Category: News and Views
Anyone know the protocol on use of these tools in U S Airports? I thought they were only going to be for those passengers who no matter what the removed from their person kept setting off the metal detector. If the scanner didn't catch anything and it still went off, then a pat down search? My friend was surprised I didn't have to go through either as he thought they were going to be used on everyone. Which is it, for everyone or for potential flyers who can't get past the initial screening?
Now I took two trips to an efficient little police state where pat down searches...by male guards for the males, females for the females...are required right there on the tarmac before you can board any of their outgoing flights. When you arrive on the runway there's an efficient little sharpshooter with his rifle in the event of terrorist activity, there are police checkpoints every so often, when you leave the trunk of the car you arrive in is searched before entering the airport, you go thru the metal detector as well as the pat down search, then once you board the plane after the pat down an efficient little sharpshooter is off in the distance with his rifle waiting for trouble. The idea of more efficient searches doesn't really bother me because it really is nothing I haven't experienced, but what's troublesome in the U S airports is evidently the search even involves...ahem...touches of private parts which the Algerian security don't do, and it just seems if every passenger went thru both scanner and patdown searches here, no one would ever make their flight on time as it seems it would take too long.
My guess is it's like everything else in the U.S. - it's dependent on your region.
What I heard out here at least was that you could do the full-body scan or opt for pat down. Like most this stuff, good idea, but raggedy implementation and not enough testing ahead of time, plus the aftermarket dime novel we're-being-taken-over-because-we're-using-security-everyone-else-has-been-doing-for-years mentality.
I think security around here is seriously over rated these days. You know, while airport security is putting us through all this bull shit, the real terrorists are laughing at us, because they almost always find a way around it. I bet a huge part of the cost of plane tickets goes towards paying for security related costs.
hhahaha. the securities are sometimes, acting more to their power. once I was travelling within my state and for which they made me to wait for one hour and touching me here and there by the name of verifications.
In fact, whatever security we have, these bloody terrorists are being much clever and doing what they are wanting to do. I guess they bribe even to the securities and knowing all the secrets.
and this is the reason I hate to go by air. I hate waiting, though.
Raaj.
While I'm not completely against the increased physical security, having experienced it elsewhere, it sort of misses the point.
It is based at least in part on Freak Boy from northern Nigeria trying to take himself out with a planeload of passengers flying out of the Netherlands. Where the new security misses the mark is it totally shifts blame away from those who ignored Freak Boy's OWN FATHER, who kept calling U S immigration authorities, saying, "My son is a militarized freak who has been trained in Yemen. He is dangerous and SHOULD NOT be allowed in your country."
I wonder how people would take to the Israeli method of screening prospective airline flight passengers: they go not by massive physical security and invasive searches but by various mind games. If they don't like your tone of voice or demeanor as they interview you, or if your story just isn't making two and two equal four, you just can't board that aircraft. Now when was the last incident out of an Israeli flight? Wasn't it there a flight hijacked out of Tel Aviv and eventually the incident derailed in Entebbe in 1976, and there hasn't been a single incident on any flight out of there since?
Yeah, Israel has managed to keep their security pretty tight, and I admire them for it. As far as this country goes, I am not sure what to think. I understand the need for security, but truly, I think the scanners and pat-downs are going too far. I guarantee you I will not be happy the first time I have to experience a pat-down. Almost makes me not want to fly at all. And I used to like flying, even when security started to get tighter.
I have heard conflicting reports about who has to go through the scanner and/or pat-down, and who does not. I've heard some say that everyone has to pick between the two, and I've also heard that it's only by random selection. Not sure which is true.
I understand that times are tough and we must take steps and all that, but this is just more of the monkey business if you ask me.
It's a shame a small minority of destructive passengers has to spoil what should be a nice experience for the majority, but that is what some of these destructive people are doing. I have no interest in using the net to learn how to manufacture explosives, nor military training overseas, nor have I the technological sophistication to even do a cut & paste, but I heard Logan is ready to go with both the scanners & pat downs. Not quite sure when or where I'll be traveling next.
I have had the unfortunate experience of a pat down. Luckily, the lady was really nice, and didn't seem to have anything on her mind besides doing her job, in regard to that, but it was still incredibly awkward, having a complete stranger touching me pretty much everywhere. I don't know what that was supposed to accomplish, anyway, since people who do hide explosives certainly aren't going to make it obvious to the touch, but I still say I'd rather go through that than the body scanner. At least the person touching me was female, and not some pervert secretly masturbating in front of the scanner.
I don't see what the big deal is. although it may be uncomfortable, I would much rather take a little extra time to go through a few seconds of being uncomfortable, then being on a plane that is hyjacked, or a bomb placed on it, or anything stupid that the freaking psycho idiots tend to want to do these days! I'd choose to be inconvenienced for two seconds over that anyday!
Unfortunately, the psycho idiots are also inteligent psycho idiots, so they usually find a way around these things.
hmmm, well yes maybe they do once in a while find a way around it. but if we had that attitude, we won't do anything cause they may find there way around it. it would be a scary life. people would be killed daily and noone would want to fly.
and with that attitude who wins? the psycho! now someone is going to say the psycho is winning, cause we have to go through this. um, nooo he's not. we're still alive aren't we? lol!
hmm.. interesting i saw this topic.
i just posted 2 health related artickles to the scanners (on another website) and i can post them here if you want them
I'd like that. Thank you.
I know a man for whom it is a danger to fly because he has had more than the limit of radiation, and even though scanners are not large amounts, they still emit radiation. Yet he sets off detectors because there is metal in his body from where he's broken bones. This is going to make it hard for him to fly. But what happens if someone has a predicament like this, and they hate America, so they believe God has given them their way past the scanners--or something equally ridiculous?
there hasn't been a plane flown in to a building in nearly 10 years now, no planes have blown up over the u.s in that same time period. Something must be working. If you don't want to fly there's allways amtrak or greyhound, but I'll take someone touching my nads over riding with a bunch of smellys
Feathery, can your friend bring his medical records? I knew a guy years ago, pretty regular, average kind of guy, who had some kind of metal implant to hold together some kind of injury, and had to bring documentation of this for when the metal detector automatically goes off. Singer Gloria Estefan probably has to do this as she had rods inserted to fix broken vertebrae. Medic Alert i d you engrave yourself in your own words, so could get one to show the radiation exposure? There's a toll free number on the back. Maybe having his records handy could simplify things for him if he wanted to travel somewhere.
Can you prove that the extreme security is the reason for the lack of terrorism incidents in this country lately? besides, there was an incident, last year. Rmemeber, the one that basically caused the body scanner thing to be implimented? I firmly believe there should be a security system in every country, but this one is just ridiculous, in my opinion. Half the people that seem to be suspicious honestly have nothing to hide, and some people who really do have something to hide get away with it, because they've found a way to trick the system. I was fine with putting our bags through the scanner, going through the metal detectors, and I'm even okay with the liquid restrictions, but the body scanners have just gone one step too far. apparently, one of the operators has already been caught masturbating. At least the person doing the patdown search is going to be the same gender. As awkward as that is, I don't mind it quite as much.
Okay, I will not make light of the September 11th situation, but it's over, get over the fear and peranoia and let us fly in comfert.
I get a pat down every time I go to the airport. I do it because I refuse to release my guide dog in public, and so I set off the metal detector when I go through. Its not like they cup your private parts and start giving you a hand job, they pat your legs with the back of their hands.
If you want to know what would really make our airports a lot safer, its one word that makes all people cringe and look away when I say it, "profiling". If you'll notice, at this point in time, the terrorists are middle eastern. Now I have nothing against middle eastern people, they're nice enough, I love the food, but some of the people from there are terrorists. Reallity sucks, get over it. So, in the airport, or train stations, or anywhere security wants to be tight that is a high target for terrorists, profile the people getting on, most likely your going to catch the terrorist.
If you think this is a new idea, nearly every other western country does it. Israel does it, italy does it, they all do. We just need to tell the unions and race baters to shut the hell up, and the people who claim their being descriminated against to get over it.
As for the full body scanners, I feel they are a bit invasive, but you don't have to worry about that if you simply follow the rules and take some small precautions before going to the airport. Its not that hard.
Margorp, I completely agree with you.
Silver lightning, if the people doing the profiling are inteligent, and aproach the situation the way a judge aproaches a trial, I'm all for it. Profiling doesn't have to mean aresting everyone who looks a certain way. it means judging you based on how you act, and respond to their questions, rather than judging you based on how a piece of machinery responds to you.
Profiling is racism. Simple as that.
Saying to someone, "you're an evil terrorist because you're from the Middle East" is racist. Saying to someone, "we're suspicious of you because you can't seem to give us a straight answer when we ask you a question, and you keep figiting around in your pockets" is not.
It is conceivable that someone in the same predicament as my friend could be twisted enough to believe that God had given him/her/it the way in to America, and past the scanners, without having questions raised. If the situation arises, how will they up security? Cut you open and look at the metal bits? Run some sort of chemical scanner? Make you drink something that would make certain scanners light up if they react with certain chemicals? This could require people to arrive many hours early. Truth is people, cracking down gets some people to quiet down, but it gets many more to set their imaginations in action. We can't have it both ways, and we just have to accept that any way we play it, shit can get through and hit the fan. Anything powerful attracts things that want to break it down. Short of shutting down the borders, you couldn't eliminate the threat. And that still might not do it. They just need to realize that excessive paranoia gets you more hurt than anything. A dose of paranoia will keep you alive, but overkill will just make people want to try and cheat the system just to say they can, not just because they hate us.
Okay, I will not make light of the September 11th situation, but it's over, get over the fear and peranoia and let us fly in comfert.
Okay I am profiling here. Are you mentally retarted? because that is the only way I can possibly explain this line of reasoning, that and the majority of replys that you write on other subjects that usually consist of one line that never makes any sence.
Sure, lets drop the metal detecters, drop the pat downs. Lets just let everyone back on the planes just like before, hey if you go fly we can even provide you with a box cutter. Hopefully your parents aren't in the next building to be brought down by an airplane.
Margorp's posts don't make sense? maybe you're the one who's mentally retarded. I don't know about you, but I can't find anything confusing about his posts. Do I completely agree with all of them? Not necessarily, but they make perfect sense to me. I'm not saying there should be no security. Like feathery said, a little peranoya is necessary, but this is overkill.
I repeat.
Okay, I will not make light of the September 11th situation, but it's over, get over the fear and peranoia and let us fly in comfert.
in other words? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Lets just go back to the old days and screw security! It's over with surely nobodys going to do it again!
September 11, 2001 should never be forgotten or it will be repeated. It is ironic that while most international terrorism comes from the middle east, the first highjacker was a white male who went by the name "D B Cooper".
I support more of an "either or" proposition with the new technologies, let the passenger choose scanner or patdown. I'd probably go with the patdown.
As for profiling it's unfortunate, but too many negative elements have ruined life for the rest of the people from their nations. Now with the middle east & some Muslim non Arab majority states, for example Chechnya, even women and children are being recruited as warriors. One of the suicide bombers in Moscow subway was a 17 year old female, & females raised fatherless are particularly recruited as Islam teaches that marriage is half of the faith & men are mandated to provide for & protect women. Generally scholars of the faith don't support female jihadists, but with everyone now involved no one is or should be exempt from profiling.
I know Latinos who are decent people, but recently near me there were two young men from Mexico & the Dominican Republic arrested for trafficking in large amounts of cocaine that were found in an industrial part of neighboring Revere. Sure, there were other elements of them that should have aroused suspicion, like hey a Nissan Maxima, even if it's 6 years old, is a very nice car for men in their early 20's who aren't sons of wealth...believe me you're probably not hanging around this part of Revere if you grew up wealthy, even local police try to avoid this area...but the cocaine possibly being connected to violent drug cartels in Mexico may mean profiling for south of the border folks when they travel. Which brings me back to my commonly expressed opinion that perhaps it's time to start evaluating each group based on certain statistics & start reducing allowable immigration.
It really wasn't the 9/11/2001 incident that made security as ridiculous as it is today. Like I said, I didn't have a problem with it in the least until the body scanners came into play.
Did I say have no security? No. Furthermore, I don't understand why my posts are confusing. I still firmly believe that profiling and racism go hand in hand.
You're still not answering...what will they say when a terrorist has the keys past the scanner? Whether the medical stuff is faked or not?
Imagine then, we will never be able to fly.
I mean hey, I am playing like they do. If they want to get paranoid, I'll pose more sticky questions to make people squirm.
Of course some of these searches are a bit ridiculous. All a potential terrorist has to do is to come in from a country with less restrictive airport security and do his deed once the plane is over U.S. teritory (shoe bomber for instance, the most recent bombs threat in the UK, flight originally from yemen).
Airport security is needlessly complex and needs to be rethought.
If giving extra searches to the people who are most likely to blow up my plane is racism, then that's fine with me.
I feel sorry for those people, I like many of them and think this is unfair, but their own people brought it on and it is a part of living in a country that has been attacked by them, however unjust it feels.
Many universities have certain quotas for races as and special minority scholarships, that is clearly racism too then, and should be stopped, you can't have it both ways.
If I make some weirdos day in pat down search or body scanner that is fine with me, but they need to make this technology so that the machine will determine if there are suspicious items or explosives, and not make the pictures available to operators in any way. Fact of the matter is, this will be abused and pictures will leak out somehow. If the record companies can't even keep master copies of their albums save and they appear on Pirate Bay months before official release, they certainly cannot control millions of pictures from a network of airports.
In general, I find people who have not flown much bitch about the inconvenience of flying much more than those who actually fly. It is not so bad, sure it gets crowded on super busy days, but perhaps avoiding flights on those days might be a good idea.
I have gotten through airport in as little as 20 minutes, and it hardly ever takes more than 45 minutes from check in till the gate on a domestic flight, twiice that on an international one, but then you have no choice, if you are to go by ship, it'll take days and days, cost more, plus you have to pay for accomodations and food on the way.
U.S. trains are abslutely dreadful, sadly, and no one wants to give up his or her precious land or storefront or grand parents house, to make a new railway line, so nothing happens with the infrastrcutre.
For those who have been on the Eurostar from, say, London to Paris, know how amazing it is to take a train downtown one city and get to the other city in 3 hours, rather than go to the airport, through security, check in baggage, wait for takeoff clearance, have a 35 minut flight, land, go through passport control, find your bags, find a cab or train etc, and get downtoan, all of this taking definitely more time than the train.
No reason why the east coast cities could not be connected by high speed train, like New York, Boston, Philli, DC etc.
Very well said, WB. Thank you.
I used to fly back and forth three times a year...and I still fly an average of once a year. and I still bitch. lol
Wb, what a clear, well-thought-out post. However, don't you feel that all of this hocus pocus isn't really doing much good?
Sorry Feathery that's just not that often. I used to fly twice a month at least, and there's people that fly more often than that.
WB is right, and in general you get ready for it / get through it pretty quick.
I used to fly 2 to 3 times a month.
I have been on over 30 flights this year (total, not round trip) and barely got myself out of 2 more trans atlantic trips just this month.
I'd say flying once a month approaches "flying a lot".
It is a fact that the processes are excessive and not very efficient. the UK has ordered a total revission of the whole airport security process with ohpes of simplifying it, speeding it up and making it more effective without sacrificing security.
One could say the terrorists are winning, if their goal is to affect our way of life, they do so admireably well.
If you add the cost of extra security and the average hassle to the detah they already caused, they are definitely very effective (just look at the 911 tax we have to pay every time we fly).
So, yes, there is a lot of room for improvement, I think, but, no, this process does not make flying a horrific I-will-never-do-this-again, experience, as I feel the tone of some of the posts and news items seems to suggest.
Let's count, I flew for summer, spring, and Christmas breaks, back and forth, then I'd fly to and from somewhere in the middle of summer, I'd also fly to various blindy things throughout the year, and I'd fly places for school. so actually technically that's a lot more, I was just thinking of the really big things like flying across country or out of it altogether. I'm glad I don't fly much anymore. I didn't fly as much as some, but I didn't know when I was going to so I was afraid to unpack sometimes, particularly in the dead of winter or the middle of summer. lol. so now I have narrowed my stuff down to laptop, bn, phone and chargers, headset, earphones, a few changes of clothes, some toiletries, and a bit of money. Some people pack three suitcases. I have one, and a medium sized purse. I also travel back and forth between 3 or 4 houses a lot but at least I don't have to fly for that. That would mean flying every two weeks. ick.
Yeah. If you're planning to fly with more than, well, two suitcases, one for checked baggage, and one to take with you on the plane, you're going to run into some difficulties. that doesn't really have much to do with security, but the weight of the plane, especially if it's a small one. O yeah, and don't forget that you need to put all your larger containers with liquid in your checked bag.
The weight restrictions and fees are not directly security related though.
Part of the problem is that the average passenger has become 10 or 20 pounds heavier today than in the 70s, and when you have a plane that holds 200 people that is significant, and so they are more expensive to fly.
It is also a security consideration. In January of, I believe, 2004, a plane carrying 20 people crashed on takeoff from Charlotte (where I lived at the time) due to being overloaded, there were no survivors.
So they have had to install new weght sensors on planes to make sure that weight dosnot exceed the limits for each plane and make sure it is distributed correctly.
Flying may be getting ever safer, but all these security measures and tools always come at a cost, and we have to pay that as passengers.
Yes. I completely understand the weight restriction part of flying. If you can't respect that, then don't fly, plain and simple. It's the rest of it. In my opinion, they're doing the wrong thing for the right reasons.
Wb is correct in saying that we are actually giving the terrorists power...they are winning. How sad.
O yes. I imagine they probably find this whole thing amusing.
no doubt.
You guys are overrating this.... Security is not much different from five years ago.. Accept for what you can take in... geeish I fly at least once a year..