[Disneyphile]

Sometimes I wonder if the terrorists have already won:eek:The point of terrorism is to change everyday lifestyles and invoke fear, so yes, they have.

I think we should just have a general policy of saying that so long as the terrorism-related death rate is less than 0.001% (or whatever number) then current security measures are acceptable.But, with the way we're now doing things, we should have 4-way traffic lights at every intersection, including little residential side streets. ;)

[Moonliner]

I think we should just have a general policy of saying that so long as the terrorism-related death rate is less than 0.001% (or whatever number) then current security measures are acceptable.

Quantify the level of acceptable risk and then accept that risk when it happens. That's the big problem I see behind all the stupid security. People say they're willing to accept a certain level of risk but then when the negative possibilities actually happen they end careers demanding to know why it wasn't prevented.

I say use the death rate for traveling by car as your metric. As long as I have a better chance of getting killed driving to work than from a terrorist I'm good.

Of course that would decimate the mutil-billion dollar security industry as well as toss an entire government oligarchy out on it's keister.

[Ghoulish Delight]

My dad has a rule of thumb when observing traffic control options outside of major intersections. "Every stop sign represents a past accident at that intersection. Every traffic light represents a past fatal accident."

[Moonliner]

The point of terrorism is to change everyday lifestyles and invoke fear, so yes, they have.

. ;)

I think that's more of a checklist item along the way rather than the actual goal.

[CoasterMatt]

The TSA is to flying as DRM is to videogames.

[Moonliner]

Inspired by Alex's comment, how about this for a T-Shirt:


Priorities (http://reason.com/archives/2006/08/11/dont-be-terrorized)
If terrorists hijack and crash one plane per week
You would still be 2.7 times more likely to be killed crossing the street.

[Alex]

The point of terrorism is to change everyday lifestyles and invoke fear, so yes, they have.


Well, if that's their purpose then frankly I'm all in favor of it because I guess this means all of the terrorists will say "job well done" and move on.

[CoasterMatt]

Moonliner - that's a shirt I'd wear!

[sleepyjeff]

I think we should just have a general policy of saying that so long as the terrorism-related death rate is less than 0.001% (or whatever number) then current security measures are acceptable.

Quantify the level of acceptable risk and then accept that risk when it happens. That's the big problem I see behind all the stupid security. People say they're willing to accept a certain level of risk but then when the negative possibilities actually happen they end careers demanding to know why it wasn't prevented.

Inspired by Alex's comment, how about this for a T-Shirt:


Priorities (http://reason.com/archives/2006/08/11/dont-be-terrorized)
If terrorists hijack and crash one plane per week
You would still be 2.7 times more likely to be killed crossing the street.

Exactly!

We suffer the deaths of children due to auto accidents(about 20,000 a decade between the ages of 2 - 14 in the United States alone) with barely a batting of an eye; sure, we pass seatbelt and child safety restraint laws and drinking laws and traffic safety corridors, etc......but when it comes right down to it no one is willing to do the one thing that would prevent nearly all of these deaths (cut all speed limits to one third). We find, as a society, that getting there in a third the time is worth the lives of 20,000 kids( not to mention the lives of another quarter million plus adults on top of that).

[Alex]

But I do like watching the other side try to fight irrational fear with irrational fear (such as that the radiation will kill you or that with these rules in place soon TSA will be comprised 100% of pedophiles and frotteurists).

[CoasterMatt]

I've become good friends with many TSA workers over the last six months, and all this situation is doing is putting extra stress on an already stressed group of people.

Operational rules at LAX are different from terminal to terminal, for instance.

[JWBear]

Eff that.Um, what?

I've never considered myself to be liberal. I'm actually pretty fiscally conservative (the real kind of fiscal conservative, not the fake Reagan-Bush "trickle down" kind). Socially, I'm progressive.

Just because I trust the Republican Party a whole hell of a lot less than the Democratic Party doesn't make me liberal.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I've never considered myself to be liberal. The mind boggles.

[Kevy Baby]

And in other news, the Pope doesn't really consider himself a "religious kind of guy"

[JWBear]

The mind boggles.

And in other news, the Pope doesn't really consider himself a "religious kind of guy"

I hold opinions that were once considered quite moderate. It's not my fault that the body politic has shifted dramatically to the right.

We live in a country where the democratic president is more conservative than some past republican presidents. If I am a liberal so was Eisenhower.

So go on attaching your own preconceived labels to me if it gives you jollies. I am what I am regardless of what you call me.

[Moonliner]

So go on attaching your own preconceived labels to me if it gives you jollies. I am what I am regardless of what you call me.

How do you feel about spinach?

[JWBear]

How do you feel about spinach?

As long as it's raw.

[Disneyphile]

Well. Cafe Press pulled my designs down.

