Baby's First TSA Patdown 570
theodp writes "Is there anything cuter than baby milestones? Baby's first steps. Baby's first word. And now, baby's first TSA patdown. 'Well,' writes Anna North, 'it finally happened. Airport security officers gave a pat-down to a baby.' A post on the TSA blog defended the move: 'The child's stroller alarmed during explosives screening. Our officers followed proper current screening procedures by screening the family after the alarm...The [8-month-old] child in the photo was simply receiving a modified pat-down.' Hey, at least they didn't make a federal case of the 4 oz. of liquid found in the little tyke's Pampers."
Pedophiles! (Score:2)
Here's some nice TSA porn [news.com.au] for all you regular folks.. Now get back to work!
Airport security... (Score:5, Insightful)
...is an embarrassment to America.
We really could be better than this.
Re: (Score:3)
I honestly can't decide whether or not I think that's true.
Re:Airport security... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hah, my wife was just applying for a non-immigrant visa today because her old one expired. Now you have to submit an online application. There are about a million questions, all the buttons are counter-intuitive (usually continue goes on the right and back goes on the left), and the website says it will log you out after 20 minutes of inactivity, which is false. It logs you out after 15 minutes - activity or no. Considering that these forms take far more than 20 minutes to fill out (list the exact dates of your last 5 visits to the US please, never mind that US immigration likes to stamp wherever the hell they feel like it in your passport), it's a major hassle. We were logged out no less than three times during this process.
And don't forget, you need to give travel dates (even if we're not sure when we plan on going to the US in the next 10 years) and name/address of a contact person in the US (I'm sure I have the name and address of the guy who works at the hotel I'll be staying at...). Oh and of course the "trick" questions where they try to "catch you out". My favorite was "have you ever participated in torture/extrajudicial killing". I wonder how many American government employees actually would not be allowed a visa... but I digress.
Put it this way - I'm glad I'm Canadian and don't have to do this crap every few years but America - if you don't want tourists why don't you just say so? I mean, the Mexicans will still keep jumping the border fence anyway no matter how many questions you put on that form, but we law abiding people can take a hint.
Re:Airport security... (Score:5, Funny)
We really could be better than this.
We could, but there's a major roadblock: citizens who are terrified that terrorists are out to get them and vote for whoever promises they'll stand between the terrorists and the voters' family. Common sense policy in national security that follows that quote about freedom vs security will always fail because of their paranoia, if they can vote.
...but they probably are expecting that...
What we NEED to do is KILL OFF ALL THE PARANOID PEOPLE!
Re: (Score:3)
One of many reasons I would much rather travel by car/bus/train than airplane.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A most interesting way to get from Atlanta to Denver.. Where can I get a ticket?
No problem. Your connections are as follows:
Chattahoochee River to Apalachicola River
Apalachicola River to the Intracoastal waterway
Intracoastal waterway to Mississippi River
Mississippi River to Missouri River
MIssouri River to Platte River
On Platte River, take the left fork to South Platte river
Arrive Denver.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, because it's really useful to prevent suicidal passengers from bringing bombs on trains when any idiot can plant one under the rails anywhere along a thousand-mile-long stretch without any significant risk to themselves.
This is a prime example of why everyone in the top tier of TSA management should be fired. If they are so dumb that they naïvely believe that adding security stations for bus and train terminals is useful, they should absolutely not be allowed to be in charge of anything.
Osama Bin Laden (Score:5, Insightful)
Osama Bin Laden is laughing in his grave. He obviously won, even in death.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Osama Bin Laden is laughing in his grave. [yourfunnystuff.com] He obviously won, even in death.
Fixed that for you.
He even gave an interview on CNN [cnn.com] and said "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed", and we still did exactly as he predicted. We won the battle ten days ago, but lost the war ten years ago.
