On the new TSA body scan/pat down

The main issue is that there needs to be constant employee evaluation with these type of things so that perverts and idiots are left in a position like this.

Looking at most of the complaints for the pat downs. It's not that actual pat down, but the conduct of the person doing the pat down that was in the wrong.

Would you if I told you that the timespan of the situation and subsequent article were both at the introduction of new TSA policy?

I suppose in that case it is understandable, but thats only one occurrence. After turning on the news and seeing multiple reports of people being "groped" every day, I have become somewhat incredulous of the whole ordeal.

By the way, do you happen to have a link to the article?

If you haven't read it, I'd be surprised.

Yeah, I just wanted to double check that it was that article you were referencing.

Ah, is there anything wrong with said article? It's quite a nice outrage article.

Indeed it is a nice outrage article. And to be honest, I really do feel for the woman. I've just become jaded after seeing it all over the news for the past few weeks.

The scanner is supposed to have less radiation than a regular x-ray, because it just penetrates the skin and not all the way through. No one can confirm this though, since TSA will not release the actual levels of radiation for security purposes. However, I wouldn't consent to that either, because like the Discovery article I linked to in the OP mentions, even if it is lower than an x-ray this is still dangerous for those people who have certain risk factors.

Another reason not to get scanned--even if theoretically, the scan is perfectly safe--is the fact that it is a virtual strip search. Does everyone from grandma to baby really need to be strip searched? Are you comfortable with having strangers look at your naked body? If you refuse, are you comfortable with being touched in ways that could feel like sexual assault? And if you refuse to do both and just decide to go home, are you prepared to be slapped with a lawsuit and a fine of $11,000?

This is security theater, nothing more. This does absolutely nothing to keep us safer. There are better alternatives, like Tegumi's article mentions.

Like I already said, the radiation that passes through your body during flight in the atmosphere is way more than than the scanners - if the scanner worries you because you don't want to be radiated you shouldn't fly in the first place. As for the groping, again, it needs to be refined. They should use better decsion making skills, but again, they don't have to pat you down if you just get scanned.

As for the Israel bit, that article is biased. It has been explain many, many, many times that what works in Israel can only work in Israel. It is a nationistic country, they racial profile, they are worried about bombs, it is hard to cross the board in the first place so there is an already added layer of protection, the airports smaller and country are smaller.

We can't do this in America, we are to diverse, we are to large, and we are to sensitive to racial profiling.

However, I do think they need to get rid of body scanner, but only because they don't work. But I think they need to replace them with something that does, not just stop screening.

An unsubstantiated claim.
http://www.epa.gov/radtown/cosmic.html



And I'm supposed to take that at face value?





MS Word replace 'behavioral' with 'racial'?



No kidding?



Yes, and their resources and manpower are smaller too. What's your point?



Nobody said stop screening. People just don't want these outrageous methods used for screening.

Notice the mrem in the EPA report? It is higher than the mrem from the body scanner that I said I was against because they don't work. So just flying in a plane exposes you to more radiation than a scan (the scanners that I don't like).

Also, Israel does racial and ethinic profile. Depending on which country your parents are from, you can experience extra procedures. And no, their manpower to airport ratio is not smaller. As for the part about focusing on Bombs, I meant that they are worried about bombings on the airport where as a more focused attempt at stopping hijackers and bombs on airplanes is placed at USA airports.

But do you honestly think that you can take a tiny and homogeneous country's methodology and adapt it to one of the largest and the most diverse country in the world?

Of course the procedures are excessive, they aren't perfect, and they need to be refined. My argument is that

1) It doesn't violate any of your rights for these searches to take place, despite the invasivness of the searches.
2) By large, it isn't TSA agents fault as they are following guidelines.
3) We have to be careful of relaxing the security just because it upsets a tiny minority or else a successful terrorist attack will cause a backlash that will further place resrictions on people traveling.

Which are? So far they've just been metal detectors.



Mm hmm. If you say so. So the fact that maybe they DO racial profile, means that the proposed behavioral profile is suddenly not going to work? You know, the TSA does racial profiling too, so should that be the argument against why we shouldn't have scanners or pat-downs?



I didn't say that. You said they have smaller x, y, and z because they are a small country. My contention with this is that as a small country, they also have smaller manpower and resources. The US doesn't have to work with small manpower and resources.



Does it make a difference? Both nations' security checkpoints check for bombs. One nation handles discovery of a bomb better than the other. That nation is not the U.S.



Uh, yeah. Tiny isn't an issue. (see small country, small resources) Being homogeneous isn't an issue. (see uncondoned racial profiling) So yes, it can be done.



Oh sure it does. You know why people are touting the 4th amendment? Here, take a look at this. Yes, it's Wikipedia, deal with it. The important parts have citations.



Are you Republican?

I am obviously refering to the full body scanners... thats what we've been talking about. I don't like them because they don't work, where as most people don't like them because it is revealing and feel it invades their privacy.

The searches are not breaking the 4th amendment because the are authorized by the government and it is private companies that run airlines and airports. Plus, you have a choice of whether or not you fly - flying is not mandatory by law, no one is forcing you to go to the airport to be searched. Being able to fly on an airplane is not a right, it is a service you chose to pay for.

