TSA mess and the police

[C.Ann]

Okay, let me get this straight. The TSA agent is searching the hypothetical 85 year old woman because she "could be a threat." But if she tells the agent that she's using a feminine product, then the TSA agent will let her go without examining the alleged product? Then what exactly was the point of the search in the first place?

And that goes directly to the point that none of the pro-pat down people have yet answered, despite several of us asking: What happens next? Approximately half the population is female. Of those, how many happen to be experiencing their monthly cycles on any given day? How many people use products for incontinence? How many have colostomy bags? How does the TSA know that there aren't explosives hidden in one of those products? Are they going to make people strip down and display those items? Then what? If the appropriate bodily fluids are present, then the traveler is free to go? Couldn't the product be used for its designated function and ALSO contain explosives?

If they're not doing a detailed analysis of bodily fluid-containing products, then they're theoretically leaving a gaping hole in security. And if that's the case, then the whole argument for invasive pat downs breaks down altogether.

Thank you.. And still no one will give a direct answer because:

(A) They don't know..

(B) They believe it will never happen - just like we believed security would never reach the point of groping..

(C) Tunnel vision - blinders firmly in place..

And for the record - if I were to fly (which I won't now) - I would have no problem with the scanner - but will NOT stand in line hoping and praying that I'm not randomly selected for an invasive, unneccesary, pat down that is useless.. It's laughable to think that a terrorist is going to be caught via random searches.. They're always one step ahead of us - so now they will likely go the route of "cavities".. And the TSA will respond how????

You mentioned it once before - the terrorists have already won - simply by wreaking havoc with how people travel - and we are now considered the terrorists the second we step foot in a security line at the airport..

 

[kaytieeldr]

Okay, let me get this straight. The TSA agent is searching the hypothetical 85 year old woman because she "could be a threat." But if she tells the agent that she's using a feminine product, then the TSA agent will let her go without examining the alleged product? Then what exactly was the point of the search in the first place?

Not at all. C.Ann's concern was that an 85 year old woman who normally wouldn't be using 'feminine protection' but who, due to recent surgery, might unexpectedly be using that or a similar product would automatically be presumed instead to be carrying some type of dangerous device in in the feminine hygiene product, and so be subjected to embarrassment by the TSO and intensive search. Go back and read her posts.

My point was simply that, due to leakage and overactive bladder, MANY women WELL beyond menstruation age would/could/should be expected to be wearing padding similar to (but in all likelihood bulkier than) the typical maxipad. A TSO encountering an 85 year old woman wearing a pad shouldn't be surprised. If standard procedure is to pull all those women aside for more intensive screening, that's one thing. But to worry about a hypothetical situation? Nope.

 

[kaytieeldr]

The world I live in, which I hold in high esteem, does not permit law abiding citizens to be treated like criminals without cause. The land I live in is governed by the Constitution and the Constitution does not permit this.

The Constitution doesn't permit the TSA to enter my home or vehicle and scan or 'frisk' me just in case I may board a commercial flight some time.

Various mechanical, electronic, and physical detection procedures are legal at courthouses, government buildings, sports stadiums, concert arenas... all places in the same country covered by that Constitution All permitted.

 

[jodifla]

I just called my two senators' offices, and they say they've been fielding LOTS of calls on this.

 

[JLTraveling]

Not at all. C.Ann's concern was that an 85 year old woman who normally wouldn't be using 'feminine protection' but who, due to recent surgery, might unexpectedly be using that or a similar product would automatically be presumed instead to be carrying some type of dangerous device in in the feminine hygiene product, and so be subjected to embarrassment by the TSO and intensive search. Go back and read her posts.

My point was simply that, due to leakage and overactive bladder, MANY women WELL beyond menstruation age would/could/should be expected to be wearing padding similar to (but in all likelihood bulkier than) the typical maxipad. A TSO encountering an 85 year old woman wearing a pad shouldn't be surprised. If standard procedure is to pull all those women aside for more intensive screening, that's one thing. But to worry about a hypothetical situation? Nope.

Okay, fair enough. The agents shouldn't be surprised about women of any age wearing pads. But it's not hypothetical to then address my next points: what happens to ALL of those women (and men wearing Depends for that matter)? It seems reasonable to assume that both the naked scanner and the pat down will expose those pads (or adult diapers or colostomy bags or whatever the case may be). What procedures are in place for resolving any of those matters? You don't know and I don't know, because the TSA hasn't made those policies public. But there are only two basic courses of action:

A) The person in question identifies the object as a hygiene product and is let go without further screening. In which case it made no sense to do the enhanced screening in the first place, since explosives could theoretically be placed in hygiene products.

B) The TSA agent has the distasteful job of examining said hygiene product. Then what? Is there a flow chart (no pun intended)? If the bodily fluid is present then the person goes free, if not then he/she is held for possible terrorism? The item must be removed for puffer testing? Puffer testing is administered while the person is still wearing the item?