Maybe I'm just an oldthinker who unbellyfeels newspeak, but "Homeland of the fee, homeland of the safe" still doesn't sound
Re: (Score:3)
We're heading that way at breakneck speed, following Airstrip One which is leading the way.
Not TSA alone. But the Fourth Amendment has been reduced to shreds, though the TSA, through allowing of various "checkpoints" (the local police had some sort of BS checkpoint, marked "safety checkpoin
Re:Osama Bin Laden (Score:5, Insightful)
The economic damage he caused to the US economy is several trillion dollars. While he may not have won the war, but he did cause overwhelming damage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What do you mean by winning? He showed how to cause great damage to super-powers (first USSR, after that the US) with relatively tiny resources. Btw, note that most of the economic damage to the US (e.g., the war in Iraq) is self-inflicted.
On the other hand, his dream of building a caliphate has failed miserably.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What do you mean by winning? He showed how to cause great damage to super-powers (first USSR, after that the US) with relatively tiny resources. Btw, note that most of the economic damage to the US (e.g., the war in Iraq) is self-inflicted.
And most of the damage done to the USSR was also caused by the US. This was back when Reagan portrayed the Taliban and al-Qaeda (actually the precursor to them) as a religious group being persecuted for their beliefs by the big bad commies. So the US trained the mujahedeen and sent billions in weapons aid so they can fight the Russians. Russia eventually pulled out when they realized they could not compete.
If the US/CIA had minded their own business then the mujahedeen would have been wiped out by the Ru
Re: (Score:3)
Well, his goal was to have the US economy collapse. That did not work.
2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Nationwide, how many times has the alarm gone off during explosives screening?
2) How many times have explosives been found?
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Informative)
>2) How many times have explosives been found?
None. Ever. Even the underpants bomber made it through.
Since the inception of the TSA, they have stopped *zero* hijacking/bombing attempts from the airport.
Biggest waste of money on security theater going.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
But they stopped over a thousand terrorist attempts from even considering going through their heightened security measures. Plus, the theater is just that, theater. The real security improvements are secret and invisible.
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly, that's the same way that I know that this rock that I have bought keeps away tigers!
More seriously, lets say that your screening procedures are 99% effective with a 0.0001% false positive rate, both of which are horribly, massively unrealistic. And then let's pretend that there are 10 terrorists that try to get on an airplane each year in the US, which is almost definitely an unrealistically high number. There are an estimated 737.4 million passenger flights each year in the US. That means that for each terrorist detected you're going to hit 8200 false positives. Screening everyone in the country just doesn't work at a mathematical level.
Re: (Score:3)
More seriously though, part of the issue of gauging the "success" of TSA is that we don't know how many potential plots they stopped from even leaving home to attempt it. How effective was the security theater in convincing potential terrorists to "just stay home".
I see 2 possible answers to that question: Pessimistically, if those terrorists really wanted to do it, no amount of security theater is going to stop them. On the o
Re: (Score:3)
Bullshit.
And your analogy stinks. Locks and alarms are only there to keep honest people out.
We can't even keep drugs out of prisons! How are you going to stop a determined person from creating another Pan Am 103?
--
BMO
Re: (Score:3)
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Informative)
The Israelis haven't had a hijacking in decades, and they don't use full-body scans or anything of the kind. I listened a few months ago to an Israeli security expert who was literally scoffing at the TSA's methods, and stating what they need, rather than $10 an hour rent-a-cop types, they needed to pay some behavioural experts who can recognize potential threats. Trying to up the ante with technology is just a shell game, and as we've seen, doesn't seem to do a great deal if someone seems dedicated to blowing up an air plane.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:4, Interesting)
>2) How many times have explosives been found?
None. Ever. Even the underpants bomber made it through.
Since the inception of the TSA, they have stopped *zero* hijacking/bombing attempts from the airport.
Biggest waste of money on security theater going.
--
BMO
The parent should be modded to 5, and all Slashdot readers should be sure to spread this point as much as possible to everyone they know. The TSA has an $8.1 annual billion budget and has yet to have a single success.