Interesting.

[lashbear]

Isn't that against some amendment or other ?

[Disneyphile]

Isn't that against some amendment or other ?
Well, Cafe Press is a private company, so they can do as they wish. So, let 'em.

I just created a new shop at Zazzle (http://www.zazzle.com/disneyphile13), and they even offer keyword searches so my products have a better chance of selling! :)

[Moonliner]

Well, Cafe Press is a private company, so they can do as they wish. So, let 'em.

I just created a new shop at Zazzle (http://www.zazzle.com/disneyphile13), and they even offer keyword searches so my products have a better chance of selling! :)

I think a "Banned by Cafe Press" banner might be in order. Have you had any sales?

[Disneyphile]

I think a "Banned by Cafe Press" banner might be in order. Have you had any sales?No sales yet, but I love that banner idea. I still have some Facebook advertising credits, so I might as well use 'em! :snap:

[Kevy Baby]

You have some competition from this great idea: http://laughingsquid.com/underclothes-that-display-the-4th-amendment-when-x-rayed-by-tsa/

(Courtesy of Fej via Twitter)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Printing out the TSA rules and bringing them with you might not be a help. In fact, it might make you miss your flight (http://thestir.cafemom.com/baby/113023/tsa_targets_breastfeeding_mother).

Uneffingbelievable.

[Alex]

Not that it matters to the specific story but these events happened back when we were mostly fine with the TSA and is not part of the current hubbub. (I only mention that because in the stampede to get airtime for every TSA horror story I'm seeing a lot of older story being put forward as recent events as a brick in the argument that they've finally gone too far.)

[katiesue]

My Aunt flew down from San Jose for the holiday. Didn't get scanned or patted down either way. I think she was kind of bummed. She was looking forward to the cheap thrill :)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Not that it matters to the specific story but these events happened back when we were mostly fine with the TSA and is not part of the current hubbub. (I only mention that because in the stampede to get airtime for every TSA horror story I'm seeing a lot of older story being put forward as recent events as a brick in the argument that they've finally gone too far.)Ah, that explains it. I've been so surprised that these things seem to keep happening even though the TSA is under a microscope right now.

[BarTopDancer]

Erica flew to NC today and didn't get her complimentary grope.

[alphabassettgrrl]

That's the big problem I see behind all the stupid security. People say they're willing to accept a certain level of risk but then when the negative possibilities actually happen they end careers demanding to know why it wasn't prevented.

I'm with you here. I have no intention of giving up all freedom in the name of preventing every possible risk; not that it's possible anyway.

I say use the death rate for traveling by car as your metric. As long as I have a better chance of getting killed driving to work than from a terrorist I'm good.

Of course that would decimate the mutil-billion dollar security industry as well as toss an entire government oligarchy out on it's keister.

All sounds good to me....

My dad has a rule of thumb when observing traffic control options outside of major intersections. "Every stop sign represents a past accident at that intersection. Every traffic light represents a past fatal accident."

Interesting. Probably a good frame of mind.

[Gn2Dlnd]

I think, for me, that the reason I'm having such a visceral negative reaction to a choice between naked radiation machine and stranger danger grope revealed itself a couple of days ago. In casual conversation with a friend, during which we were talking about the coincidence of both having been in a production of Cheaper by the Dozen in junior high, I mentioned, ha ha, "Oh, and a year later, the guy that played my father "raped" me."

First time I ever characterized the sexual assault that occurred to me when I was 12 as "rape."

It's been an interesting week.

[alphabassettgrrl]

I've wondered about assault survivors. I'm surprised nobody's started having panic attacks from the security grope.

[Gn2Dlnd]

The news isn't reporting them, but there are plenty of online personal stories you can find.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Touch-a Touch Me, TSA Security (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLqZknQ6GcQ)
A Rocky Horror parody by my favorite Dragapella Beauty Shop Quartet, The Kinsey Sicks (http://www.kinseysicks.com/).

[lashbear]

Touch-a Touch Me, TSA Security (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLqZknQ6GcQ)
A Rocky Horror parody by my favorite Dragapella Beauty Shop Quartet, The Kinsey Sicks (http://www.kinseysicks.com/).
:snap:

[Prudence]

FWIW: This sexual assault survivor had minor panic attacks before her recent flights. Got my naked photo taken at seatac. And yes, only women were directed to the line with the nudie scan. (All lanes have both, but only one lane had the nudie scan activated.)

On the other hand, cupcake frosting is apparently neither liquid nor gel.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Did you give them a good pose for the scan? :)

Glad you came through security relatively uneventfully. And that's good to know about cupcakes!

[Gn2Dlnd]

I love this chirpy TIME magazine article for the smackdown the author gets in the comments. Bonus idiocy: she states the false equivalence of being body-scanned or patted down vs. being blown up.

