Post Punk Kitchen Forum

But they're not doing it to everyone, right? I know that it used to be they'd randomly pull people out of line and run the individual little stick thing over their body, but I guess the stick proved ineffective (even though it didn't) so now they have to do this instead. Which doesn't even pick up things inside the body, so if someone REALLY wants to get bombs on planes, they can still do it, even if they're randomly pulled out of line first. So everyone wins. And by everyone, I mean the terrorists.

I don't think he did anything wrong at the security checkpoint, but I do wish he'd been more careful with his wording. He was going there, with his iphone already set to record, so that he could make a point and record the incident. I think the phrasing he used could very well be interpreted as antagonistic, even if that's not his intent, and he's put himself in the position of being dismissed by others who don't really think this is a big deal, tin the first place.

I'm really trying to find other accounts, besides that of him of Meg McClain, because only have a couple of isolated stories doesn't really do much for the cause.

That's the crux, I think. Personally, I don't particularly care if someone sees me naked, but I REALLY care that people, generally, must now submit to naked scrutiny or touching that in just about any other context would be sexual assault in the name of security, particularly since the x-ray machine is largely untested, and the staff operating them and performing the pat downs are largely untrained, underpaid, un-skilled workers. There's no evidence these things work to prevent security threats, is there? Are x-ray machines that show viewers a naked image of subjects the only way to increase security at airports? Why are these kinds of invasive measures a first resort instead of a last?

I don't know. I understand the not caring, but at the same time, I hate when new, more invasive "security" measures are introduced, and people don't make a fuss. It makes me feel like a frog in a pot of water being heated slowly over a stove.

He claims when he went to the airport and got in the security line, he didn't even think the San Diego airport had these scanners. When he got there he learned the website was inaccurate. He doesn't sound to me like he was preparing this from the start.

I also get weary hearing about his poor attitude. His attitude is irrelevant. These policies are idiotic and their implementation is capricious. The solution isn't for all of us to fall in line and become more deferential. Although that's probably what I would do. And then feel ashamed.

Agreed. I'm probably just still sore at him for making the "I don't look like a terrorist because I'm white" comment.

Exactly. This is a really frightening step in the wrong direction. Govt just continues to whittle away at the right to privacy, and especially given the current SCOTUS lineup, we need to protest stuff like this or it'll just get worse and worse.

isa said she's wearing deodorant and i want you to expound on this.

Inverted Body Scanner Image Shows Naked Body In Full Living Color [NSFW]

this one explains about the 2 different kinds of scanners.

i don't know. it creeps me out. i think i will avoid flying at all costs until this is sorted out.

For like 30 seconds I thought she had a gun up her asparagus

Well, hell.

Not safe for work, unless you're a TSA pervert.

So, really, what do those of us who don't have the option of not flying do? Besides opt for a pat-down...is there any other form of protest for us, besides, *cough*, writing Congress?

I can't wait until the first kid goes through one of those. Then we'll finally find out if we're more afraid of pedophiles or terrorists.

Nope, not really! So hold up the line, cause a stink, make a mess! Hopefully it will make at least one other person consider whether this is all really worth it.

Well, darn it. I thought the airport I'm flying out of next week didn't have a naked xray machine, but apparently it does. I plan on wearing my skinniest skinny jeans and a fairly tight tank top the day I fly so maybe they'll see no reason to pull me out of the metal detector line, or maybe that will make them more likely to choose me? who knows! If they do I'm opting for the pat down and hopefully I'll have the courage to make a big fuss. Then I'm flying again at Christmas, and after that hopefully not again for a long time.

I flew the weekend of the "there's somethin' goin on with the terrorists, but we're not gonna tell ya what - just be vigilant, American travelers" thing and they were body scanning every single person going through that line. I thought it was just that weekend, but when I was on the way back they did the same thing in Dulles. To everyone.

I'm sure in some places with fewer machines they have to pick "at random," but my in my limited experience it's been everyone.

Ngh, I'll google every airport I'll be at in December to see where I will be publicly humiliated.

Eta: GREAT! two of 4 airports I am flying into have them.
Here's a list:
http://www.jaunted.com/story/2010/7/15/ ... y+Scanners

That list is a number of months old. The TSA has a list that is probably updated, because it now has San Diego on it and when John Tyner flew, he says that San Diego was not on the TSA website.

http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/faqs.shtm , 9th question down.

awesome! someone will see me nude at 3/4 of the airports I'll be at in dec/jan

You're so promiscuous!

I get annoyed when privilege is used as a trump in a conversation that has nothing to do with class division. I mean, how does invading the privacy--for the sake of theater--of people affluent enough to fly address the wealth disparity? It's arbitrarily punitive.

Have any of you been through one of these? I went through one in September, and while I might have opted out had I known about the radiation (I didn't know about that until recently), it's not a big deal.

I can see it being problematic for people with body issues, knowing that someone can see the shape of your body. But it isn't--at least, it wasn't, for me or my boyfriend--an invasive procedure. Since it scans for weapons and containers of liquids, people with unusual scars or markings or genitals may feel uncomfortable standing there knowing someone is looking at them, but the people looking don't know who they're looking at, so unless the people being scanned also carrying a gun or a bottle of shampoo, I don't see how they'd be exposed to humiliation.

I'm not saying it's okay to make people feel uncomfortable, and I myself am not cool with just adding extra radiation to my life, but the vehement outcry against these machines surprises me.

Anyway, the scans take a while, and at least the day I was at the airport, at least every other person was going through these machines. TSA will probably stop doing this eventually just because it's a lot of extra, time-consuming work that isn't really that much more likely to catch many more "bad guys" than metal detectors. And that's one of the main reasons I think it should go.

(edited because of 2 typos)

What do you think we thought it was?

And I don't really mean that in a snarky way, but a legit - do you think we're under the impression that it's something different than has already been posted about? I haven't read anything so far that makes me feel better about it at all.

Oh that explains it. I don't know what you're bugging out about? I think if it makes people safer it's worth it. So if it doesn't make people safer that's one thing, but...I don't actually understand the other words you've said.

We have no reason to believe this actually makes us safer (even if it altogether eliminates terrorism, the risk of terrorism is about the same as the risk of dying from the x-ray radiation you're exposed to during the scan), and the state justifies every invasion of privacy with safety concerns. I really don't know how we can get safer than zero airline fatalities due to terrorism (in the US) since 9/11/2001, anyway. Unless you count Rigoberto Alpizar, and then it's one death due to our fear of terrorism. It would be nice if nobody ever managed to sneak explosives onto a plane, but that's never going to happen.

We should be worried about the slow erosion of privacy rights, which is what we're talking about here. Every step on the way to a police state will seem like it's not a big deal, because we are normalized to all the previous steps that have been taken. We should also be worried about the tendency of law enforcement agencies to use new technology more broadly than the procedure it replaces (tasers, for example). I have no problem with body scanners replacing strip searches; I have a huge problem with virtual strip searches being done routinely and without reasonable suspicion.