We can't comment definitively on the deterrent effect mentioned by an AC reply, though our very limited data points make deterrence seem unlikely, given that 1) every attempted bomber in the last 10 years has successfully made it through security and 2) the 100% failure rate probably doesn't put much fear into the hearts of potential attackers.
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Insightful)
...has yet to have a single success.
HA! Tell that to the people who sell all those nice machines.. They're laughing all the way to the bank..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember - TSA is there to act as a deterrant as well.
Mission accomplished. I have been deterred from flying.
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:4, Interesting)
Mission accomplished. I have been deterred from flying.
I've got a big Disney fan in the household. We used to make at least one vacation stop at Disney World each year. This year, we've canceled our initial plans. A big part of that is not wishing to go through Security Theatre.
I understand that big tourism like Disney theme parks are struggling with disappointing numbers in current times. What a pity they have additional pinch points further restricting income flow.
Re: (Score:3)
Anything that costs Disney money (and by extension, power) is a Good Thing(tm)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You've got a guy willing to blow himself up. If he gets through TSA, he blows himself and the plain up. If TSA catches him.. well, he doesn't get to blow the plane up. Maybe he just blows the security line up, or maybe he gets stopped before he can trigger the bomb. If he gets stopped, maybe he can rat out a couple of accomplices under "interrogation". It's not like building a bomb is such a HUGE expense that the THREAT of a failed attempt would make people give up.
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Informative)
You know what deters hijackers now?
The fact that the passengers will beat him to a bloody pulp.
That's what stopped the shoe bomber. That's what stopped the underpants bomber. It sure as fuck wasn't the fucking TSA.
Old rules are gone. "Sit tight and this will all be over and everyone will go home" doesn't exist anymore. Not since 9/11. Now it's "beat the piss out of him and sit on the bastard until we land" as exemplified by the last incident where a passenger went nuts this past week, tried to open the door (lol!) and the passengers beat the piss out of him.
TSA is underpants-on-head useless.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:3)
so I would not be so sure potential hijackers would be deterred by a fear of getting beat up.
LoB
Re: (Score:3)
You are of course correct, there is a possibility that the TSA has deterred terrorist. Unfortunately, there is equal evidence to suggest they have also deterred elephants from getting on planes as well as aliens from outer space.
Hint: you are fighting an organization that has no qualms about using suicide bombers and killing innocents. Your deterrent is that some of them might get caught?
Please read any study on "asymmetric warfare" and its tactics.
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:4, Insightful)
Someone mod this up.
Scariest question to ask any Airport operator: How long would it take to evacuate the airport for a bomb scare?
You won't like the answer.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in favor of them taking all basic and non-intrusive steps to detect explosives.
It's fallacious to say "they haven't found any in the screening process so there aren't any". It excludes the middle in that if they weren't checking for explosives, it'd be easy to get them through, and then terrorists would be doing it. But as it stands now, they know baggage is screened so they have to find another way.
The trouble with these pat downs is that they can't reasonably detect any more by groping your balls than
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:2 questions for the TSA (Score:5, Funny)
George Carlin said it best, long before 9/11:
I’m getting tired of all this security at the airport. There’s too much of it. I’m tired of some fat chick with a double-digit IQ and a triple-digit income rootin’ around inside of my bag for no reason and never finding anything. Haven’t found anything yet. Haven’t found one bomb in one bag. And don’t tell me, “Well, the terrorists know their bags are going to be searched, so now they’re leaving their bombs at home.” There are no bombs! The whole thing is fuckin’ pointless.
And it’s completely without logic. There’s no logic at all. They’ll take away a gun, but let you keep a knife! (editor note: Not anymore) Well, what the fuck is that? In fact, there’s a whole list of lethal objects they will allow you to take on board. Theoretically, you could take a knife, an ice pick, a hatchet, a straight razor, a pair of scissors, a chain saw, six knitting needles, and a broken whiskey bottle, and the only thing they’d say to you is, “That bag has to fit all the way under the seat in front of you.”