[Disneyphile]

I'm still curious as to what they'll do once someone uses colostomy bags to smuggle explosive.

Or, shoving sticks of dynamite into orifices.

Will it become "enhanced cavity searches" for everyone?

I love the whole "it's keeping us safe" argument. Um, no. It really isn't.

[Morrigoon]

Is there nothing we can do to reign our government in?

[Kevy Baby]

No.

Just accept that and life becomes much simpler

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Is there nothing we can do to reign our government in?There is this thing called representative governance...

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Or, shoving sticks of dynamite into orifices.
Isn't that basically what the Xmas Day Bomber did?

[JWBear]

There is this thing called representative governance...

Too bad we don't have much of that any more.

[€uroMeinke]

Is there nothing we can do to reign our government in?

Do what our founding fathers did - stage a revolution

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Too bad we don't have much of that any more.I would dispute that anything has changed.

[Disneyphile]

Isn't that basically what the Xmas Day Bomber did?Nope. He had a small packet inside the waistband of his underwear, hence why the new "enhanced patdowns" involve the TSA agent sticking their hands inside the waistbands of your pants to feel the waistbands of your underwear.

By the way, Kevy - should the guy whose urine bag was patted so hard that it leaked all over him leaving him to fly in his own piss just have simply accepted it? The big "deal" is that we're losing more and more freedoms for false senses of security. How much farther is it going to go? And, it will go much farther the more we just "accept" it.

When we flew home right after Christmas last year, we were not only pulled aside at the checkpoint for manual bag searches and minor patdowns, but then I was also "randomly" pulled out of the boarding line at the gate, forced to sit in a wheelchair, and given an "enhanced patdown" all the way into the top of my pants in front of everyone getting on the plane (who, of course, stared at me as though I had done something wrong), and they refused to let Ken wait for me, telling him he had to board the plane and I would be allowed to as soon as they were done. They took off my shoes (even though those were already x-rayed at the checkpoint), and also removed my jacket, emptied the pockets, etc. I was not allowed to touch anything on my body, forced to keep my hands and arms stretched straight out in front of me for over 5 minutes. I was treated like a criminal, plain and simple. But, I got on the plane thinking, "So, they went through all that, yet I could have a stick of dynamite shoved up my **** and they'd never know. What a pointless waste of time and energy, and violation of my own person."

In this country, you're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, yet now at the airport, they're suspecting everyone of being guilty and still not proving them innocent. And it's also a violation of the constitution. Which brings about a funny thought - some of the idiots who spout "right to bear arms" who don't want to lose gun rights are perfectly ok with this search and seizure at the airport. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Do I personally care if someone sees my naked scanner pic? No. However, I do care for those under 18, and those who have been victims of sexual crimes, and those who have medical necessities/special needs that are being violated. Yes, I can handle being groped, but not everyone can, nor should they be expected to just "cope with it".

If they're so worried about terrorists on planes, they need to put up DUI checkpoints outside of EVERY bar to catch the idiots who drive under the influence and terrorize our damn roads, killing people every day. ;)

[JWBear]

The whole airport security thing is a farce. Flying, even with the threat of terrorism, is still by far the safest mode of transportation. You have a greater chance of being killed just walking down the street!

Do you realize that it would take ten 9/11s per year to equal the number of deaths by auto accidents in this country?

I’d rather have my freedoms back and take my chances with flying.

[Ghoulish Delight]

And it's also a violation of the constitution.
I agree with 99% of your sentiment, but unconstitutional is a tough case to argue. You are making a choice to use a private service, and the terms of that private service are that you will be searched. This is not a case of the government searching people at-whim with no warning or explanation, which is what the 4th amendment is about. "and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." It's pretty well described where they'll be searching you and what they're looking for (save the odd idiot who forgets that they're no longer looking for nail clippers).

I do not disagree that it is kabuki, overkill, unnecessary, paranoid, undignified, insulting, and frankly disgusting. But unconstitutional? Not particularly.

http://chartporn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/IT5FP-500x495.jpg

[Disneyphile]

I understand what you're saying, GD. But, TSA is a government agency.

I think the airlines who offer the service should supply and determine their own level of security. It would allow people to choose what service they'd like to use.

Say, if United wanted to grope and xray everyone, then those who do not like it have other flight options. And, those who need to feel like they are safer, can totally fly with them. Personally, I'd fly with a company who just has the old pre-9/11 screening, plus a sky marshall or two onboard. I was fine with that level, and I wouldn't feel any less safe with it today.

Also - 9/11 taught us all something. Vigilante justice. I'm confident that anyone caught being remotely suspicious on a plane is going to be tackled and beat to a pulp by fellow passengers. I know I sure as hell wouldn't hesitate to launch myself at someone pulling a knife, match, etc. Because if I don't, I'll probably die anyway. The underwear guy last year was subdued by fellow passengers. Perfect way to deter anything. ;)

[alphabassettgrrl]

I’d rather have my freedoms back and take my chances with flying.

