TSA Body Scanners - Page 4 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-23-2010, 07:28 AM   #61
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

I do care, but at the same time I don't. It's a private company, which I have an issue with, but then again I would have an issue with the government doing it too. If they were actual law enforcement I would have less issue. Another issue is the scanner of course gives off radiation. If I traveled a LOT in my job, that would worry me. Though the doses are probably very small. The pat search, I don't have a huge issue with. I would kind of be irritated by Jamal grabbing at my junk and frisking me, but if it was Melissa the hot brunette, probably not as much. Might sport wood just to surprise her.

Also, no actual terrorist plots/acts have been foiled by airport security, so I think like someone said earlier, they are doing it more for trafficking and smuggling. Either way, there have to be better ways to go about this. I do think political correctness is hurting us, by tip toeing and avoiding profiling. At the same time, if we passed up searching granny and the children, potential terrorists would probably catch onto this and recruit old and young people to carry stuff on-board.

It's all a mess, and I really don't care. There are alternative means of travel, if it's THAT big of an issue to you. I don't travel much, so I'm not worried. I'd probably do the scanner before I would pat search. So what if they have a blurry x-ray image of my junk.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 10:29 AM   #62
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (7)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,656
Total Cats: 447
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkel View Post
Hrrmmm.. well, no, that is not quite right. Off topic, I know, but I just got to comment on this common misperception. The rights of the American people are in no way greater then the rights of the people living in for example the EU-countries.

In everything else, I totally agree with you!
I've been to plenty of EU countries, and I'll respectfully disagree with you.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 10:36 AM   #63
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,819
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkel View Post
Hrrmmm.. well, no, that is not quite right. Off topic, I know, but I just got to comment on this common misperception. The rights of the American people are in no way greater then the rights of the people living in for example the EU-countries.

In everything else, I totally agree with you!
I can shake the hand of Obama, can a commoner touch the Queen?

Let me rephrase, the United States of America has the first and only Bill of Rights in which it expressly outlines the limitations on the power of the gov't yet it protects the rights of liberty and property of it's citizens. It also grants people any rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution and again limits all powers not specifically granted to the gov't expressly to the people.

Quote:
Now observe the results of a society built on the principle of individualism. This, our country. The noblest country in the history of men. The country of greatest achievement, greatest prosperity, greatest freedom. This country was not based on selfless service, sacrifice, renunciation or any precept of altruism. It was based on a man’s right to the pursuit of happiness. His own happiness. Not anyone else’s. A private, personal, selfish motive. Look at the results. Look into your own conscience.

I also want to point out - Life Under Sharia law:
  • There is no freedom of religion
  • There is no freedom of speech
  • There is no freedom of thought
  • There is no freedom of artistic expression
  • There is no freedom of the press
  • There is no equality of peoples—a non-Muslim, a Kafir, is never equal to a Muslim
  • There is no equal protection under Sharia for different classes of people. Justice is dualistic, with one set of laws for Muslim males and different laws for women and non-Muslims.
  • There are no equal rights for women
  • Women can be beaten
  • A non-Muslim cannot bear arms
  • There is no democracy, since democracy means that a non-Muslim is equal to a Muslim
  • Our Constitution is a man-made document of ignorance, jahiliyah, that must submit to Sharia
  • Non-Muslims are dhimmis, third-class citizens
  • All governments must be ruled by Sharia law
  • Unlike common law, Sharia is not interpretive, nor can it be changed

Last edited by Braineack; 11-23-2010 at 10:52 AM.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 02:24 PM   #64
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Norrahammar, Sweden
Posts: 614
Total Cats: 6
Default

The commoners not only get to touch the royal family, they get to marrie them even! Over here, the princes in line for the throne actually just married her personal trainer. ;-)

I assume the part on sharia was for the topic body scanners and terrorists.
Torkel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:03 PM   #65
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,315
Total Cats: 1,913
Default

On the one hand, I'll certainly agree with those who observe that the US, like the UK, is becoming more and more of a surveillance state, and I'll say that I felt much less "oppressed" by the police in France and Germany than I do every day driving on the streets of most towns here in the states.


And fine, backscatter X-ray won't do squat insofar as folks who want to shove C4 up their ********. I think we're all in agreement there.


But what's the big deal?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That's the fourth amendment in its entirety. Pretty simply, really. How is it unreasonable to want to see whether folks passing through airport security are carrying? Not "does it accomplish anything useful", but "why are you even trying to compare it to the police barging in and rooting around inside your house at will?"
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:15 PM   #66
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,819
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

I had a $75 bottle of cologne seized at the airport. I've had a tube of tube paste seized. I've had a lighter seized, a leatherman, a book of matches, a bottle of Paul Dean's sweet and sour sauce.

however, I continue to be able to smuggle through a pocket knife time and time again.

Those are unreasonable seizes.

Searching everyone who enters an airplane is unreasonable. Especially on the notion that every once in a while they get hijacked by some random Muslim. Every once in a while a a church gets shot up...should the gov't start making people pass through metal detectors before enter church? Why not...same thing? Searching random people is still unreasonable. Allowing strangers to view a digital image of my naked body is unreasonable, especially without my consent. I'm pretty sure this violates many peeping laws. Having the alternative method of being grouped is unreasonable.

Please tell me the ratio of airport security searches to terrorist bombing arrests.

Now please tell me the ratio of random/profiled/"common sense" Mexican border searches to drug/human/gun trafficking arrests.


Those searches are a blatant waste of taxpayer dollars. they do nothing to stop terrorists and they walk a fine line over the Constitution.


A TSA official has been recorded during an attempted body search saying, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights.”

I'm sorry Joe, but as our Declaration of Independence states, our rights are inalienable. I'm pretty sure you are smart enough to know what inalienable means.

We are fighting a war against Terrorism, not a war against Americans.

Last edited by Braineack; 11-23-2010 at 04:43 PM.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:37 PM   #67
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
rccote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 1,595
Total Cats: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
however, I continue to be able to smuggle through a pocket knife time and time again.
I've lost count how many times my mom has told me my stepdad forgot he was carrying his and manages to smuggle it anyway.
rccote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:44 PM   #68
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,315
Total Cats: 1,913
Default

So, because you can't remember to follow the clearly posted rules and ensure that your Paul Dean's sweet and sour sauce is separated out into containers of 3 oz or less and placed in a clear ziploc bag, TSA rules are unreasonable? I've been packing my sweet and sour sauce in my checked baggage for years, never had a problem. (I hate lugging heavy bags around the terminal anyway. The fewer condiments I have to carry the better.)


All I'm saying is that some of these folks are trying to twist a law that governs the powers of the police to search your home, car, workplace, etc (these are general examples only) and apply it to an area where your reasonable expectation of privacy is understood to be vastly diminished. It's called the open fields doctrine, folks.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:52 PM   #69
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,819
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

The gov't invested billions of dollars in these full body scanners in direct response to the underware bomber, and the Government Accountability Office study earlier this year concluded that had these scanners been in use they may not have detected the explosive material that was allegedly brought onto the airplane.

billions of dollars could have gone into better programs that actual stop terrorist activity and we can all bring our Paula Dean sweet and sour sauce home with us.

And yes, TSA rules are unreasonable. I can still stab your ******* face off with a pencil that I can still bring on board. And the terrorist, if they decided to bother with airplanes anymore will do the same.

Hell if they were smart they start bombing stadiums or shopping malls. the gov't should just ban people from gathering in large groups so there's no chance a terrorist can injure a large number of people at once. that seems like the most logical solution.


giving up our individual freedoms and establishing unaccountable gov't organizations and wasting billions of dollars for false sense of security is leading American in the wrong direction.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:57 PM   #70
Elite Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,982
Total Cats: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
On the one hand, I'll certainly agree with those who observe that the US, like the UK, is becoming more and more of a surveillance state, and I'll say that I felt much less "oppressed" by the police in France and Germany than I do every day driving on the streets of most towns here in the states.