And if you didn’t take a weapon on board, relax. After you’ve been flying for about an hour, they’re gonna bring you a knife and fork! They actually give you a fucking knife! It’s only a table knife, but you could kill a pilot with a table knife. If might take you a couple of minutes. Especially if he’s hefty. But you could get the job done. If you really wanted to kill the prick.
Shit, there are a lot of things you could use to kill a guy with. You could probably beat a guy to death with the Sunday New York Times. Or suppose you just had really big hands, couldn’t you strangle a flight attendant? Shit, you could probably strangle two of them, one with each hand. That is, if you were lucky enough to catch ‘em in that little kitchen area. Just before they break out the fuckin’ peanuts. But you could get the job done. If you really cared enough.
Guess That's What Happens When... (Score:2)
The TSA people really believe they are keeping everyone safe while creating targets for terrorists to attack.
Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be getting better.
While we're at it... (Score:4, Funny)
I think we should be able to request a woman do our patdowns instead of a man.
The idea of some mustachioed 50 year old man grabbing my balls is a lot more offensive to me than a woman doing it.
Re:While we're at it... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:While we're at it... (Score:5, Funny)
Leave my wife out of this.
privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that bothers me most about the TSA responding to issues is the privacy of the people going through screening. I feel like the entire process should be treated as confidential, the number of people in the party, wether or not they had a stroller, what set off what alarm, how old the child was, etc. I don't feel like the TSA should be sharing that information publicly.
The kids loaded (Score:2)
I'd be willing to bet the "explosive" they detected coming from the kid was the load that was left in his diaper. When kids explode is really messy!
*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes a terrorist can hide a bomb in a baby. A terrorist can also surgically insert a bomb into a baby if they wanted to.
They could also just detonate the bomb at the airport itself (remember russia?) and skip all of this.
All this stupid theatre does absolutely nothing, except give the 'terrorists' (and the general population) a little grope before they get blown up. Wouldn't want them to die unhappy would we?
We are not alone (Score:4, Insightful)
Does France have such patdowns in their airports? What about Canada? What about Germany? Belgium? China? Japan?
Why is it we also have not heard of ANY foreign terrorist activities on airliners since all this started? Are the american airport patdowns such a deterrent they can stop a "potential terrorist" from boarding a plane in S Africa with a bomb or a knife?
This needs to stop. I really don't care personally, because I don't fly - but all the other people being displaced from the planes are filling up the trains, and I miss the extra elbow room.
Re:We are not alone (Score:5, Informative)
More to the point.... does Israel? I've flown in and out of Tel Aviv 3 times on business. They take security seriously -- and have for much longer than the USA. You get a thorough interview from a well-trained, intelligent professional. No pat downs. They *gasp* profile. Israeli airport security is not theater, it is effective, yet it is not degrading. Fly in and out of Israel once and you will want to strangle everyone associated with the TSA.
Re: (Score:3)
You get a thorough interview from a well-trained, intelligent professional.
Good luck finding those working for the U.S. government, especially the runts of the litter known collectively as the TSA.
And therein lies the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
In the past 30 years it caught at least 3 or 4 it publicized.
That's not that many, but unlike American security, how many have slipped through?
Re:We are not alone (Score:4, Informative)
I can talk about Nice, France. On the way in they will X-ray your bag. They may or may not ask you to remove your belt or your shoes, it's pretty random (they never ask me but I've seen it happen). There is one person for every two lines who will to a cursory pat-down of anybody that gets 'beeped' when walking through the X-ray doorway. It's definitely not intrusive.
