Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think that TSA really messed up. They should have rolled out this new program, AFTER the New Year. Anyone in business knows you never start a new program during the busy season...and of course, TSA starts the "strip" search, RIGHT BEFORE THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY!!!! Hello, F Idiots! The busiest travel week of the year, aside from Christmas! This is going to just be a complete comedy show to watch on the news for the next week. TSA messed up big time with the timing on this program...I appreciate the security aspect, but they have not even had time to work out the tweeks on this new program, it reminds me of when they started the "throw away ALL liquids", and I went to the airport with some makeup in my purse, and a lip gloss, and had to throw it away. Then, 2 weeks later...it was okay to take lip gloss and make up on the plane in a purse...they realized it was a disaster. This will turn out to be the same thing...I can see it changing now...to only do the search on "random" passengers...The next week will be interesting to watch..
There's a flip side to the unfounded argument, "don't like it, don't fly", being this: "If you're so scared of virtually non-existent threats, don't fly".
Why should law abiding or even otherwise criminal, but in no way capable/willing to blow up planes, citizens be subjected to highly invasive procedures that in any other situation would be called sexual harassment, at best.
So why not flip the coin and say this: If you are so worried about your plane being blown up, then don't fly, and leave the sensible people in peace.
Marmac, let me ask you this: Do you think all cars should have built blood analyzers, where you need to submit a blood sample, testing for all known intoxicating substances, before the cars ignition will work?
Do you think knives should be outlawed, as there's a definitive danger (far greater than being on a plane with a terrorist) that you might kill yourself with it?
Do you think it should be illegal to be outdoors without a full bee keepers suit in any area with a registered wasp and/or bee presence?
My personal favorite is Peanuts, who in 2001, the highest terrorist casualty year in America, killed more people that terrorists. Should peanuts then, in all forms, be banned?
All the examples I've listed have far greater potential to save lives, and as far as I can se, they won't be any more invasive, do you support those too?
I agree ten thousand percent! If we are frequent, responsible flyers, why cant we register for a finger print or iris scan and be done with it?
Management at Orlando International announced today the privatization of security, my daughter just told me, looking for a link to the story on one of the Orlando news stations.
Florida Congressman John Mica is encouraging airports to explore privatization of security opting out of TSA contracts.
However, the TSA has pointed out that while airports may replace their staffers, the new security workers still have to abide by TSA regulations. That means nude scanners and regular gropings no matter who mans the checkpoints.
Parenthetically, it would seem that public crotch grabbing has been going on in America’s airports for much longer than the past few weeks.
No one with any power has yet taken on the security measures themselves – or their efficacy – rightly fearing they might be portrayed as soft on terrorism. Airport security braces for holiday travel rush
There's a flip side to the unfounded argument, "don't like it, don't fly", being this: "If you're so scared of virtually non-existent threats, don't fly".
Why should law abiding or even otherwise criminal, but in no way capable/willing to blow up planes, citizens be subjected to highly invasive procedures that in any other situation would be called sexual harassment, at best.
So why not flip the coin and say this: If you are so worried about your plane being blown up, then don't fly, and leave the sensible people in peace.
Marmac, let me ask you this: Do you think all cars should have built blood analyzers, where you need to submit a blood sample, testing for all known intoxicating substances, before the cars ignition will work?
Do you think knives should be outlawed, as there's a definitive danger (far greater than being on a plane with a terrorist) that you might kill yourself with it?
Do you think it should be illegal to be outdoors without a full bee keepers suit in any area with a registered wasp and/or bee presence?
My personal favorite is Peanuts, who in 2001, the highest terrorist casualty year in America, killed more people that terrorists. Should peanuts then, in all forms, be banned?
All the examples I've listed have far greater potential to save lives, and as far as I can se, they won't be any more invasive, do you support those too?
Maybe you should check the polls . You would find out your line of thinking may be popular on internet posting sites, but the vast majority of Americans support the measures being taken.
Where are the polls? Let's check them now and in 6 months!
BTW: Are we safer now?
Homeland Security's acting inspector general, Richard Skinner, says: "The ability of TSA screeners to stop prohibited items from being carried through the sterile areas of the airports fared no better than the performance of screeners prior to Septmber 11, 2001"
In his 1835 book Democracy in America, Tocqueville wrote, "A nation that asks nothing of government but the maintenance of order is already a slave in the depths of its heart; it is a slave of its well-being, ready for the man who will put it in chains."
In his 1835 book Democracy in America, Tocqueville wrote, "A nation that asks nothing of government but the maintenance of order is already a slave in the depths of its heart; it is a slave of its well-being, ready for the man who will put it in chains."
Tocqueville was a wise man, I wonder what he would have to say about the state of America these days.......
Did any of you watch the Evening News tonight. There was an interview with the head of security over in Israel and they have NO scanning. They personally screen every flyer and have not had a breach in their security in 8 years. The "interviewers" are tested every so often with a person wearing dummy explosives, and if the interviewer does not sense something wrong in the 30 minute interview and lets this person pass they are fired on the spot.
I personally do not have a problem with scanners but I realize and respect those who do, there are other alternatives to flying such as train (wonderful way to travel if you have the time), split the driving time with someone else, there is Grey Hound.
I saw that and there is a link somewhere here about him and their system, probably buried now in the multigrouped threads in Politics. The impressive thing to me is they don't need to do these things because they employ human psychology. Part of it is the country of origion, but a large part is the individuals reaction. Their people aren't walmart style clerks but college trained professionals. They look for psychological signs something is wrong or off. So if we have white, blond, middle america looking guy but he'd got plans they find him in that kind of system. They don't even look at the luggage and its scanned right after entering the terminal.
The do an intelligent job which only involves going past step 2 or 3 for those which don't pass. And they get travelers on a plane in a half hour.
I am taking the train as I have been since the shoes and inspection of every tiny thing and the no fluids rule. And too much anxiety and people to deal with when I can find alternatives. I'd have to say that Greyhound would be very low on the list based on the one nightmare trip I tried, but maybe I got lucky and got the driver who didn't speak english and was told by a passanger that the bus broke down and we were transfering busses. No more busses...
A friend of mine has sworn off air travel due to her last trip which did not include a scaner or security problems. She said there were 60 people on the plane and two bathrooms, the seats were so small and close it was hard to get out and they could recline but you didn't have much room to do so, and while the earbuds were free, the little tv cost to watch anything. They had three carryon bags, one each, and in addition to the fare paid 75 dollars for luggage. And the only thing you got free was the water tap. Bottled you paid for. She is tired of being a sardine and will find a different way next time. With this being your flying experience the airlines don't need any more bad feelings. If people are feeling violated already then squished into a little seat in a crowded cabin its not going to make them feel much better.
I'm wanting all the transvestites in the U.S. to book a flight, and everyone else to avoid flying. The following day, I want a report from the TSA on how wonderful the security is...
marmac and whirlwind246: I am glad that you do not have any problems with the screening, but some people do, and that's what we discuss here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
