• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

TSA ejects Oceanside man from airport for refusing security check

Boo Radley said:
It's a good question:

A CBS News survey showed 81 percent of people polled approve of the use of full-body X-ray machines. A Washington Post/ABC News survey found nearly two-thirds of respondents in support. When it comes to the pat downs, respondents were practically split down the middle. Still 70 percent of Americans questioned in the Washington Post/ABC News poll said the new TSA rules made no difference in their decision to fly.

TSA complaints: Warranted outrage? Or all bark, no bite? – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs

Myth: Complaints about the pat-downs are extremely high.
Fact: Only a small percentage of the traveling public receives a pat down as they travel through the security checkpoint. Approximately 2 million people fly in the United States every day. The number of complaints is extremely low.

The TSA Blog

I'll keep looking but I haven't found anything that has actually counted them.
Click to expand...

These polls are worthless. Less than 20% of the public even flies more than once a year.

What do you think the percentage of objections would be from those who have undergone it ??
 
Boo Radley said:
Not lie. A mistake of which I took credit for. Now, if you'll just do the same, we'll be fine. ;)
Click to expand...



Right... Selling bridges in my hometown as well? :roll:


You got caught bro. Pretending otherwise is a transparent joke. :lol:
 
Gill said:
These polls are worthless. Less than 20% of the public even flies more than once a year.

What do you think the percentage of objections would be from those who have undergone it ??
Click to expand...

That may be true, but polling people who aren't flying wouldn't mean that much either. And I can only speak for myself, and I can't see why I would have a problem with it. But even if I did, I wouldn't call it fondling or feeling up.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Right... Selling bridges in my hometown as well? :roll:


You got caught bro. Pretending otherwise is a transparent joke. :lol:
Click to expand...

Do whatever you have to not to actually participate in honest debate. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
reading skills are important. When I spoke of exaggerating and hyperbole, I always had as part of the fondling and the feeling up. Go back and read, and see that I even defined the words. Please, try to be somewhat honest.
Click to expand...

I remember having a discussion with you some time ago Boo, when JD3 was the moniker, about the water boarding that Bush was doing. And in that discussion I was making the argument that the people being water boarded were necessary to take that measure to stop a possible attack.

You argued strongly against it, even to the point where I posed the question that if your own family was in danger you would not do this? You argued no, that if people died that was regrettable but a part of retaining our freedom.

Now you argue for giving up that freedom when you will not answer the pertinent questions. Why?


j-mac
 
Boo Radley said:
I hope you don't mind that you "heard" is not really enogh to be accepted as fact. I do know I heard a woman on TV this morning say she had no problem with it, and the question was at all vague.
Click to expand...

So then produce the internals....Can you? I mean I will accept that a conversation I heard on the radio may not have it all together factual, but you can clear that up with the internals. Please don't expect me to accept your dismissal just because you can poke a hole on the fringe and not touch the important point.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I remember having a discussion with you some time ago Boo, when JD3 was the moniker, about the water boarding that Bush was doing. And in that discussion I was making the argument that the people being water boarded were necessary to take that measure to stop a possible attack.

You argued strongly against it, even to the point where I posed the question that if your own family was in danger you would not do this? You argued no, that if people died that was regrettable but a part of retaining our freedom.

Now you argue for giving up that freedom when you will not answer the pertinent questions. Why?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Quite a difference in the two things. Torture is expressedly illegal, not to mention immoral.

And I don't see anyone giving up freedom. It's a simple pat down. No freedom taken away at as best I can see.

But, again, I repeat, it is the hyperbole and exaggeration I am having a problem with. It isn't fondling or feeling up. You are free to go through the scanner, not much different than the metal scanners we've gone through for years. There doesn't seem to actually be a health risk and there certainly isn't any sexual about them. But if you don't want to do that, you are free to choose a pat down, or not to fly. So, no freedom is being taken away. And no laws broken that I can see. And certainly nothing equal to torture.
 
j-mac said:
So then produce the internals....Can you? I mean I will accept that a conversation I heard on the radio may not have it all together factual, but you can clear that up with the internals. Please don't expect me to accept your dismissal just because you can poke a hole on the fringe and not touch the important point.

j-mac
Click to expand...

I wouldn't expect either of us to accept anything. But if you bring it up, and you did, I would expect more than what you heard.
 
Boo Radley said:
It was a problem, but not fondling or feeling up. As this person noted, it was merely inexperience in dealing with people with a medical condition. He was not hateful or hyperbolic, but someone making a reasonable argument. And has even been asked to help train, and he is considering it.

Do you see the difference yet?
Click to expand...
I see, so no one thought about the fact that frisking children was moronic, or that people with disabilities would be flying on airplanes? How many incidents aren't being reported?
 
American said:
I see, so no one thought about the fact that frisking children was moronic, or that people with disabilities would be flying on airplanes? How many incidents aren't being reported?
Click to expand...

Never said the above, and it appears really only a few are being reported. I have not said there is no reason for objection, but that aexaggerating isn't the way to go about it. I even, and I keep pointing this out, showed a reasonable complaint as it related to children.

having a reasonable complaint is different than losing your mind and screaming fondling and feeling up. There is a real difference.
 
Boo Radley said:
Never said the above, and it appears really only a few are being reported. I have not said there is no reason for objection, but that aexaggerating isn't the way to go about it. I even, and I keep pointing this out, showed a reasonable complaint as it related to children.

having a reasonable complaint is different than losing your mind and screaming fondling and feeling up. There is a real difference.
Click to expand...

The "Roach Hotel" approach at the airports is also illegal. Trying to stop people from leaving airports and fine them $10K is absurd.
 
Boo Radley said:
Quite a difference in the two things. Torture is expressedly illegal, not to mention immoral.
Click to expand...

Is running your hand up the habbit of a Nun immoral? how about a child?

And I don't see anyone giving up freedom. It's a simple pat down. No freedom taken away at as best I can see.
Click to expand...

Joe, I like ya, but willing blindness is no excuse.

But, again, I repeat, it is the hyperbole and exaggeration I am having a problem with. It isn't fondling or feeling up.
Click to expand...

People that have gone through this have likened it to a sexual assault. Are they exaggerating?

You are free to go through the scanner, not much different than the metal scanners we've gone through for years.
Click to expand...

Absolutely untrue. Reports of these machines, and even the TSA themselves note that the scanners show amazing detail, even to the point of detecting, and showing sweat on someone's back. Now that effectively makes you naked to the person viewing the scan. I doubt metal detectors see that do they?

There doesn't seem to actually be a health risk
Click to expand...

As of yet inconclusive, but ok.

and there certainly isn't any sexual about them.
Click to expand...

For a while yesterday there was a story buzzing around about a Colorado TSA man arrested for masturbating while screening a High School girls team through a check point. It was later debunked, however, not so hard to imagine is it really?

But if you don't want to do that, you are free to choose a pat down, or not to fly. So, no freedom is being taken away.
Click to expand...

Except your freedom to fly. And most important your 4th amendment freedom. Now I agree you don't have a right to fly, but it is a freedom.

And no laws broken that I can see. And certainly nothing equal to torture.
Click to expand...

"Torture" is your hyperbole.


j-mac
 
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.

Pretty clear here.


j-mac
 
American said:
The "Roach Hotel" approach at the airports is also illegal. Trying to stop people from leaving airports and fine them $10K is absurd.
Click to expand...
It's ridiculous.

scare%20tactics.jpg
 
j-mac said:
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.

Pretty clear here.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Opt-in scanning to stop possible terrorist attacks is unreasonable?

I don't have a problem with having a process with scanning travelers. My biggest problem is the inefficient way it's done. The government spent tons of money on these scanner setups in airports across the nation only to revert back to a manual pat down because it was found out these expensive machines were useless in detecting almost anything that could actually be used in a terrorist attack.

On top of all that the top x-ray companies are racking in millions in revenue at the expense of tax payer to provide a useless product that may very well have horrible long term health impact in forms of cancer for frequent fliers. Is slowly killing off a few hundred thousand American citizens with out-dated back-scatter x-ray technology worth the security?
 
Last edited:
Gibberish said:
Opt-in scanning to stop possible terrorist attacks is unreasonable?

I don't have a problem with having a process with scanning travelers. My biggest problem is the inefficient way it's done. The government spent tons of money on these scanner setups in airports across the nation only to revert back to a manual pat down because it was found out these expensive machines were useless in detecting almost anything that could actually be used in a terrorist attack.

On top of all that the top x-ray companies are racking in millions in revenue at the expense of tax payer to provide a useless product that may very well have horrible long term health impact in forms of cancer for frequent fliers. Is slowly killing off a few hundred thousand American citizens with out-dated back-scatter x-ray technology worth the security?
Click to expand...


Much of your point is well taken, however I do have a problem with the "reasonable" part of this. Is it really reasonable to be searching a person with a catheter? A Nun? A child? on inner US flights from point A to point B with in the US? I'd say no. What it is is a response with heavy PC thrown in so as not to offend our true enemies.


j-mac
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
That right there is signature material. :lamo
Click to expand...
What's so funny? I completely agree with Boo... nothing could make me feel more "free" than being detained by the government under threat of arrest or massive fines unless I submit to genital groping by a gloved security guard.

Now that I think about it, it probably epitomizes the ideal of Liberty.
 
j-mac said:
Much of your point is well taken, however I do have a problem with the "reasonable" part of this. Is it really reasonable to be searching a person with a catheter? A Nun? A child? on inner US flights from point A to point B with in the US? I'd say no. What it is is a response with heavy PC thrown in so as not to offend our true enemies.

j-mac
Click to expand...

You really can't have exceptions when it comes to security. That creates loop holes that can be exploited to bypass the system. The public would love a more lax security that makes their day-to-day easier but the second another attack unfolds they will be yelling as to why more extreme security measures weren't in place.

What needs to happen is a more efficient way of scanning to be introduced that meets the base requirements of security and violates the traveler as little as possible. Requiring a hurried and ill-educated person man handling another is NOT the solution.
 
Last edited:
Taylor said:
What's so funny? I completely agree with Boo... nothing could make me feel more "free" than being detained by the government under threat of arrest or massive fines unless I submit to genital groping by a gloved security guard.

Now that I think about it, it probably epitomizes the ideal of Liberty.
Click to expand...


GAWD! what a sucky job that has to be when your boss says, "hey Sam! Get over here and cup this guys package."

EEEEWWWWWWW!


j-mac
 
Gibberish said:
You really can't have exceptions when it comes to security. That creates loop holes that can be exploited to bypass the system. The public would love a more lax security that makes their day-to-day easier but the second another attack unfolds they will be yelling as to why more extreme security measures weren't in place.

What needs to happen is a more efficient way of scanning to be introduced that meets the base requirements of security and violates the traveler as little as possible. Requiring a hurried and ill-educated person man handling another is NOT the solution.
Click to expand...


Agreed, do you think that Israel has it right?


j-mac
 
why not have the full body scanners only go shoulder high? Keep the head out of it entirely? That way, no one knows whose semi-visible nekkidness is whose... privacy.
 
j-mac said:
Agreed, do you think that Israel has it right?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Elements yes. We couldn't take it as far as Israel does in singling out specific groups though since America has such a culturally diverse population. But that's not to say profiling and flagged people to be monitored isn't needed. We are so PC in this country that the invidiual is completly taken out of the security process. All we care about is what items they happen to have access to while traveling, not their intent on using them.

I think profiling and study of individuals (tones, actions, etc.) is required and having multiple points of contact through the airport like Israel does is something that is needed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom