http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/111346/will-turkey-day-fliers-cry-foul#mwpphu-container The last time I went on an airplane I felt like I was being marched off to Auschwitz and I didn't even have to go through a body scanner. Also I don't understand exactly what excessively patting people down is going to accomplish. You can set a bomb off on in a city or in a building and probably do a lot more damage than you will setting off a bomb in an airplane. Does this mean we need full body scanners and pat downs every time we enter anywhere there is a large quantity of people? Hell, you don't get to security until you are IN the airport facility, you can set off a bomb right before you get to the security checkpoint and do plenty of damage. I bet that would make the TSA feel pretty stupid. This all seems just silly to me, the real terrorists are in their caves laughing at the normal general public who just trying to get from point a to point b and getting patted down and scanned like criminals.
And to make it even sadder there are people out there (I listened to Sean Hannity's radio show for a few minutes and he was all about this) that think profiling is the answer . Why would anyone think profiling people based on their race/religion should be legal? They make the argument that the people who are attacking the U.S. are Islamic fundamentalists. The notion of taking people to the side and give them full searches because they are brown which means they look like a terrorist is rediculous. Yeah profiling for national security is a great idea and should be perfectly legal, how about you ask the Japanese-Americans how they felt about it in the 1940s? How about taking Sean Hannity off to the side and giving him a special pat down and Q&A session because he's white? White people have a much longer history of bombing brown people than brown people do white people.
This is why I refuse to fly. People need to feel "safe" despite what personal rights they give up. This is despite the fact that a 16 year old in their parent bought SUV is more of a threat than any terrorist.
A perfectly safe life is boring in pointless. At that point you are just the living dead.
They aren't profiling anymore. A white guy tried to go through security in San Francisco where they now have the body scanners. They weren't using them for all passengers though, so he initially chose to just go through the simple metal detector. They were pulling people randomly from that line though (not sure what their method was, like someone every 5 minutes, or every 15 people) to go to the body scanner. He refused the body scanner and got upset when they did a more than thorough pat down on him. He was asked to leave, some other BS ensued, and now he's being hit with a civil suit and a $11000 fine. I read a little more on it, the case against him is BS. I've only flown 3 times since 9/11 (2002, 2003, and 2010). There weren't many noticable changes in 02 or 03. Though, in 02, I set off a metal detector in Phoenix (I was 14 at the time) and had to go through an additional search which at the time was just the wand. Still though, to take a 14 year old traveling with his parents and not acting suspiciously and make him go through an extra search, seems a little ridiculous. 2003 went without issue for me, but 2010 was way different as you can imagine. It seemed like such a hassle this time, and I didn't have much of a clue about the new regulations before my trip. Luckily, someone told about all the new stuff, and it wasn't too bad getting through security. It was still a bit of a hassle compared to before. I'm not concerned with the body scanners for what they can see; all they can really see is a grey haze that is your body and it picks up anything that's not natural or clothing. My concern though is the extra level of radiation these place on you. It's needlessly subjecting you to extra radiation above background levels and that can be a serious health concern for people who travel a lot. For the casual vacationer, I don't think they emit anything that would be an issue. But for someone who travels heavily for work, it could start to become dangerous. For that sacrifice, I don't think these will add any significant level of protection over what the TSA used before.
I'm also surprised we aren't hearing more from the airlines about this. Surely, this will irritate a lot of people, some of which to the point that they won't fly anymore. Some of you have already said you won't fly because of the other security measures they instated before. This is bad for the airline industry, and if they want to keep their customers, they need to speak up and do something about this, as well as individuals.
So, regarding my gripe about the radiation levels these body scanners put out; they only expose you to an amount of radiation equivalent to the exposure over 2 minutes during flight. It's not significant. Also, in response to the San Francisco Airport incident, that airport is not serviced by TSA. That means TSA is not responsible for what they do.
monsterfan99 wrote:This is why I refuse to fly. People need to feel "safe" despite what personal rights they give up. This is despite the fact that a 16 year old in their parent bought SUV is more of a threat than any terrorist.
A perfectly safe life is boring in pointless. At that point you are just the living dead.
How long is it going to take you to do your northwest trip next year without flying?
Nothing beats the story about the lady who "opted out" of the body scanner and was humiliated when TSA Agents shouted "WE HAVE AN OPT OUT!" She was then very emotional during the pat down and was asked to sit in a holding area where they allegedly handcuffed her to a chair and ripped her ticket in half.
The TSA's response? They posted two five minute clips of this two hour ordeal. One of her entering the holding area and one of her leaving the area.
These things are a hot issue and frankly I can't stand them. It has been admitted that the body scanners would not have prevented the Christmas Day bomber from getting through security. Anyone want to tell me how many terrorist attacks have taken place on US soil after 9/11 and before the arrival of these scanners? My point exactly. In any case of a terrorist successfully making it on a plane, they have been stopped my vigilante Americans who are already paranoid as hell to fly. I don't want to trade my personal space for the privilege of boarding a plane.
And my favorite quote of the day... " Since 1972, 3,098 Americans have been killed on US soil by Islamic Terrorists including 9/11. In 2009, 16,500 Americans were killed by drunk drivers. YES, 38 years vs 1 year 5x as many people were killed by people who drink and drive. Yet we molest people at airports while the drunk drivers continue to kill nearly every day and we spend billions at airports and almost 0 on stopping the real killing happening in your neighborhoods and cities."
Well its up to you, get your junk nearly touched or risk being blow to pieces at 36,000 feet.
I've got nothing to hide, and personally I don't think the TSA person much cares about what my junk feels like. They probably hate the fact they have to do it.
And to answer your question, there have been so few terrorist attacks since 2001 because many of them have been thwarted by increases in security, why do you think the last two have come in someone's underwear and an ink cartridge? Because its tough as hell to get a gun or knife on a plane today.
Nothing is perfect though. Adam Savage (from Mythbusters) allegedly got onto a plane with two huge razor blades recently.
Top 5 wood-5-Goliath 4-Ravine Flyer II 3-Phoenix 2-Voyage 1-El Toro Top 5 Steel- 5-Velocicoaster 4- Maverick 3- Fury 325 2-Steel Vengeance 1-X2 Coaster Count: 444
Yeah, I've drawn the line. It's more worth it to take Amtrak to/from Chicago and Salt Lake City when I need to. Longer yes, and sometimes more expensive, but there's soooo much less bullshit. Plus I have legroom. There's gonna be another terrorist attack no matter what they do in security, all they are doing is prolonging it. I'm happy to know I will be on the ground when it happens.
monsterfan99 wrote:^Dead on with Amtrak. Total time for my fiancée to get her ticket (pre-bought) and bags checked was around 3 minutes.
Depending on the line, you could even buy a ticket as late as 5 minutes before the train. However, some stations won't allow you to purchase a ticket later than 10 minutes before scheduled departure due to security concerns. That's all you have to put up with on Amtrak. I think they also have dogs looking for drugs and explosives on the train sometimes, but I've never actually seen them.
The only thing I don't like about taking a train...even if the ticket is the same as flying you have to take off of work longer (sometimes 5 more days). So depending on your job that's a lot of money lost, and buy more food (it's gets boring on a train, you'll have to eat).
Last edited by tp41190 on November 25th, 2010, 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
^Agreed. With school and work, I don't have time to take a three day train ride from L.A. to Chicago. I'd use up my entire vacation just with traveling back and forth.
There needs to be a FAST alternative to air travel. I'm thinking something with lazers.
Maybe I should buy a plane.
Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking, isn't thinking of.
^Will be interesting to see how the US versions of the bullet trains works here in Orlando to Tampa. The speed here will be 120ish but only cut 25 minutes off a 90 minute route. Plus cost for it will be insane at around $30-$40 one way Orlando to Tampa/
The question is will tourists be more willing to pay for the rail than take a shuttle or rent a car? I personally think it would be a major boost to Florida's economy as an re-invent the way tourists travel like it has in Europe. Florida isn't really in need of a project like this nearly as much as California though, I think it was approved mainly because the large tourism in Florida but it certainly would be nice being able to go from San Diego, OC, LA, Valencia, Sacramento, San Francisco. Those freeways are always slammed with traffic, it would be huge for the state.
^FL doesn't need it at all as driving from Orlando to Tampa is a breeze. The fact there is a stop that will be made at WDW, eliminating the need to magical express, despite this being a public project tells me why this will happen.
. Why would anyone think profiling people based on their race/religion should be legal? They make the argument that the people who are attacking the U.S. are Islamic fundamentalists. The notion of taking people to the side and give them full searches because they are brown which means they look like a terrorist is rediculous. Yeah profiling for national security is a great idea and should be perfectly legal, how about you ask the Japanese-Americans how they felt about it in the 1940s? How about taking Sean Hannity off to the side and giving him a special pat down and Q&A session because he's white? White people have a much longer history of bombing brown people than brown people do white people.
