TSA mess and the police

[auntie]

My DFi flew to Florida this past weekend. I asked him how security was, and he got pretty quiet. Our airport has the scanners now, but he wasn't given a choice to go through them or get the pat-down. He said there was one line, then agents seemed to be randomly putting people in the scanner line and pat-down line. He was directed to the pat-down line. And he said that was no quick pat-down. What made him the most uncomfortable was how the (male) agent went under his shirt and gave "the boys" a lot of attention. Not just a quick brush; he says he got completely felt up. Next time he hopes to get the "naked scanner."

I know police in Manhattan are required to make sure they "feel a guy's junk"..if you know what I mean. Used to be, they could run the hands up and down the legs. No more. On more than one occasion things have been smuggled into areas via that location on the body. It's no picnic for the cops either. They really don't want to do it. Yet...that one time that they don't, and something happens, they will loose their job, and people will be screaming that they weren't kept safe. I
don't think these TSA agents get any particular thrill having to perform these tasks either.


I agree that the "naked scanner" is the way to go. Who cares? They make us all safer.
If I'm on a plane with my kids I WANT to know that there are NO underwear croch bombers, no shoe bombers. WHAT EVER IT TAKES to do that, I'm on board with.


_____________________

 

[rie'smom]

All the TSA is doing is going to insure that terrorists pay someone who works at the airport and isn't subject to the search to carry out their plans or they can use missles. There are more ways that I can think of because I'm not someone who is intent on causing harm.
Oh or they could strike at Disney World, a ball game, a national park, the subway or other popular places where people tend to congregate. Having people walk through scanners and searching them won't stop a terrorist and God help us if the idiots who have proposed this really think it will make us safer.

 

[sbell111]

All the TSA is doing is going to insure that terrorists pay someone who works at the airport and isn't subject to the search to carry out their plans or they can use missles. There are more ways that I can think of because I'm not someone who is intent on causing harm.
Oh or they could strike at Disney World, a ball game, a national park, the subway or other popular places where people tend to congregate. Having people walk through scanners and searching them won't stop a terrorist and God help us if the idiots who have proposed this really think it will make us safer.

You don't abandon security measures simply because we can be attacked in other ways.

 

[Muushka]

You know what made me feel safe?

Last month I flew. The man sitting next to me chose the aisle seat and I came later and got the window. I noticed that he kept looking out the window, strange. We started talking and I finally asked him if he liked looking out of the window. "I love it!" he answered.

So I asked him why he chose the aisle seat if he loved the window view. He answered that he always sits in the aisle because if anything happens, he will be ready. He said he watches every single person as they come down the aisle. Looks for strange behavior.

He said that he helped to 'subdue' a very unruly passenger a few years back and would be happy to go after anyone who threatened the safty of the plane.

I wish they would allow certain citizens to carry a weapon on board. And certainly the captain.

Let the flames begin.

 

[rie'smom]

You don't abandon security measures simply because we can be attacked in other ways.

I'm not saying to abandon all security measures.

 

[kaytieeldr]

For those of you who think this will not have a lasting effect on travel I think you might want to consider a few things. First, the economy is poor so the number of people who can afford to fly is low and shrinking by the day. Second, the people who are flying right now bought their tickets a while ago so they will be unlikely to throw away their money. It's the people who would normally be BUYING right now who are the problem. I can tell you with 100% truthfulness that I did not buy 4 tickets to Orlando and I did not buy 4 tickets to Aruba because of this particular change. Third

Well, I can't speak to point three, but I purchased my plane ticket for this leisure trip in this economy. Granted, I shopped intelligently (compared prices, didn't purchase both directions at the same time, weighed advantages/disadvantages of JetBlue vs. Continental...). Second, while I bought my tickets in the summer and early fall respectively, I don't give a rat's patooty about the changes in security procedures. These changes did, do, and will not change my travel plans.

No, I haven't been patted down with the front of the hand by a TSO - yet. If required, I will undergo such a pat-down. No, I haven't been through a backscatter scanner. If directed, I will go. Sheep? Not at all. Decisions based on information - general, statement from head of radiology at MGH over some scientists at a California college - and past experience (xrays, variety of airport, courthouse, and other government building screenings)? You betcha.

The damage came when people stopped being willing to travel and therefore stopped paying for it right after 9/11. The result to this was an outpouring of protections designed to make us feel safe and keep us humming along. The new product was buy a ticket/ show up 3-2 hours early, be prepared for hold-ups, remove shoes, don't bring bad stuff on plane, go through metal detector, put all liquids in a quart size baggie, keep your mouth shut and go on your trip.

You make it sound as if this was all the immediate result of 9/11. Not so. Richard Reid attempted to shoe-bomb a plane he boarded in France (not the United States - but where a poster in this thread recently underwent a much more intensive security screening than any experienced in the U.S.) in late Decembert that year; and the liquids restriction - originally a ban - was put into place in 2006 after a plot was uncovered.

As for who sits in which group, I think it's pretty obvious that some people are absolutely comforted by the changes so their behaviors will be unchanged.

Comforted? Hardly. Willing to tolerate? Yes.

 

[OceanAnnie]

You know what made me feel safe?

Last month I flew. The man sitting next to me chose the aisle seat and I came later and got the window. I noticed that he kept looking out the window, strange. We started talking and I finally asked him if he liked looking out of the window. "I love it!" he answered.

So I asked him why he chose the aisle seat if he loved the window view. He answered that he always sits in the aisle because if anything happens, he will be ready. He said he watches every single person as they come down the aisle. Looks for strange behavior.

He said that he helped to 'subdue' a very unruly passenger a few years back and would be happy to go after anyone who threatened the safty of the plane.

I wish they would allow certain citizens to carry a weapon on board. And certainly the captain.

Let the flames begin.

I think that fellow is a hero! Watching out and willing to put himself on the line like that says so much.

 

[kinntj]

My husband and I were talking about driving down to WDW next time. DH and I personally don't have a problem with the new enhanced pat down, but we're not too fond of it happening to our kids.

On the Today show yesterday morning the TSA guy said 12 and under were not expected to get the enhanced pat down. Is this in writing at the airports? I wouldn't fly unless I knew that this was across the board understood. I doubt it.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I'm not saying to abandon all security measures.

If not all, which? Are you saying abandon the measures with which you don't agree, or which offend you? Replace them? With what? Do you (or anyone) have suggestions that are - not merely that you think - more effective?

Not being argumentative, genuinely curious. People don't like the way things are without even experiencing them (and by the way, I DO believe that San Diego man's experience ), but so many posters here seem to know what works and what doesn't, so... what works?

 

[Planogirl]

I think that flying overall has turned into a miserable experience and this just adds to it for me. With high prices (from our area at least), long lines, uncomfortable seats, over the top security measures (IMO), rude airport personnel and so on, I just see no sense in flying any more if I don't have to. Driving takes longer but it is so much more fun for me and I can't see going back to those horrible planes.

As for the searches, who is to say that even more won't be done eventually? Where does it end? Will people just tolerate anything?

 

[SaraJayne]

I know police in Manhattan are required to make sure they "feel a guy's junk"..if you know what I mean. Used to be, they could run the hands up and down the legs. No more. On more than one occasion things have been smuggled into areas via that location on the body. It's no picnic for the cops either. They really don't want to do it. Yet...that one time that they don't, and something happens, they will loose their job, and people will be screaming that they weren't kept safe. I
don't think these TSA agents get any particular thrill having to perform these tasks either.


I agree that the "naked scanner" is the way to go. Who cares? They make us all safer.
If I'm on a plane with my kids I WANT to know that there are NO underwear croch bombers, no shoe bombers. WHAT EVER IT TAKES to do that, I'm on board with.


_____________________

Here's the thing ~ no, they don't make you safer. It makes you feel safer ~ big difference.

 

[MiniGirl]

That's more self-serving nonsense. If it was common sense, then we'd agree about it. What you're advocating is not common sense - it is your own personal preference, and indeed some people share it with you, but don't make the error many people in your position make, by assuming that what you believe and value is somehow generally superior to what everyone else believes and value. Reasonable people disagree, and claiming that your side is "common sense" is ridiculous.

Okay, I have stayed out of this discussion, but this made me LOL!! Really? She would only be demonstrating common sense if she agreed with you. Anything else is just self-serving nonsense. Then later you state that claiming common sense for one's side is ridiculous. Oh wait... that's right. It is only ridiculous if it isn't your side. Good stuff.

Since I'm posting, I guess I'll put my thoughts out there as well. Let me begin by saying that airport security is part of my family's daily life. I have stated before that we are an airline family. My dh is a commercial pilot for a major "legacy" carrier. I am a former f/a. We knew and had worked with quite a few of the crew members killed in the 9/11 attacks. One of the f/as was even in my initial training class. I share this only to show that this is not something I take lightly, and that it does impact our daily lives.

