"Naked" X-Ray Scans At The Airport.. Your Thoughts?

[sbell111]

There is some truth to that. OT a bit but I have always wondered why terrorists even want to blow planes out of our skies. We will keep flying. We proved that after 9/11. ...

Actually, 9/11 severly hurt the industry. I have no doubt that if there were a few successful attacks that many of these already financially troubled airlines would fail. This would ripple through our economy.

The idea that people could somehow live with a certain level of attacks without major concequences is unrealistic, in my opinion.

 

[shrubber]

There is some truth to that. OT a bit but I have always wondered why terrorists even want to blow planes out of our skies. We will keep flying. We proved that after 9/11. If terrorists started strapping bombs on themselves and began routinely blowing up our grocery stores, libraries, medical facilities, schools, Disney, sporting events, etc. personally that would freak me out. It would put everyone on edge. I don't need to fly but I need groceries and going out on a daily errand would become so much more stressful for everyone. When they start disrupting my everyday life and I never know when or where they are going to strike, I would be frightened. Right now I am far more worried about the plane having a mechanical problem or pilot error instead of a terrorist taking it down.

I have often thought the same way. One reason may be that there are armed people, wether they be law enforcement or citizens nearby in places like grocery stores, hospitals, shopping malls, able to stop them. Airlines, not so much.

 

[sbell111]

tiptoeing here.....same note to Mods.

Well, the name fits the profile.
So yes.

I think that you are failing to realize the immense number of innocent people who would fit your profile and the huge number of 'bad' people who wouldn't fit it.

 

[sbell111]

I have often thought the same way. One reason may be that there are armed people, wether they be law enforcement or citizens nearby in places like grocery stores, hospitals, shopping malls, able to stop them. Airlines, not so much.

Here's the problem with your logic:

Crime still happens. Armed civilians rarely every stop crime; even violent crime.

That being said, what do you say that we actually return to the thread's topic?

 

[shrubber]

I think that you are failing to realize the immense number of innocent people who would fit your profile and the huge number of 'bad' people who wouldn't fit it.

Only what, somewhere between 100 and 300 people board a plane at a time, depending on the craft?

Doesn't seem like too much work. After all there are over 1,000,000 names on our terrorist watch list.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Here's the problem with your logic:

Crime still happens. Armed civilians rarely every stop crime; even violent crime.

That being said, what do you say that we actually return to the thread's topic?

I'm going to try to be as general as possible in relating this:

Recently, a father took his young son into a supermarket restroom. The father saw a hand reach from the next stall in an attempt to, well, grab his son (for apparent nefarious purposes). The dad - naturally - attacked the would-be molester. Punched him, in the face I think. Guess which one went to jail?

But that's not the part that relates to this discussion. Nope. A state official went on record as stating, "We discourage self-help."

 

[shrubber]

Here's the problem with your logic:

Crime still happens. Armed civilians rarely every stop crime; even violent crime.

That being said, what do you say that we actually return to the thread's topic?

Armed civilians constantly stop crime! And it's almost always violent crime. There is no reason to draw a weapon if it's not a life threatening situation.

Most always a severe recession leads to more crime, violent or otherwise, armed robberies, murders, rapes ect. Violent crime was down dramatically in all of '09.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

The idea that people could somehow live with a certain level of attacks without major concequences is unrealistic, in my opinion.

In many countries, people live their daily lives surrounded by risk and death, but life still goes on. Sure it may impact how people do business and where, but it doesn't stop life.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I'm going to try to be as general as possible in relating this:

Recently, a father took his young son into a supermarket restroom. The father saw a hand reach from the next stall in an attempt to, well, grab his son (for apparent nefarious purposes). The dad - naturally - attacked the would-be molester. Punched him, in the face I think. Guess which one went to jail?

But that's not the part that relates to this discussion. Nope. A state official went on record as stating, "We discourage self-help."

Only what, somewhere between 100 and 300 people board a plane at a time, depending on the craft?

Per plane, sure. Some airports have a plane taking off every minute. That means, potentially 18,000 passengers per hour going through security checkpoints?

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Armed civilians constantly stop crime! And it's almost always violent crime. There is no reason to draw a weapon if it's not a life threatening situation.

Most always a severe recession leads to more crime, violent or otherwise, armed robberies, murders, rapes ect. Violent crime was down dramatically in all of '09.

How often do armed civilians also cause crime? How often do they try to stop crime, but also further increase it?

 

[shrubber]

How often do armed civilians also cause crime? How often do they try to stop crime, but also further increase it?

Armed citizens or legally armed citizens?

 

[shrubber]

In many countries, people live their daily lives surrounded by risk and death, but life still goes on. Sure it may impact how people do business and where, but it doesn't stop life.

Well, not this country, thank goodness.

 

[shrubber]

Per plane, sure. Some airports have a plane taking off every minute. That means, potentially 18,000 passengers per hour going through security checkpoints?

Well, I'm unsure of that number, but OK...divided by x number of security checkpoints, no problem really. Name on ticket is Mohamad Atta? Step to left please......

 

[kaytieeldr]

No. Again, while one's name may make one more likely to be suspect, it DOESN'T make one guilty. You want to advocate for one right? You can't deny all the other rights - check with your local ACLU.

I vote for all-scanner, all the time. Period.

 

[shrubber]

No. Again, while one's name may make one more likely to be suspect, it DOESN'T make one guilty. You want to advocate for one right? You can't deny all the other rights - check with your local ACLU.

I vote for all-scanner, all the time. Period.

Who said guilty?
More likely, yes. I choose to examine the more likely more closely...who wouldn't?

 

[NikitaZee]

I vote for all-scanner, all the time. Period.

I could not agree more.

 

[Planogirl]

I'm a little surprised that people are so blase about the possibility of detailed body scans and body cavity searches and so on. This from the same society who thinks that teen girls shouldn't show their bellies and are usually dead set against nude beaches and the like. It doesn't fit the normally somewhat puritanical sensibilities that I see portrayed on these forums and elsewhere.

Also, where does it end? Or does it ever end? I wonder how far an already troubled industry can be pushed before enough people finally say enough?

 

[Seijaku]

I think the system should be used but by saying the images are automatically deleted leaves a problem. If they are automatically deleted, how will courts have proof that the suspected person did or did not break airline rules and bring liquid, etc, through security. If the image is kept for any amount of time there will be some way to get the other images. I have my doubts to be honest.

 

[Planogirl]

By the way, I do prefer this too. From http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/29/national/main6032424.shtml :

Amsterdam's airport has been running a test project with full-body scanners for three years, mainly for a few European flights. One machine being tested there for the past five weeks, made by L-3, is designed to enhance passengers' privacy by having software, rather than a human, analyze the image generated by the scanner. If the software detects an anomaly - something strapped to a leg, for instance - it alerts a human screener to look at the person's leg directly.

"So nobody sees any images," said Ron Louwerse, the airport's chief of security. "The results are very, very good. I'm very confident about it."

 

[shrubber]

Sure, I want to trust the TSA rather than defend myself.....

http://cbs2.com/goldstein/caught.on.tape.2.1407508.html

The investigation began late last year when a TSA Agent was arrested for allegedly counterfeiting parking passes here at the employee parking lot. In his house, police found a videotape. On it was an afterhours party where other TSA agents were allegedly using drugs.

None of the employees was charged with any crimes. Even the TSA agent caught counterfeiting parking passes wasn't prosecuted because no one he sold to would come forward.

But the incident was kept under wraps. Even from the mayor.