isadore;569013 wrote:Based on experience with terrorist bomb attempts we use scans and then pat downs when needed. So we dont look up in the sky and see another Lockerbie but this time over the USA.

justincredible;568902 wrote:Only in America are you a terrorist until proven innocent.

justincredible;569132 wrote:Nope. The US has been 100% effective in preventing terrorist attacks without these scans since 9/11. They are unnecessary, you said it yourself.

Manhattan Buckeye;569192 wrote:Just called my wife's stepfather to hear exactly how the search went.....the TSA agent had on gloves, so no skin to skin contact. With the back of the hand made contact with the genital region (i.e. the frank and the beans) and probed within the underwear which depending on one's "manscaping" would have touched the pubic area.

This isn't right.

BGFalcons82;569197 wrote:I hadn't thought of it this way, but this is spot on.

Lost in the "discussion" last night is that fact that there are other ways to provide safe flying environments, other than taking nude photos and searching our bodies in violation of the 4th Amendment. Things like bomb-sniffing dogs and profiling could be used, but aren't popular with the politicians. These will never happen, so we get what we elect.

Manhattan Buckeye;569233 wrote:A metal scanner detects an immediate threat (knife, gun, etc.). You don't even need to go on a commercial flight to go through a metal detector. Many courtrooms and even schools use them. People don't bitch because it isn't intrusive. Have metal on your person? Put it in the tray. There is no intrusion.

You can't be serious comparing that to these new TSA rules.

isadore;569225 wrote:they are hardly unnecessary given the methods shown by our enemies. new threats were presented first by richard reid, which we adjusted to, then by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Manhattan Buckeye;569233 wrote:You can't be serious comparing that to these new TSA rules.

believer;569252 wrote:Apparently some folks think having strangers "touch your junk" is far better alternative to the common-sense ideas of metal detectors, profiling, questioning, and bomb sniffing dogs.

Damned Israelis anyways. What the hell would they know about stopping terrorists?

justincredible;569255 wrote:Hey, I love when strangers touch my junk. Just not like this.

believer;569267 wrote:I don't mind strangers touching my junk either as long as I'm wearing a condom.

justincredible;569251 wrote:You never answered my question about what happens if someone tries boarding with a bomb up their ass. Will you be for or against cavity searches before boarding a plane?

I think Shooter Jennings is right: "They're preparing us for an all-out police state."

[video=youtube;LOL12y4QJbg][/video]

believer;569252 wrote:Apparently some folks think having strangers "touch your junk" is far better alternative to the common-sense ideas of metal detectors, profiling, questioning, and bomb sniffing dogs.

Damned Israelis anyways. What the hell would they know about stopping terrorists?

Manhattan Buckeye;569263 wrote:"Body scanners are only incrementally more intrusive"

1) You can't be serious, part 2. A metal detector doesn't record an image of your body. A metal detector doesn't emit radiation. You get your belongings back to you after the queue. Where is the intrusion? No one touches you, no one examines you, it is just walking through a detector. It isn't any more intrusive than having to walk through an area with a canine, which seems to make a lot more sense.

2) Why do you keep neglecting the pat-downs? That can happen even if you agree to the scan.

Have you ever flown before?

Manhattan Buckeye;569299 wrote:"Have flown and have been patted down on more than one occassion, it is no big deal. "

So you've had your genitals touched?

I know you are trolling, so go ahead and tell us you have.

isadore;569288 wrote:Israel with two international airports as compared to US. such a similar situation.

believer;569343 wrote:Complete bullshit. The number of airports does not matter. The methods do.