England security is awful to the point I avoid going back when possible. It's not just being treated like a potential terrorist, and having to strip off my shoes and belt like some kind of prisoner, but the insane queues this produces. In Nice I bank on about five minutes to go through security, so I allow ten minutes to be sure, but try going through a London airport during the summer...
My sole trip via New York the only thing I found objectionable was the finger-printing. Being an affluent white middle-class male I had no experience of the TSA, only passed a few laid-back quite cool security guards. I broke my US boycott due to a promise to a friend. I really enjoyed the trip, and the people were great, but the security theater is still off-putting.
Phillip.
honor among terrorists (Score:2)
I'd just like to point out that a terrorist draws the line as using children to blow things up. No one would *ever* think to sacrifice a child for their religious views. They should obviously be allowed to pass through any security points without any problems!
idle? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:idle? (Score:4, Informative)
because it's not tech news.
At least it wasn't a first cavity search (Score:2)
http://gizmodo.com/5688087/the-tsas-sense-of-humor-makes-me-nervous [gizmodo.com]
Texas vs. TSA (Score:5, Informative)
Texas has had enough. Other states will soon follow. On top of states rights, there are individual airports excercising their "opt-out" privileges and replacing TSA with private security.
This morning CBS in Dallas/Fort Worth reports:
"The Texas House passed a bill that would make it a criminal offense for public servants to inappropriately touch travelers during airport security pat-downs.
Approved late Thursday night, the measure makes it illegal for anyone conducting searches to touch “the anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast of another person” including through clothing."
Source:http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/05/13/texas-house-bans-offensive-security-pat-downs/
If TSA ignores the new Texas law Texas has grounds to go to the US Supreme Court and challenge TSA's authority.
Re:Texas vs. TSA (Score:5, Interesting)
It's incredibly weird to see a story on Slashdot where I agree with the way laws are being implemented or enforced in Texas.
Maybe there's hope for us yet.
Re: (Score:3)
>> "Is there some reason you think our current SC won't side with the TSA?"
The TSA has been begging for a Forth Amendment challenge to it's authority.
Will the US Supremes do the right thing? (*shrug*) Only if they still enforce the Constitution.
Re: (Score:3)
I am not a right-winger. By hoping for the "right thing" I hope the US Supreme Court forces TSA to modify their intrusive and humiliating searches. How does that make me right wing, @sshole?
toddler's first pat down, November 2001 (Score:5, Interesting)
First I was screened, then our baby was made to stand away from both of us (since he wasn't screened and they were screening my wife) while my wife was being screened. This step took a long time, because of course the kid was screaming bloody murder about being kept from his parents, and several times he broke free and ran to his mother and if she moved (not reached, just moved out of her crucifixion position) or the kid touched her, the agent yelled at her and started over again. After about the third time when she got yelled at w/o moving, I was about ready to punch somebody but the supervisor intervened, patted down the baby and got him into my arms, at which point they could finish the stupid screen on my wife. This was the closest by far I've ever come to physical violence in my adult life. And it wasn't caused by a false-positive on an explosives test, it was because our flight was canceled.
Terrorists are not the biggest threat (Score:5, Insightful)
"Terrorists could hide a bomb in a diaper, and we don't seem to have anything much better than pat-downs to detect it. "
Terrorists could just go to the next mall in kill 1000 people with a bomb. Or they could go to a train station and kill 500 people. They could just go to the next restaurant and kill 50 people.
What we really should be doing is just accept terrorists as a threat but not overreacting. We should spend our tax money for real things that are proven to save lives, like improving highways, get more police officers, improving hospitals and health care, invest in more public transportation.
We could even just give capital to the third-world countries, or invest in their education and infrastructure. Even that would reduce the risk of a terrorist attack way more then the stupid TSA. But instead we giving Millions of money to people to search babies, kids and some random people so we have a one in a million chance to find anything.
Re: (Score:3)
Terrorists could just go to the next mall in kill 1000 people with a bomb. Or they could go to a train station and kill 500 people. They could just go to the next restaurant and kill 50 people.
