U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-03-2011, 08:22 PM
 
12,284 posts, read 18,401,528 times
Reputation: 19122

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Febtober View Post
(One case that jumps to mind was a six year old boy who was caught at a screening checkpoint with a gun inside a teddy bear. Apparently a stranger gave the boy the bear prior to security. Most likely the person was watching to see if the kid was caught, and if not was planning on taking it back post security.

I thought this story was BS. Well, it party is and isn't. I found the story. One thing is clear - You are misrepresenting the facts. According to the sketchy details, the family claimed the bear was given to the child by another child at their hotel several days before the fiight. That dismisses any theory about "person watching" or anything that conspiracy or terrorist oriented unless you stretch the bounds of reality and assumed the family was watched and followed for 48 hours straight. My guess is the dad stuck it in there and lied (and the press failed to followup), or it was hidden in the teddy bear years ago and forgotten about (the gun was reported stolen in the 90's).

Besides that, the gun was found in standard non-evasive xray screening (the same that has been in effect before 911), not with a TSA randompatdown. No one here is saying all articles shoud not be searched by non-evasive means before boarding. I am all for it as I am all for any non-evasive technological developments for security screening. ...but that is not the subject of our thread is it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-04-2011, 05:24 AM
 
Location: NYPD"s 30th Precinct
2,448 posts, read 4,433,815 times
Reputation: 2467
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorMama View Post
No, sorry, I will not accept strip searches for everyone. We know who we should be profiling but too many want to be politically correct.
I agree with that to an extent, obviously "everyone" is taking it too far, but there's been plenty of cases both in the US and aborad of "normal" people hijacking aircraft, usually disgruntled employees or emotionaly unstable people that appear normal, or just plain old people wanting money. And of course the ever popular rash of "take me to Cuba!" issues in the 70s. Obviously as of late the focus has been on religous zealots, but you've got to remember history and continue to scrutinze "regular" people as well. The methods of used to do said scrutinizing are up for debate, however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
I thought this story was BS. Well, it party is and isn't. I found the story. One thing is clear - You are misrepresenting the facts. According to the sketchy details, the family claimed the bear was given to the child by another child at their hotel several days before the fiight. That dismisses any theory about "person watching" or anything that conspiracy or terrorist oriented unless you stretch the bounds of reality and assumed the family was watched and followed for 48 hours straight. My guess is the dad stuck it in there and lied (and the press failed to followup), or it was hidden in the teddy bear years ago and forgotten about (the gun was reported stolen in the 90's).
Fair enough, I was wrong about how they were given it. It doesn't rule out anyone watching them at all though, they could have freely given their flight time as part of normal conversation with someone. In this case, I doubt anyone actually was, but it's a pretty simple hypothetical.

Quote:
I am all for it as I am all for any non-evasive technological developments for security screening.
Would you consider millimeter wave/backscatter technology to be invasive?

Last edited by Febtober; 07-04-2011 at 05:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2011, 08:24 AM
 
26,590 posts, read 54,583,712 times
Reputation: 13019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Febtober View Post
Sure for a gun an x-ray is great, but what's stopping it from being a block of plastic explosives?
Let's get real about the potential of a stranger hiding a block of explosives in a kids underwear.

Quote:
And you'd be surprised. Especially if it's a female approaching a kid, asking if they're looking forward to their first flight, where they're going, etc.... parents may think it's an innocent gift.
Any parent who's that stupid needs to have their kid taken away and be put in a special place for stupid people called jail. Seriously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2011, 08:27 AM
 
26,590 posts, read 54,583,712 times
Reputation: 13019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Febtober View Post
Would you consider millimeter wave/backscatter technology to be invasive?
Do you really want to be irradiated on a weekly basis? That's how often I fly. When I get cancer from this BS that hasn't been independently proven safe (do you really believe everything a stakeholder or a government agency with an obvious agenda tells you?) I plan on suing the TSA. And yes, it's invasive. It's a total invasion of my privacy, especially because it's been proven that they DO store those x-rays for training purposes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2011, 09:13 AM
 
Location: Out West
22,716 posts, read 16,817,419 times
Reputation: 26289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Febtober View Post
I agree with that to an extent, obviously "everyone" is taking it too far, but there's been plenty of cases both in the US and aborad of "normal" people hijacking aircraft, usually disgruntled employees or emotionaly unstable people that appear normal, or just plain old people wanting money. And of course the ever popular rash of "take me to Cuba!" issues in the 70s. Obviously as of late the focus has been on religous zealots, but you've got to remember history and continue to scrutinze "regular" people as well. The methods of used to do said scrutinizing are up for debate, however.
How many flights take off all over the world every day? How many of those flights have been hijacked in the past 50 years, what are the percentages? You say, "plenty"....how many? I could also say that plenty of flights that take off from any location throughout the world on any given day has not been hijacked and are perfectly safe flights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2011, 10:08 AM
 
18,852 posts, read 31,708,488 times
Reputation: 26114
And how many hi-jackers of any flight, were 90 year old blind women in wheelchairs wearing diapers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2011, 10:15 AM
 
26,590 posts, read 54,583,712 times
Reputation: 13019
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
and how many hi-jackers of any flight, were 90 year old blind women in wheelchairs wearing diapers?
+1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2011, 07:38 AM
 
Location: NYPD"s 30th Precinct
2,448 posts, read 4,433,815 times
Reputation: 2467
Quote:
Originally Posted by annerk View Post
Do you really want to be irradiated on a weekly basis? That's how often I fly. When I get cancer from this BS that hasn't been independently proven safe (do you really believe everything a stakeholder or a government agency with an obvious agenda tells you?) I plan on suing the TSA. And yes, it's invasive. It's a total invasion of my privacy, especially because it's been proven that they DO store those x-rays for training purposes.
Millimeter wave body scanners aren't much of a concern to anyone, it's the backscatter technology that produces a clearer image, but also is the subject to the concerns with radiation. I'm not a radiologist, and there seems to be a lot of propaganda on both sides of the issue, so I'll reseve judgement on that for now.

Personally, I don't mind if someone that can't see me physically views the image produced, but I can recognize that others will take issue with it and that's fine. It's another good point of debate (tests have been done using a generic model of a human instead of your actual body, but so far it's returned about an 80% false positive rate.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorMama View Post
How many flights take off all over the world every day? How many of those flights have been hijacked in the past 50 years, what are the percentages? You say, "plenty"....how many? I could also say that plenty of flights that take off from any location throughout the world on any given day has not been hijacked and are perfectly safe flights.
Here's a pretty decent list for starters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2011, 08:35 AM
 
26,590 posts, read 54,583,712 times
Reputation: 13019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Febtober View Post
Millimeter wave body scanners aren't much of a concern to anyone, it's the backscatter technology that produces a clearer image, but also is the subject to the concerns with radiation. I'm not a radiologist, and there seems to be a lot of propaganda on both sides of the issue, so I'll reseve judgement on that for now.
If your wife were pregnant and had to fly weekly for her job, would you want her subjected to either of those on a weekly or even more often basis? What if she was a breast cancer survivor? Do you think that she should be subject to the groping of her sex organs on a weekly basis because it's medically contraindicated for her to be exposed to additional radiation?

And that propaganda is the problem. Until they have a truly independent resource test and approve those devices, they shouldn't be assumed safe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2011, 08:58 AM
 
12,284 posts, read 18,401,528 times
Reputation: 19122
Quote:
Originally Posted by annerk View Post
If your wife were pregnant and had to fly weekly for her job, would you want her subjected to either of those on a weekly or even more often basis? What if she was a breast cancer survivor? Do you think that she should be subject to the groping of her sex organs on a weekly basis because it's medically contraindicated for her to be exposed to additional radiation?

And that propaganda is the problem. Until they have a truly independent resource test and approve those devices, they shouldn't be assumed safe.
From my perspective - I am all for security technology, anything that will prevent evasive search methods (i.e - patdowns). And on that note, once again, Israel has some incredibly advanced technology:
1.) wands that detect harmful substances in fabrics and skin - no more pat downs, and non-radioactive.
2.) human reaction detectors (very classified, literally detects the sweat of deception)
3.) face recognition technology
4.) Remote robots monitoring the monitors, and someone monitoring all those. Built in redundancies, etc.

This is the point - I don't want ex-McDonald's now government "make a job" employees groping me. I don't want to be touched by strangers. Xrays (OK, yeah, let them be cleared independently for radioactive concerns), scanners, sniffers, all OK by me. Just - NO TOUCHING unless they have a damn good reason.

And back to the israeli comparison. We all know what the problem is - profiling. It is politically incorrect in our society, and once we put it in place we will have the ACLU descending like a vulture. And that's why TSA searches grandpa and the 4 year old and are stuck in their inneficient, outdated, and obsolete security model.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Travel
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top