And fine, backscatter X-ray won't do squat insofar as folks who want to shove C4 up their ********. I think we're all in agreement there.


But what's the big deal?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That's the fourth amendment in its entirety. Pretty simply, really. How is it unreasonable to want to see whether folks passing through airport security are carrying? Not "does it accomplish anything useful", but "why are you even trying to compare it to the police barging in and rooting around inside your house at will?"
You have that right.......Then you loose it when you buy a ticket to fly on a private airline. The gov will say they are imposing rules on the airline, and not the people. Then the poeple choose to fly or not.
miatauser884 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 05:00 PM   #71
Elite Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,982
Total Cats: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
The gov't invested billions of dollars in these full body scanners in direct response to the underware bomber, and the Government Accountability Office study earlier this year concluded that had these scanners been in use they may not have detected the explosive material that was allegedly brought onto the airplane.

billions of dollars could have gone into better programs that actual stop terrorist activity and we can all bring our Paula Dean sweet and sour sauce home with us.

And yes, TSA rules are unreasonable. I can still stab your ******* face off with a pencil that I can still bring on board. And the terrorist, if they decided to bother with airplanes anymore will do the same.

Hell if they were smart they start bombing stadiums or shopping malls. the gov't should just ban people from gathering in large groups so there's no chance a terrorist can injure a large number of people at once. that seems like the most logical solution.


giving up our individual freedoms and establishing unaccountable gov't organizations and wasting billions of dollars for false sense of security is leading American in the wrong direction.
No kidding. In Greensboro, NC there is a oil storage facility. milliosn of gallons of fuel. Just off the hwy, and a few miles from the airport. That's efficiency, when you start picking targets within a few miles of the airport. Hell, I might even be able to fly a plane that far.

The point is that this facility was deemed low risk because of its location. Nevermind how much damage would be caused if targeted.
miatauser884 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 05:05 PM   #72
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,819
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

our rights are inalienable. You give them up freely because you'll all weak liberal altruist collective second-handers.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 05:09 PM   #73
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (7)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,656
Total Cats: 447
Default

Really, it's a moot point whether any of you individually are fine with giving up your own right against unreasonable search and seizure -- some people are fine with giving up their right to bare arms, but that doesn't mean their personal decision negates other peoples' right to bare arms.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 05:22 PM   #74
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (7)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,656
Total Cats: 447
Default

Airport "Security"?
by Thomas Sowell
11/23/10

Quote:
No country has better airport security than Israel-- and no country needs it more, since Israel is the most hated target of Islamic extremist terrorists. Yet, somehow, Israeli airport security people don't have to strip passengers naked electronically or have strangers feeling their private parts.

Does anyone seriously believe that we have better airport security than Israel? Is our security record better than theirs?

"Security" may be the excuse being offered for the outrageous things being done to American air travelers, but the heavy-handed arrogance and contempt for ordinary people that is the hallmark of this administration in other areas is all too painfully apparent in these new and invasive airport procedures.

Can you remember a time when a Cabinet member in a free America boasted of having his "foot on the neck" of some business or when the President of the United States threatened on television to put his foot on another part of some citizens' anatomy?

Yet this and more has happened in the current administration, which is not yet two years old. One Cabinet member warned that there would be "zero tolerance" for "misinformation" when an insurance company said the obvious, that the mandates of ObamaCare would raise costs and therefore raise premiums. Zero tolerance for exercising the First Amendment right of free speech?

More than two centuries ago, Edmund Burke warned about the dangers of new people with new power. This administration, only halfway through its term, has demonstrated that in many ways.

What other administration has had an Attorney General call the American People "cowards"? And refuse to call terrorists Islamic? What other administration has had a Secretary of Homeland Security warn law enforcement officials across the country of security threats from people who are anti-abortion, for federalism or are returning military veterans?

If anything good comes out of the airport "security" outrages, it may be in opening the eyes of more people to the utter contempt that this administration has for the American people.

Those who made excuses for all of candidate Barack Obama's long years of alliances with people who expressed their contempt for this country, and when as president he appointed people with a record of antipathy to American interests and values, may finally get it when they feel some stranger's hand in their crotch.

As for the excuse of "security," this is one of the least security-minded administrations we have had. When hundreds of illegal immigrants from terrorist-sponsoring countries were captured crossing the border from Mexico-- and then released on their own recognizance within the United States, that tells you all you need to know about this administration's concern for security.

When captured terrorists who are not covered by either the Geneva Convention or the Constitution of the United States are nevertheless put on trial in American civilian courts by the Obama Justice Department, that too tells you all you need to know about how concerned they are about national security.

The rules of criminal justice in American courts were not designed for trying terrorists. For one thing, revealing the evidence against them can reveal how our intelligence services got wind of them in the first place, and thereby endanger the lives of people who helped us nab them.

Not a lot of people in other countries, or perhaps even in this country, are going to help us stop terrorists if their role is revealed and their families are exposed to revenge by the terrorists' bloodthirsty comrades.

What do the Israeli airport security people do that American airport security do not do? They profile. They question some individuals for more than half an hour, open up all their luggage and spread the contents on the counter-- and they let others go through with scarcely a word. And it works.

Meanwhile, this administration is so hung up on political correctness that they have turned "profiling" into a bugaboo. They would rather have electronic scanners look under the clothes of nuns than to detain a Jihadist imam for some questioning.

Will America be undermined from within by an administration obsessed with political correctness and intoxicated with the adolescent thrill of exercising its new-found powers? Stay tuned.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 05:28 PM   #75
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,819
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Those who made excuses for all of candidate Barack Obama's long years of alliances with people who expressed their contempt for this country, and when as president he appointed people with a record of antipathy to American interests and values, may finally get it when they feel some stranger's hand in their crotch.
funny: WASHINGTON — The woman who told President Barack Obama that she was "exhausted" from defending him and his economic policies and waiting for the change she expected after voting for him has another reason to be put out: She's lost her job.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 05:51 PM   #76
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,114
Total Cats: 351
Default

Hussein should have instituted this policy in 2013 like the other unique programs he's initiated. I'd provide further commentary but I'm posting from work.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 06:03 PM   #77
Elite Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tigard, Oregon
Posts: 3,908
Total Cats: 0
Default

My problem with the security increases after each terrorist event is how many man hours are lost and how many people are inconvenienced due to them.

Shoe bomber - there have now been over 6 billion people, just in the united states, that had to remove their shoes at the airport.

UK guy with explosive liquids - 3 billion people have had to bag liquids, scan liquids separately and restrict liquid container size.

Underwear bomber - We now get the full body xray scans and/or serious groping.

If all this adds just 2 minutes to each person's time in line that is over 3 million hours of passenger time lost since 2003. This does not include time lost due to changes after 911, just the changes made after failed terrorist attempts.

Forgetting rights, it's an unreal amount of time and money lost.
cueball1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 06:12 PM   #78
Miotta FTW!
iTrader: (24)
 
Splitime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Posts: 4,292
Total Cats: 26
Default

Wacka Wacka Wacka OOOOOOOOOOOOH.

http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/?c=124&a=2389
Splitime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 07:05 PM   #79
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,819
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splitime View Post
Wacka Wacka Wacka OOOOOOOOOOOOH.

http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/?c=124&a=2389
free ****!
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 08:06 PM   #80
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Mythbusters' Adam Savage: "WTF, TSA?"

http://gizmodo.com/5697222/adam-sava...curity-wtf-tsa
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another Cast Manifold Corky Bell Prefabbed Turbo Kits 18 11-22-2016 10:01 PM
OTS Bilstein to motorsports ASN conversion stoves Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 5 04-21-2016 04:00 PM
Expected intake temps on the track? tazswing Race Prep 20 10-03-2015 12:04 PM
Back to Stock Part Out!! Turbo Parts, MS2 Enhanced 01-05, Suspension, and MOAR! StratoBlue1109 Miata parts for sale/trade 16 10-02-2015 10:39 AM
Time to start learning and play with tuning The Gleas MEGAsquirt 3 10-01-2015 10:30 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:25 PM.