Me, too! Sign me up!


I think the airlines who offer the service should supply and determine their own level of security. It would allow people to choose what service they'd like to use.
...snip...
Also - 9/11 taught us all something. Vigilante justice. I'm confident that anyone caught being remotely suspicious on a plane is going to be tackled and beat to a pulp by fellow passengers. I know I sure as hell wouldn't hesitate to launch myself at someone pulling a knife, match, etc. Because if I don't, I'll probably die anyway. The underwear guy last year was subdued by fellow passengers. Perfect way to deter anything. ;)

Yep. We used to just let them do pretty much whatever they want, we'll sort it out later. We are no longer willing to do so, which makes me feel much safer than anything TSA has considered.

Besides, if they're truly looking for bomb materials, use dogs. Humans have not invented a machine that is as good as a dog. There is, however, less profit in using dogs than in these enormously expensive machines. Which I think explains a lot.

[Gn2Dlnd]

Me, too! Sign me up!



There is, however, less profit in using dogs than in these enormously expensive machines. Which I think explains a lot.

Michael Chertoff - Former head of Homeland Security - Lobbyist for enormously expensive machines - Skeletor impersonator

Dogs at baggage x-ray and throughout airport, and quick interviews at all contact points, i.e., ticketing, baggage x-ray, check-in, boarding.

[Prudence]

If this isn't "too much", then what is? Where is the line? The notion that "if it saves even one life" it's worthwhile is so ridiculous, yet people keep saying it. Really? You're really okay with any policy as long as it *might* save a life? And does this only apply to air travel?

My biggest problem with the new procedures is still not being able to know what's legitimate and what isn't. How far down my pants are they allowed to stick their hands? Did that playboy model really trip the scanner or does someone just want to know whether "they" are real? Is that patdown of a six year old taking a long time because the kid is squirming or because the patter downer is a pervert? The TSA has made two things clear: they won't tell you what normal is and there are serious consequences for anyone who challenges their authority.

[Disneyphile]

Besides, if they're truly looking for bomb materials, use dogs.And, dogs are more reliable in detecting an explosive shoved where the sun doesn't shine. ;)

But, dogs also don't look as "secure". It's all about the appearance of "safety".

[alphabassettgrrl]

Yes, as opposed to actual safety.

I'm not impressed by appearances. I'd rather deal with what's real.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Man With 4th Amendment on Chest Sues Over Airport Arrest
http://o.aolcdn.com/photo-hub/news_gallery/7/0/708884/1300189706617.JPEG (http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/15/aaron-tobey-student-with-4th-amendment-on-chest-sues-over-airp/)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

So I'm guessing he stripped down to underwear unnecessarily to be sure that he would be detained so he could sue them. :rolleyes: I'm sure he thinks he's some amazingly bold rights activist.

[JWBear]

I'm not entirely sure SM posted that just for the story...

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Meh... he's pleasant looking but he's no Wally Szczerbiak.

or Jordan :evil:

[Alex]

He should have had someone help him so he wouldn't write random letters backwards.

And if he was really dedicated to our constitution he's not have used the King James Abridged version but put the hole thing on there no matter how tired his hand got from all the writing:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Of course, legal careers have been spent in the grey area created by the word "unreasonable."

[€uroMeinke]

Now if he stitched the 4th amendment in braille along in inner thighs of his trousers...

[€uroMeinke]

And if he was really dedicated to our constitution

He would have also carried a firearm

[Alex]

Now if he stitched the 4th amendment in braille along in inner thighs of his trousers...

This fellow was so deeply in love that just before he was married, he had his bride's name tattooed on his penis. Normally, only the first and last letters were visible, although when he was aroused, the tattoo spelled out A-S-T-R-I-D. Now they're on their honeymoon at a resort in Montego Bay. One night, in the men's room, this fellow finds himself standing next to this guy at the urinal. To his amazement, he notices that this man, too, has the letters A-D tattooed on his penis. "Excuse me," he says, "but I couldn't help noticing your tattoo. Do you have a girlfriend named Astrid?" "Nope, I work for the NRA. Mine reads, 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'"

Or something like that.

[Not Afraid]

I'm not sure if I'm laughing more at the joke or the fact that Alex made up a penis joke.

[innerSpaceman]

I can't say for sure, but that read to me like Alex has been waiting for an opening to use that penis joke for quite some time, and finally found it.








(And no, "waiting for an opening to use that penis" is not a second joke, just verbiage happenstance.)

[lashbear]

....Alex has been waiting for an opening to use that penis....
Heavens !!! :eek: