I can't find evidence, but on CNN someone spoke with the security head, and made this statement*: If you pat down people, you get burned. but if you dont pat down people, then a bomb gets on an airplane, you still get burned. so what are you going to do? *Off of remembrance.
What are your thoughts on these pat-downs? And are they helping our safety? or are they violating our rights?
im not going on a plane but i dont care either if you have nothing to hide whats the problem? they arent violating rights, they're doing it for our safety, people need to stfu and stop complaining
if you have nothing to hide whats the problem? they arent violating rights, they're doing it for our safety, people need to stfu and stop complaining
If these searches and pat downs were actually effective, I would agree with you. But they aren't. The terrorists you see on the news weren't caught when they got felt up by some stranger at the airport.
And I think there should be age cutoffs. When you're patting down 90 year old grannies and 10 year old kids in an attempt to prevent terrorism, you know you're doing something wrong.
Hypermnestra, the airport security facilities have affirmations to be able to search people. They cannot search people without probable cause, aka a search warrant or affirmation, and they have one.
The TSA should not be doing pat-downs without a court-provable reason but the scanners are okay. They would of stopped Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab(The underwear bomber). I believe their should be two sets of planes, ones for everyone who will go through the scanners and one for everyone else. I know that is not very practical but it would make sense.
its illegal to stereotype all of those that look like they'd blow themselves up... lawsuits would be had if this was the case. in order to search those people they have to search everyone... I think people complain just to complain and get their 10 seconds of fame to be honest...
You also have the option to go through an x-ray scanner that could be used to produce a nude 3d image of you. Think of what a less the honorable employee could do with that naked image of you. There is nothing regulating how much radiation it puts out, and even if the levels are safe it would be easy for the operator to dose you multiple times. Now the alternative of being pat down. They are suppose to have guys search guys and women search woman. However this isn't the always the case. There are many times they don't follow this procedure. Of course they are restricting our ability to document their procedures so if anyone complained there would be no evidence.
So I have to wonder who protects us from those protecting us?
if you have nothing to hide whats the problem? they arent violating rights, they're doing it for our safety, people need to stfu and stop complaining
They touch your penis for the good of everyone, what's so hard to understand about that?
Because a minuet tiny number of criminals made their way onto planes, the 99%+ of people who aren't criminals are being treated as if they were criminals criminals. But if we must allow the cousin of the mall cop, the airport security guard, to take sexy pictures of me, my wife, and my children to make doubly sure we have a safe flight, then be it! If you're too ashamed of your body to have pictures taken of it, then you can always allow them to dingle your dongle and patter your pitter!
The TSA should not be doing pat-downs without a court-provable reason but the scanners are okay.
Without court provable reasons? What would that constitute? How about the fact that there are firearms and knives made from ceramics or composite plastics that are undetectable with scanners? Is that a good enough reason for pat downs?
And no, the fourth amendment is NOT being violated, as it only protects against "unreasonable search and seizure". There is nothing unreasonable about cursory physical examination to deter and prevent the possession of deadly weapons on mass transit vehicles.
They would of stopped Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab(The underwear bomber)
That depends on the type of scanners used. Standard equipment at most airports is metal detecting scanners, x-ray scanners of carry-on luggage, and random pat-downs. Even then there are numerous weapons which one could get on board an aircraft, however by adding pat-downs to the scanners and checks of carry-on luggage the size and types of weapons which one could smuggle on board are drastically limited.
And no, the fourth amendment is NOT being violated, as it only protects against "unreasonable search and seizure". There is nothing unreasonable about cursory physical examination to deter and prevent the possession of deadly weapons on mass transit vehicles.
Exactly how far is too far? As it stands now it seems they can practically do what ever they like to us, so long as they do it "for our safety".
Legally, I'm not exactly sure. However typically 'too far' is something which is unwarranted given the situation, or an action which is in violation of other laws. And yes, sometimes it does go too far in the name of 'safety', however this is typically caught and punished.
Unfortunately there are, and will be, those who will abuse their authority and utilize it to manipulate and/or take advantage of people or situations. While this is definitely deplorable, it is a sad fact of life. As long as there is a need for such authority there will be misuse of it.
Furthermore, it is not only about our safety, but about the safety of the businesses we patronize by choosing to fly. Added security screening processes also help to reduce the liability of the private carriers and that in turn reduces insurance cost, redundant security measures, and helps to further ensure the security of property.
While I fully agree that too often things are taken out of hand in the interests of security the alternatives we have available are just as, if not more, undesirable. If I have to subject myself to the possibility of a pat-down and the screening of my carry-on luggage in order to travel via airplane, and to help deter anyone else from attempting to engage in activities which place myself and/or my family in jeopardy then I find that a small price to pay.
As I pointed out earlier, there are many different ways to get weapons on board commercial aircraft, even with today's security measures. However current measures make it more difficult for one to do so, and force potential threats to acquire more and more restricted and hard to find materials to carry out their designs. No security system is fool-proof, and no one wants to give up their privacy and liberties in the interest of security, however the only other viable option is to simply allow anyone to bring anything on board, or station several armed airline police on each flight, at a drastic increase in financial cost.