I realize we all give up a certain measure of our freedom in the name of safety. I have long ago given up my right to walk through a park alone at night, for example. I have also given up a certain measure of my right to privacy as well for both safety and convienence. We all have. What each person needs to ask is how much are you willing to give up. I think many have drawn the line here. Our choice is to be given a virtual strip search and be subjected to radiation penetrating our skin or be touched in places we have always considered private and off limits to strangers. Even then, we do not have a choice. You really have to be okay with both. TSA could funnel you into a line for either. If you refuse, you are then required to go through the additional screening.

Also, does all this make us any safer? Many people feel it does not. All of these procedures are in place because of the 9/11 attacks and then the shoe bomber and later the underwear bomber. Only the underwear bomber MAY have been stopped by these measures. Although, even in that instance, officials refused to say that it was even a possibility that this would've stopped him. What we do know about all these attackers is that they ALL raised red flags with the kind of ticket they bought and the manner in which they paid for them, and these flags were not investigated further. Shoot. The underwear bomber didn't even have a passport. Perhaps, instead of adding more procedures that take away one's rights and privacy but provide no real security, we should concentrate on the procedures that are already in place and follow through on those red flags. That would have done more to stop those attacks than these procedures we are talking about here.

So, I ask..... in this country, where we take great pride in our freedoms, how much are you willing to give up in the name of safety? Would you allow a TSA agent to put their hands inside your clothing and feel you? (Many teen girls, and boys too, wear very low-waisted jeans and shorts. Would you be okay if a TSA agent ran their hands along the inside of a person's waistband? My dh has seen agents do this.) We know people smuggle drugs inside their person. Is it out of the realm of possibility to think that a terrorist might do this as well? So, would you be okay subjecting yourself or your minor child to a more, shall we say, thorough search? Don't think it could happen here? Really? Did you ever think we would reach a point in this country where we would see average citizens, who have done absolutely nothing to warrant it, getting frisked so aggressively? Again, frisked without cause. Okay, I know some of you think that is too extreme. Let's look at something more common. Someone mentioned earlier colonoscopy bags. What about diapers, depends, and even a woman's maxi pad? These would be detected in both the body scanners AND the pat downs. The only way to ensure nothing is being hidden inside these items would be to have the person remove them and surrender them to the TSA agent while the TSA then provides the passenger with a replacement that we know is free of hidden chemicals, etc. Otherwise, this is all just for show. So, would you be willing to be escorted into the restroom by a TSA agent and surrender these things to them? Would you be okay with making your young dd have to do this? Maybe some of you are. I'm just curious where some of you would draw the line. At what point has it gone too far? Are you okay with Muslim women not having to receive pat downs or remove their head covering? Does their freedom to worship in the manner of their choosing override the safety of others? If so, why are you not willing to extend that same level of courtesy to a man or woman who says it is against their faith to allow someone other than a spouse or medical professional to touch them in certain places? I do know quite a few people who have been given gift certificates to a spa for a massage and have not used them because they felt it went against their beliefs, so those people are out there. All I'm asking is why should one faith be given special consideration over another? Is one more important or valid than another? Is one more likely to engage in terrorist activities than another?

Anyway, sorry for the long post. This whole thing just saddens me. I was going to take my girls to NYC next month to see the decorations and the Rockettes -- just some fun things I remember doing with my mom. However, now I am leaning against it. I don;t think my oldest dd would handle these screenings very well. She is not a victim of a sexual assalt or molestation. She is not "on the spectrum." She is just a painfully modest young girl. Even doctor's appointments are very uncomfortable for her. I was looking forward to the days we could travel and see the wonderful places this country and the world have to offer. (We are homeschoolers and not bound by a school schedule.) I will speak to my girls and see how they feel, but I'm sadden that we have reached this point in the good ol' US of A. I'm even more saddened by the number of people who are okay with it.

 

[kaytieeldr]

You can toss around your snarky little remarks all you like, but it doesn't make you right. And this may come as a shock, but just because YOU think something is so does not MAKE it so.

Respectfully, this statement is equally valid if you turn it around and direct it at yourself. Simply because you think something is so - that, in this case

anyone could figure out that DH, DD and I are as safe as it gets

and

In no way, by any stretch of the most vivid TSA imagination, are were within a country mile of being anywhere near a threat

doesn't make it so. That's merely a self-assessment. Anyone could make the identical claims about themselves and their family.

 

[auntie]

Here's the thing ~ no, they don't make you safer. It makes you feel safer ~ big difference.

Well, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think they do make us safer.
Everyone's got their own take on this.