There aren't any other options. Either they let people wearing hygiene products go or they don't. If they do, then that leaves a gaping hole in security for terrorists to exploit. If they don't, then that leads to a whole new level of searching that is incredibly disturbing for both the searcher and the person being searched.

It's real easy to accept one level of invasive screening without considering the slippery slope that could follow. Now we're not just talking about one hypothetical 85 year old. We're talking about a sizeable portion of the population who, because of their bodily functions, are either released with a potential weapon in tow or subjected to terribly degrading medical searches.

 

[C.Ann]

Okay, fair enough. The agents shouldn't be surprised about women of any age wearing pads. But it's not hypothetical to then address my next points: what happens to ALL of those women (and men wearing Depends for that matter)? It seems reasonable to assume that both the naked scanner and the pat down will expose those pads (or adult diapers or colostomy bags or whatever the case may be). What procedures are in place for resolving any of those matters? You don't know and I don't know, because the TSA hasn't made those policies public. But there are only two basic courses of action:

A) The person in question identifies the object as a hygiene product and is let go without further screening. In which case it made no sense to do the enhanced screening in the first place, since explosives could theoretically be placed in hygiene products.

B) The TSA agent has the distasteful job of examining said hygiene product. Then what? Is there a flow chart (no pun intended)? If the bodily fluid is present then the person goes free, if not then he/she is held for possible terrorism? The item must be removed for puffer testing? Puffer testing is administered while the person is still wearing the item?

There aren't any other options. Either they let people wearing hygiene products go or they don't. If they do, then that leaves a gaping hole in security for terrorists to exploit. If they don't, then that leads to a whole new level of searching that is incredibly disturbing for both the searcher and the person being searched.

It's real easy to accept one level of invasive screening without considering the slippery slope that could follow. Now we're not just talking about one hypothetical 85 year old. We're talking about a sizeable portion of the population who, because of their bodily functions, are either released with a potential weapon in tow or subjected to terribly degrading medical searches.

Thank you again..

And moving away from the feminie hygiene products and Depends - I haven't seen the colostomy bags addressed.. Anyone can purchase one and simply stick it to their body with the adhesive that is required for it to stay in place.. (My bio mother had one for years and years - my dad had one for 2 to 3 months before he passed away..)

Of course you could carry a doctors note on you at all times - assuming you're not a terrorist who has a relative or friend that is a doctor and would be more than happy to write anything you want.. Or - does the TSA have a policy where they would have to detain you while they call said doctor at 3:15 in the morning - on a Saturday or Sunday - to "verify" that it's not a scam?

Again - no answers..

 

[kaytieeldr]

I will absolutely defend your personal right to be groped or naked scanned all you like.

Sigh.

Discourse works better than hyperbole. In my world, naked scanned means I take off my clothing and get scanned (literally, studied closely but understood in this case to mean read via a machine). Since I'll be almost fully dressed except my coat, let 'em go ahead and bounce rays or whatever off my skin, bones, whatever. I don't care. I want to be on that plane.

JLTraveling, may I ask - have you been patted down since the procedure changed? Can you relate your first-hand experience? Can you describe exactly how you were groped, and how your treatment this time differed from your previous experiences?

Or are you simply believing anonymous and third- and fourth-hand reports of being "groped"?

 

[CPT Tripss]

We didn't have any problems with TSA in person on our trip to WDW (got back Sunday ).

But they did search one of our two suitcases EACH way. That really creeped me out to see their little flyer and know that they had touched our stuff. Thank goodness on the way down we had our unmentionables in carryon so they wouldn't get lost! I would have had to wash all those when I got down there.

The suitcase they searched on the way down had shoes, umbrellas, electric razor, hair dryer, cosmetics etc. On the way back they searched the dirty laundry :rotfl:

You might be laughing, but think of the poor sap who had her clean clothes suitcase searched by the same TSAer who was rooting around in your dirty laundry.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Thank you.. And still no one will give a direct answer because:

(A) They don't know..

This. Nobody posting on this thread so far has had first-hand experience to report. Combine that with the common-sense faction not jumping to conclusions and posting assumptions... and, well, you won't get a VALID response until someone has personal experience.

 

[rie'smom]

Truly, what you are missing is that not everyone is going to get hysterical over this issue. Does it bother most of us? Sure it does. But most of us refuse to go into the 'the sky is falling, the sky is falling' mentality. The vast majority of people have not reported invasive body searches....
Have to agree. My mother flew to Isreal and said it was eye opening. She couldn't believe the armed presence.

No not a lot of reports of invasive body searches YET.

Northern Ireland is like this too. It's sad that we're taking steps in this direction as our individual freedoms are being eroded. One thing is implemented and accepted, then another, and it snowballs. I'm 52 years old and it shocks and saddens me to see the direction our country is headed.

For those of you who call some of us doomsayers, in 1968, my school principal, Mrs. Scullin, a little old lady, told our class that if people did not stand up to Washington and demand that our rights be protected, our country would change and our freedoms would be taken away one by one. We thought she was a nutty doomsayer woman who was affected by old age. So things that you might think are outrageous today and that will never happen here in the US might become fact in the future.
9/11 was a horrible tragedy but the fact that people lie down and let the Washington take away our privacy and rights to individual freedoms is worse. In the long run, heck, in the short run, the terrorists have won because our lawmakers do things to frost an invisible cake making the citizens believe that these crappy invasive restrictions will actually make them safer.

The Constitution doesn't permit the TSA to enter my home or vehicle and scan or 'frisk' me just in case I may board a commercial flight some time.

Various mechanical, electronic, and physical detection procedures are legal at courthouses, government buildings, sports stadiums, concert arenas... all places in the same country covered by that Constitution All permitted.

No but they can invade and frisk your body, so it's all good, right?

I just called my two senators' offices, and they say they've been fielding LOTS of calls on this.

I emailed our Senators night before last and I encourage those of you who object to the new procedures to do the same:

Representatives:
http://www.house.gov/

Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

 

[CathrynRose]

You know, I feel bad/guilty/stupid - because when it was discussed that wire tapping was going to begin, I said "I don't care.... let them listen to me talking to my g/f ...who cares??"

Now.... I understand this differently. I shouldn't have been okay with that, as I am certainly not okay with this.

So, for those of you on THAT thread, many moons ago - I admit it. I was wrong.

 

[mhsjax]

You know, I feel bad/guilty/stupid - because when it was discussed that wire tapping was going to begin, I said "I don't care.... let them listen to me talking to my g/f ...who cares??"

Now.... I understand this differently. I shouldn't have been okay with that, as I am certainly not okay with this.

So, for those of you on THAT thread, many moons ago - I admit it. I was wrong.

I actually don't mind them wire tapping, they would fall asleep listening to my conversations, I just don't like being touched. If there was a way for them to do anything else I wouldn't care, for me personally it is the touching. I have a really big personal space problem. And that includes everyone, yes even hubby. Unless I want him to invade. lol

 

[ccgirl]

What did TSA do before the new backscatter machines and pat down technique? I have never heard of it happening to anyone. I imagine the way to deal with it since the new technique is the same as dealing with it with the old technique.

 

[CathrynRose]

I actually don't mind them wire tapping, they would fall asleep listening to my conversations, I just don't like being touched. If there was a way for them to do anything else I wouldn't care, for me personally it is the touching. I have a really big personal space problem. And that includes everyone, yes even hubby. Unless I want him to invade. lol

I don't either. But if these 2 things, both fall into the same 4th Amendment category, I have to say i was wrong with one, if I'm not cool with the other.

And no kidding (about your hubby)! Can we tell the TSA person we "Have a headache?" and get out of the groping? I wonder if they'll pout?

 

[mhsjax]

I don't either. But if these 2 things, both fall into the same 4th Amendment category, I have to say i was wrong with one, if I'm not cool with the other.

And no kidding (about your hubby)! Can we tell the TSA person we "Have a headache?" and get out of the groping? I wonder if they'll pout?

Maybe we could ask for just a cuddle? If they were female I am sure they would understand.

Really, I don't want to get all uptight over this, I know the Govt' is trying to do what is best.

 

[CathrynRose]

Maybe we could ask for just a cuddle? If they were female I am sure they would understand.

The roped off spooning area, of Security.

 

[rie'smom]

Maybe we could ask for just a cuddle? If they were female I am sure they would understand.

Really, I don't want to get all uptight over this, I know the Govt' is trying to do what is best.

for the first part

The second part is not funny because the gov't is trying to placate the public and lure them into a false sense of security at the expense of our privacy.

BTW, do you think the same government officials who have given the green light to this are subject to the same security searches that we are? Doubt it

 

[jodifla]

This. Nobody posting on this thread so far has had first-hand experience to report. Combine that with the common-sense faction not jumping to conclusions and posting assumptions... and, well, you won't get a VALID response until someone has personal experience.

So all the people quoted, on the record, in newspaper articles, are lying??

 

[C.Ann]

So all the people quoted, on the record, in newspaper articles, are lying??

Yes - even the pilots and flight attendants that are having huge issues with this and voicing complaints all over the place..

LOL...

 

[ccgirl]

So all the people quoted, on the record, in newspaper articles, are lying??

I don't think they are lying. Our opinions are subjective. I just know I experienced something different when I flew this past weekend.

It's like hearing reports of people that don't like WDW. Or, hearing reports of people that hate certain restaurants. I choose to make my own opinions rather than taking the word from someone else.

Now, I'm not comparing the pat down to going to WDW. I am simply comparing how subjective opinions can be.