But if a terrorist attacked a mall or a restaurant, only that mall or that restaurant elicits fear from the public. If the terrorist attack airplanes, all airplane travel becomes suspect. In this way the terrorist impacts the entire US economy, instead of just ruining one local mall or restaurant.
They could have the same effect by attacking the train system, but it's not used as much as the air travel system and isn't as tied in with the economy. They'd have a bigger economical impact by attacking freigh
How is this news? (Score:3)
I'm sure ours can't have been an isolated occurrence. There must have been thousands of little kids given a patdown by now. Maybe it's not news because it didn't happen In America.
end this kind of crap now that bin laden is dead (Score:3)
They need a sign at the airport. (Score:3)
I'm no islamic scholar, but I am thinking, that would be enough to deter anyone from trying.
"Followed proper current screening procedures..." (Score:3)
Our officers followed proper current screening procedures by screening the family after the alarm
Gee, folks. They followed proper current procedures, so I don't see how they could have done anything wrong. What more do you want from the TSA? You have to follow procedure after all, and procedures are always right! I'd almost think you people would suggest that the procedures may be misguided, detrimental to our liberties, damaging to our Constitutional rights, or even criminal in nature, and I'm sure none of you think that, right?
Note: All responses to this comment will be logged for review by authorized agents of the federal government, as per proper current procedures.
Why pat down the Baby... (Score:5, Insightful)
Catholic priests flock to join TSA (Score:3)
SECURITY BROADWAY, Iron Curtain, Wednesday — In the wake of Transport Security Administration staff forcing a "full pat-down" on a three-year-old child, Catholic priests have been clamouring to work for [newstechnica.com] the government department.
The TSA, which has apprehended only slightly less than one terrorist in its nine years of operation, welcomed the new recruits to the fold. "We need people with experience in dealing with young people," said TSA head John Pistole, "in telling people what to do and in making the innocent feel guilty. And the enthusiasm! They're not your typical bored minimum-wager, no way! Also, they have better uniforms."
Mr Pistole reiterated the patriotic duty that drives the TSA in their work. "Fondling little girls' genitals is vital to protecting America from TERRORISTS. Remember: if TSA staff can't finger your daughter, the TERRORISTS have won!" He then strangled a kitten for our photographer.
Cardinal Bernard Law returned to America from the Vatican especially for the opportunity to create government-funded child pornography with the new "naked" scanners. "It's top quality stuff, too. The tears, the pain — the things that make this sort of thing really worthwhile."
"They were nasty men," said three-year-old TSA molestee Mandy Simon. "But it clearly demonstrates the iron necessity of the holy Jihadic destruction of the West. Allahu akbar! Daddy? I done a boo-boo."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Contrary to public outcry, American terrorist are more likely to be Caucasian males than any other race.
Re: (Score:2)
How many Caucasians have we had hijack airplanes in the last 20 or 30 years?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings [wikimedia.org]
They do not list ethnicity explicitly, but there certainly are a a number of "Caucasian" last names of hijackers listed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen a lot of white Christian suicide bombers and terrorists lately? Because aside from Tim McVeigh and a few nutbags bombing abortion clinics, I haven't seen many of them in the last 20 years. Even the IRA put its C-4 away a long time ago.
Methinks the fact that pretty much every suicide bomber and terrorist these days is a Muslim *might* just suggest a pattern. But then, granted, I'm no Batman-level detective or anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, genius. Most Muslims are not terrorists. But most terrorists *are* Muslim. Given those two facts, if you're trying to catch a terrorist, who do you look for? Do you just randomly flail around pretending there is equally as much chance that the Greek Orthodox priest standing in line is a terrorist as the Saudi Muslim standing beside him?