Interesting read though.

 

[ccgirl]

This is what I was trying to say earlier. My family is one which loves to fly....or used to. I hate driving. Last driving trip was in the 80s. But these new measures have tipped the scale. Finally, the crap I have to put up with to fly is WORSE than the hell of driving and I never thought I'd see that day. The difference between the November and December trips is that flying is not worth it anymore. They got my money for Nov., but not Dec.

Ever since 9/11, groups of people have been turned off to flying. With every new "step" added to the security process, more have been turned off. The fees alone got my goat, but I endured it. But you start requiring parents to allow their children to be seen virtually naked and or/groped and you have just lost a LOT of flyers that you were still hanging on to previously. Add to that the adults who won't allow it for themselves even if they have no children, and the pool shrinks more.

The airlines won't see the effect of this until a few months down the road when word gets out and new tickets must be purchased. Right now, they're dealing with flyers who have already been suckered into buying tickets. I can say I know of a few families who were dedicated flyers who are done flying. I'll use up my miles to go to Europe or Australia and that's it for me. I'll make those 1-2 trips and be done and if I wasn't sitting on gobs of miles, I wouldn't do that. In fact, maybe I'll see if I can trade them in for something else..........

Just wanted to add that if you are looking into flying to foreign countries you may want to look into their security procedures very closely so there are no surprises. For example, I have learned that in the UK, you cannot refuse the body scanner if selected to go thru it. Well, you can but you cannot get on the plane. That is your choice, the scanner or no flight there is not pat down choice. From what I have been reading, other countries are actually stricter than the U.S. Just didn't want you to travel thinking no other place uses the full body scanners.

 

[CathrynRose]

I know police in Manhattan are required to make sure they "feel a guy's junk"..if you know what I mean. _

I'm assuming the guy's junk being felt is under arrest? Or they have suspicion/cause to do this?

We're just trying to get to Disney World, Las Vegas, San Diego, etc etc etc....

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

Well, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think they do make us safer.
Everyone's got their own take on this.

As far as the practices not making us any safer ... I find it food-for-thought that no one has tried the bomb-in-the-shoe trick since we now all have to run our shoes through the scanner and go through the metal detectors shoeless....

If the scanning techniques didn't work at all, I'm fairly certain some other terrorist would have used the shoe scheme....

 

[Bell30012]

It may seem as if TSA is making us safer but in reality? If someone wants to take over a plane there are plenty on non-conventional weapons on the plane. If you remember none of the hijackers used any item that was forbidden on aircraft during the 9-11 attacks.

I have a cousin that works in a prison. Aluminum cans are weapons, fire extinguishers, laptop power cords, a piece of metal from the paper towel dispenser, etc., etc. You just can't ban everything that could be used to do harm.

My favorite TSA gone nuts was when the PILOT of an aircraft was arrested after he made the comment the he didn't need a nail clipper to bring the plane down. TSA had taken his nail clippers as a dangerous weapon. Please! This man is the pilot and we are worried about him having a weapon? He's the one guy on board that I want armed.

 

[Let'sGoFlyAKite]

Here's something i'm doing over at my blog:
http://shaneisevil.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/letter-of-complaint-to-the-tsa/

Join the FIGHT!

 

[JLTraveling]

I agree that the "naked scanner" is the way to go. Who cares? They make us all safer.
If I'm on a plane with my kids I WANT to know that there are NO underwear croch bombers, no shoe bombers. WHAT EVER IT TAKES to do that, I'm on board with.

What you're asking for is absolute safety. There are no guarantees in life, and certainly not a guarantee of absolute safety. Suppose we had a 100% perfect way to keep all terrorists off the plane. You're just as dead if it crashes from a mechanical failure.

Do you drive to work? Go to the beach? Your chances of being in a car accident or even attacked by a shark are infinitely higher than your chances of being the victim of a terrorist attack.

And really? What ever it takes? What if the next step is forcing your entire family to fly literally naked and carry no luggage, after enduring a body cavity search. Would you be okay with that too? Where is your personal line drawn?

Okay, I have stayed out of this discussion, but this made me LOL!! Really? She would only be demonstrating common sense if she agreed with you. Anything else is just self-serving nonsense. Then later you state that claiming common sense for one's side is ridiculous. Oh wait... that's right. It is only ridiculous if it isn't your side. Good stuff.

Since I'm posting, I guess I'll put my thoughts out there as well. Let me begin by saying that airport security is part of my family's daily life. I have stated before that we are an airline family. My dh is a commercial pilot for a major "legacy" carrier. I am a former f/a. We knew and had worked with quite a few of the crew members killed in the 9/11 attacks. One of the f/as was even in my initial training class. I share this only to show that this is not something I take lightly, and that it does impact our daily lives.

I realize we all give up a certain measure of our freedom in the name of safety. I have long ago given up my right to walk through a park alone at night, for example. I have also given up a certain measure of my right to privacy as well for both safety and convienence. We all have. What each person needs to ask is how much are you willing to give up. I think many have drawn the line here. Our choice is to be given a virtual strip search and be subjected to radiation penetrating our skin or be touched in places we have always considered private and off limits to strangers. Even then, we do not have a choice. You really have to be okay with both. TSA could funnel you into a line for either. If you refuse, you are then required to go through the additional screening.

Also, does all this make us any safer? Many people feel it does not. All of these procedures are in place because of the 9/11 attacks and then the shoe bomber and later the underwear bomber. Only the underwear bomber MAY have been stopped by these measures. Although, even in that instance, officials refused to say that it was even a possibility that this would've stopped him. What we do know about all these attackers is that they ALL raised red flags with the kind of ticket they bought and the manner in which they paid for them, and these flags were not investigated further. Shoot. The underwear bomber didn't even have a passport. Perhaps, instead of adding more procedures that take away one's rights and privacy but provide no real security, we should concentrate on the procedures that are already in place and follow through on those red flags. That would have done more to stop those attacks than these procedures we are talking about here.

So, I ask..... in this country, where we take great pride in our freedoms, how much are you willing to give up in the name of safety? Would you allow a TSA agent to put their hands inside your clothing and feel you? (Many teen girls, and boys too, wear very low-waisted jeans and shorts. Would you be okay if a TSA agent ran their hands along the inside of a person's waistband? My dh has seen agents do this.) We know people smuggle drugs inside their person. Is it out of the realm of possibility to think that a terrorist might do this as well? So, would you be okay subjecting yourself or your minor child to a more, shall we say, thorough search? Don't think it could happen here? Really? Did you ever think we would reach a point in this country where we would see average citizens, who have done absolutely nothing to warrant it, getting frisked so aggressively? Again, frisked without cause. Okay, I know some of you think that is too extreme. Let's look at something more common. Someone mentioned earlier colonoscopy bags. What about diapers, depends, and even a woman's maxi pad? These would be detected in both the body scanners AND the pat downs. The only way to ensure nothing is being hidden inside these items would be to have the person remove them and surrender them to the TSA agent while the TSA then provides the passenger with a replacement that we know is free of hidden chemicals, etc. Otherwise, this is all just for show. So, would you be willing to be escorted into the restroom by a TSA agent and surrender these things to them? Would you be okay with making your young dd have to do this? Maybe some of you are. I'm just curious where some of you would draw the line. At what point has it gone too far? Are you okay with Muslim women not having to receive pat downs or remove their head covering? Does their freedom to worship in the manner of their choosing override the safety of others? If so, why are you not willing to extend that same level of courtesy to a man or woman who says it is against their faith to allow someone other than a spouse or medical professional to touch them in certain places? I do know quite a few people who have been given gift certificates to a spa for a massage and have not used them because they felt it went against their beliefs, so those people are out there. All I'm asking is why should one faith be given special consideration over another? Is one more important or valid than another? Is one more likely to engage in terrorist activities than another?

Anyway, sorry for the long post. This whole thing just saddens me. I was going to take my girls to NYC next month to see the decorations and the Rockettes -- just some fun things I remember doing with my mom. However, now I am leaning against it. I don;t think my oldest dd would handle these screenings very well. She is not a victim of a sexual assalt or molestation. She is not "on the spectrum." She is just a painfully modest young girl. Even doctor's appointments are very uncomfortable for her. I was looking forward to the days we could travel and see the wonderful places this country and the world have to offer. (We are homeschoolers and not bound by a school schedule.) I will speak to my girls and see how they feel, but I'm sadden that we have reached this point in the good ol' US of A. I'm even more saddened by the number of people who are okay with it.

ITA with this entire post. I'm very sorry for the losses you endured on 9/11. Thank you for being a voice of reason from within the airline community.

For those who think this isn't going to affect the travel industry, please explain why in the past 24 hours I have received at least one e-mail from each airline I've flown in the past two years, offering the lowest rates I've ever seen for flights to various destinations around the world. Many of the deals are good over the holiday travel period. Still won't make me fly, but is it just a random coincidence that I've gotten all these e-mails so close together?