The first reason alone is enough to argue your 4th amendment is not being broken, but the other two
The wiki article doesn't state anything that says these body scanners or pat downs are unjustified or break the 4th amendment that I saw at least.

Also, I have no party affiliation, but if I were a republican I don't think that makes my opinion less valid.

Okaaaaay... so this is an argument against the full body scanners? Either way, according to this, I wouldn't want to be in that thing.



Anything authorized by the government can't be unconsitutional, right?


I don't even- the TSA runs the security.



Oh god, seriously?
Yes, flying isn't a right. That's because it's an activity. However, you are supposed to be able to go about this activity without having your rights violated. Do you see the difference?
Additionally, flying is quite necessary for a large number of business and other travelers. It's not purely leisure as you seem to imply. These people can't just go "Oh, I don't think I'll fly today, I'll drive from New York to California."



No.



See: Body cavity and X-ray

I'm aware of the practicality of the matter - people have to fly to get work done. However, the government does not legally have to oblige these people by saying "Gee, I know you have a lot of flying to do and you are awfully busy, so I'll relax the security measures for you."

In reality, they are going to try to comprimise someway to stop upsetting the minority of people who are upset, but they have no legal reason to stop the searches because it is not a person's god given right to be able to fly on an airline Jet without being searched.

Also, I understand these pat-downs - which again you don't have to do if you go through those useless scanners - can be violating to some people. However, why would you do a pat-down - the purpose of which is to find weapons or explosives - and not do it the same way trained law enforcement do searches?

Again, not the issue. No one is saying searches should be dealt away with entirely. Checkpoints are the legal exception to the 4th amendment. They are still, however, subject to reasonable cause. Which means that legally, indiscriminate searching is not allowed. But wait, there is an exception to that -- they are referred to as 'routine procedures'. Unfortunately for your pat-down, it is not listed as a 'routine procedure', and is therefore only legal if there is reasonable suspicion.
...Regarding the 'right' thing, I just discussed this in my previous post.



Well, law enforcement performs thorough pat down on suspected criminals, for which they have previously established reasonable cause. No such precedent exists with airline travelers.

Well the exception is made solely because someone would go through the scanner, that warrants suspicion. The law actually said "innocent suspicion" was enough to warrant a search. The other reasons can be that something showed up on the scanner, the person said something along the lines of "I have a prosthetic" or "I have an external bladder". The reasonable thing is to say "Okay, just let me verify that" You know, to make sure it isn't a bomb and they are using a surefire way to get out of a search. However, people understandable feel this is very embarassing. I understand that, but it has to be done.

You sort of countered your own point about police searches. The routine searches are justified without cause or suspicions - these come in the form of the body scans and bag searches. I was mearly pointing out that the same tactics should be used when they are "justified" - justified as in "they didn't get scanned".

Of course, in my opinion this is all quite pointless since the scanners don't work anyways. I disagree that a system used in other countries would work in the USA. Some practices could be adopted, but a direct transfer of methods would fail. However, I think the current methods are excessive in their invasion of common human privacy, and inadequate in their ability to provide security.

And just to clarify, I'm not directing the point that it is wrong to ease up on scanning and searches at you directly Tegumi, just towards anyone who thinks so.

You're making up a lot of hokey-pokey, you know that? What in the world is 'innocent suspicion'? Also, the argument is against pat-downs and scanners altogether, ergo the situational point you were trying to make doesn't even materialize.



Wait, what? Are you saying that the justification for scanning someone is the fact that you hadn't scanned them yet?


Do not qualify as 'routine procedure'.



I don't think anyone suggested taking the Israeli airport security manual and printing "TSA" on it.



Yes, the same reason why people are upset about the methods.

Hokey-pokey is a dance, and I've put my dancing days behind me.

Sorry about the confusing term "innocent suspicion" which is definetly oxymoronic. However, it refers to something where you have to suspect someone of something, no matter how innocent and improbable a person could be guilty. Example, when the teacher has to check that nobody is cheating on the spelling test in 3rd grade, and she checks even the most quite and well behaved student that she knows would never cheat and who is so smart she would never have to. In the case of Airport security, it would be patting down a little kid who did not go through the body scanners. You know he isn't going to have a bomb, but you have to do it anyways but not going through the scanner is cause for suspicion.

I know it is absurd. But it has to be done if only to appease people who would cry discrimination and racism. Every has to do it just to be fair.



You don't have to convince me that the proceedure is a reason to be upset, I've gone through them. I only think the notion that it violates your rights is wrong.


No, that the justifaction for patting-down someone can be that you never scanned them. I didn’t scan you, ergo I have to pat you down. And yes, I believe that body scan do now qualify as routine procedure. They are done to millions of people a day, multiple times. I would call that routine procedures.



The article you posted heavily suggested it. The point wasn’t just to add Israeli methods to the existing ones used by the US, but to ditch the existing ones in favor of the Israeli methods.

Yes, this is why the indiscriminate routines exist by law. However, because they already exist, and specifically exclude pat-downs and body scans, those two items would be ILLEGAL if used indiscriminately. That is the point I am trying to make.



Despite all the empirical evidence I've provided. What do you want me to do?



Just because it is done routinely doesn't make it legal! The law does not state that it is a routine procedure!



That's because several of the methods used by the TSA are kaput. But obviously the adoption would be a synergistic procedure, there ARE competent people out there.