Re:Meanwhile in line... (Score:4, Insightful)
Tim McVeigh was one attack, involving only two terrorists, that killed 168 people. Muslim terrorists have killed TENS OF THOUSANDS of people over the last 20 years, with attacks that happen on a DAILY BASIS (there was one this morning that killed 80 Pakistanis, and the day isn't even over yet).
Got YOU.
Re: (Score:3)
Now you're just spouting some tired old "Well, you support evil dictators too!" shit, because you know damn well what religion the suicide bombers who are going to walk into some police station, or mall, or marketplace tomorrow (and the next day, and the day after that) and blow themselves up after screaming "Allah Akbar!!" will belong to. And it damn sure isn't Buddhism.
Re: (Score:2)
School shootings, bomb threats, mail and building bombs . . . these are all terrorism activities. Which are carried out by people non-Muslim or Arab descent.
But you already knew that . . . .
Meanwhile in line... (Score:2)
... the kilogram of home-brew RDX in my backpack, surrounded by another kilogram of small iron nails oriented outwards and dripped in anticoagulant rat poison, explodes, peppering the meters-long queue and anyone nearby with poisoned shrapnel, ensuring that many victims bleed to death before the medics can get to them.
Good Job, TSA!
Sure, I'll die, but I'm going to take at least a hundred more people with me if I time the blast right. Nobody would pick me out beforehand, because I'm not through the security
Re: (Score:3)
Not to mention if you do it near the naked-body-scanners you'll damage something worth a few million dollars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The 9-11 hijackers, the shoe bomber, the diaper bomber, etc. were all innocent when they boarded too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Meanwhile in line... (Score:5, Insightful)
You think that patting down a random person who doesn't even come close to fitting the profile of a modern terrorists, while completely ignoring the guy behind her who does is a smart way to approach screening, do you? Because us morons think that taking a more focused approach might be in order. Profiling works to catch serial killers, so why not use it to screen for terrorists too?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Show me a profile of a modern terrorist that would have caught Timothy McVeigh, arguably one of the most lethal domestic terrorists ever. Just remember, he was white, had some college, got an honorable military discharge, Christian...
Re: (Score:3)
I've already commented so I can't mod you. Which is a shame because I think you're absolutely right. Put simply, terrorism is not that big a threat - and even when it is, the single worst thing you can do is declare "war" on the terrorists. It doesn't work because as a rule, armies aren't really trained to deal with guerilla warfare. Police are better because they're generally locals who know the area and know who's likely to be a troublemaker - but you don't often find effective police forces in countri
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Papiere bitte. (Score:5, Insightful)
Police cameras on the roads
"Zero Tolerance" in schools
Drug testing
ID requirements for just about anything, including purchasing cough syrup
When was the last time one heard "Go ahead, it's a free country!"
-----
Would George Washington taken his boots off?
Re: (Score:3)
There is no right to drive drunk.
Sure. But I would argue that if I'm sober, I have the right to drive from one place to the other, and not be forced to stop and have my car and belongings searched. That's why people have an issue with the checkpoints - for every 1 drunk driver you might catch, many more innocent drivers are subjected to a search. A search that you could reasonably argue is unconstitutional.
Re: (Score:3)
Well they didn't call me in the morning.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You are an idiot. You sir, would qualify for a job at the TSA.
The point trying to be made is that since the TSA is almost totally ineffective (by all evidence so far) whether they include everyone or not in their searches is completely irrelevant to security.
Try this for size, the odds that your plane will be blown up by terrorists are estimate at 1:30million. The odds of getting cancer from the screening machine are also 1:30million. Its just the second option costs you a boat load of money and time an
Re: (Score:3)
If they're not above that, why do you think they're above body packing (including surgical body packing)? After all, it's a suicide mission so it's not like they're afraid of a bad outcome from the surgery. Shall we have the TSA perform exploratory surgery?
All we know for sure is that the only 2 times since 9/11 people have tried to get explosives on a plane, they succeeded. They were prevented from detonating by a combination of their own incompetence and passenger intervention.