"New" TSA screening (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() TriRSquared - 2010-01-06 12:37 PM People need to realize it's not like the operator is right there looking at you then the "nude" image then back at you (licking his lips, winking creepily). The image is sent to a monitor in another room. Once the image is done being analyzed it is deleted. Also that image above is WITHOUT the privacy features in place...This is NOT what screeners will see. http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/05/which-is-it-millimeter-wave-or.html (scroll about a page or so down) Personally I could care less as long as it's effective. good info,, about the privacy filter.. something I didnt' know that they did.. then again I'm looking at things from the viewpoint of what are the limitations and doses |
|
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I'd much rather have them look at a picture of my body (I spend time running around in barely any clothes in the summer WET during a race...) than have another TSA person touch me. No pat downs, thank you very much. But overall, I am thoroughly disapointed in the methods they are using and find the description from Bigfuzzydoug to be really interesting. My question is WHY do the terrorist groups not find an old granny to do their bidding? It would be so easy. I just want to go back to the old days when my husband could meet me at the gate, I could carry my Swiss Army Knie, and bring home one stinking bottle of wine from Napa in my carryon. |
![]() ![]() |
Master ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() BikerGrrrl - 2010-01-06 3:28 PM My question is WHY do the terrorist groups not find an old granny to do their bidding? It would be so easy. "Hello ma'am. Traveling to see your grandchildren? How many do you have? What are their names? What's your grandson's favorite sport? You don't know or you're trying to remember? Why do you look nervous? Would you like to sit down? No, you don't have to rush. We'll make sure you'll catch your flight. Any reason why you keep rubbing your hands? Please come with us into this little room..." It doesn't matter who you are or what you look like. Even if you're an American WASP who looks like the LAST person that could be a terrorist and they kidnap your family and force you to carry on a bomb (let's say 3 pounds of explosives shoved up your colon) on a suicide mission. With the right Psychology training, security can be trained to look for signs of lying and deception. That victim would be quickly singled out and not allowed on the plane. It may take a while to find out the truth, maybe they never find the bomb - but they certainly aren't getting onto any plane. The point here is that security has the BIG advantage: They don't care if you miss your flight. Catch the next one. We're not letting you on any plane until we're satisfied. TIP: When traveling to or from Israel, don't grip about the line or the slowness of security. The American TSA is trying to get you screened and through as quickly as possible. Israeli security's got all day and you should've planned for it. They've got no reason to rush. They'll spend 10 minutes asking about the book you're carrying on board!!! Here's a little Psych 101 lie-detector tip: Ask someone a question and watch their eyes. If they slightly roll up and to the left, their brain is accessing the creative side of their brain to formulate the answer - possibly a lie. It's hard not to do. All it takes is for granny to give one little sign that she may not be on the up and up and that's all it takes for "the little room" with more questions, a full body scan, a pat-down... an arrest. I was detained for an hour's worth of questioning. I was released and allowed to make my flight. Maybe the guy sitting behind me was an armed air marshall, maybe not. But the results speak for themselves. Terrorists can not get on El Al flights and can not fly in and out of Israel. Focus on the PEOPLE! After all, it's one of them that's trying to do harm. |
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Bigfuzzydoug - 2010-01-06 3:56 PM ... Here's a little Psych 101 lie-detector tip: Ask someone a question and watch their eyes. If they slightly roll up and to the left, their brain is accessing the creative side of their brain to formulate the answer - possibly a lie. It's hard not to do. ... This is a bit of an urban legend. There are no universal "tells" about lying. And a well-rehearsed lie is as good to the brain as a true statement. The whole idea of "eyes look left when lying" comes from discredited ideas about neurolinguistics in the 1970's and is about as reliable as phrenology. But overall, the rest of your observations are dead on. I boil it down to "don't f_ with the israelis.". Always good advice, in my book. |
![]() ![]() |
Expert ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Ironically, a current tactic of insurgents is to use women (do to Muslim cultural thoughts on touching women), and mentally handicapped people (esp. women) to carry IED's. This is not a new thing. BTW, if you think children carrying an IED is far fetched, ask a Vietnam vet about it. I teach Anti Terrorism and will tell you the same thing I tell my students.... Terrorists are not stupid. They adapt to new ideas, are very creative and are only limited to what can be thought up. We cannot, ever, stop terrorism. All we can do is implement measures to try to mitigate not only the events that may happen but also the consequences when they occur. |
![]() ![]() |
Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I don't have any problem with it. I am 100% certain that after the screener has seen a couple hundred semi visible bodies, he or she won't care at all. And the next day will be even more bored with fuzzy, jiggly bits. Besides, a good number of those going through the screen are on their way to a warm, public beach to put a bikini on. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Bigfuzzydoug - 2010-01-06 12:31 PM I don't think it's an invasion of privacy considering the potential devastation an airliner can do... obviously. But I do question why it would be considered necessary for everyone and how you even attempt to make it cost effective to scan everybody. I don't understand why more countries don't take a page from these guys, they're obviously using a system that works. If they make these things mandatory, I'll refuse it. They can pat me down & run a wand over me, but there's no reason they need to know how long it's been since the boys got their last trim. |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() JBrashear - 2010-01-06 4:27 PM Bigfuzzydoug - 2010-01-06 12:31 PM I don't understand why more countries don't take a page from these guys, they're obviously using a system that works. If they make these things mandatory, I'll refuse it. They can pat me down & run a wand over me, but there's no reason they need to know how long it's been since the boys got their last trim.I don't think it's an invasion of privacy considering the potential devastation an airliner can do... obviously. But I do question why it would be considered necessary for everyone and how you even attempt to make it cost effective to scan everybody. I agree,,, Plus I wouldn't mind having it as actual job description or cross training for military/police personal. Sort of like a rotating 12 month gig, instead of it paying 12 bucks an hour to some one that just wants a job |
![]() ![]() |
Regular ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I personally do not consider the new scanners an invasion of privacy. I can easily see how someone else would. I am not convinced that they will do anything to increase security. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() | ![]() Gaarryy - 2010-01-06 5:45 PM I don't understand why more countries don't take a page from these guys, they're obviously using a system that works. If they make these things mandatory, I'll refuse it. They can pat me down & run a wand over me, but there's no reason they need to know how long it's been since the boys got their last trim. I agree,,, Plus I wouldn't mind having it as actual job description or cross training for military/police personal. Sort of like a rotating 12 month gig, instead of it paying 12 bucks an hour to some one that just wants a job I would rather go through security wearing my spandex than having some ex-mall cop I-flunked-out-of-police-academy Craigslist creep pat me down. You can lookie lookie but no touchy touchy. And really? My spandex shows more that those links of scanner images do. Ha! It's rather impractical to have military/police personal 'rotate' out as TSA employees/ airport security personal. The MPs have a mission and a job. The local cops have a job. There are not enough of either. If you want that quality of personal take someone who has been honorably discharged/med boarded from the service. My husband can no longer wear 50lbs of body armor but I'm sure he would take pride at keeping the nation safe in a new way. Edited by k_watzek 2010-01-06 8:05 PM |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() k_watzek - 2010-01-06 8:03 PM Gaarryy - 2010-01-06 5:45 PM I don't understand why more countries don't take a page from these guys, they're obviously using a system that works. If they make these things mandatory, I'll refuse it. They can pat me down & run a wand over me, but there's no reason they need to know how long it's been since the boys got their last trim. I agree,,, Plus I wouldn't mind having it as actual job description or cross training for military/police personal. Sort of like a rotating 12 month gig, instead of it paying 12 bucks an hour to some one that just wants a job I would rather go through security wearing my spandex than having some ex-mall cop I-flunked-out-of-police-academy Craigslist creep pat me down. You can lookie lookie but no touchy touchy. And really? My spandex shows more that those links of scanner images do. Ha! It's rather impractical to have military/police personal 'rotate' out as TSA employees/ airport security personal. The MPs have a mission and a job. The local cops have a job. There are not enough of either. If you want that quality of personal take someone who has been honorably discharged/med boarded from the service. My husband can no longer wear 50lbs of body armor but I'm sure he would take pride at keeping the nation safe in a new way. that is what I was trying to say, I just couldn't get it from my mind to the keyboard, thank you.. ![]() or even make it a new MOS for the military, I'm a Vet myself so I was thinking if we have soldiers do a 2 yr Drill Instructor or 3 yr Recruiter commitment as part of their service, have it be something like that, does that make sense?? |
|
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Gaarryy - 2010-01-06 12:07 PM here is a link to what an image looks like with the back scatter machine. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Backscatter_x-ray_image_woman.jpg While I would say it's safe for work, I also work in the medical field so my perception on that might be off. But I thought it was better to post a link than the actual photo here. Working with radiation and physics stuff most of the article I read are on the dose's a person receives and what type of training the people running the machine should have for their own safety,, but in none of the machines out there are you "nude" eta spell check DUDE that's a total "nude" type of picture of someone. Totally NOT cool. Not cool at all. I would not be comfortable with that. Really let's think about this... who is back there monitoring this stuff and reviewing it? $12 an hour employees... IF the make THAT much. What keeps them from taking pictures of what is on the screen with their phones? |
![]() ![]() |
Sneaky Slow ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() KSH - 2010-01-06 9:23 PM Gaarryy - 2010-01-06 12:07 PM here is a link to what an image looks like with the back scatter machine. DUDE that's a total "nude" type of picture of someone. Totally NOT cool. Not cool at all. I would not be comfortable with that. Really let's think about this... who is back there monitoring this stuff and reviewing it? $12 an hour employees... IF the make THAT much. What keeps them from taking pictures of what is on the screen with their phones? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Backscatter_x-ray_image_woman.jpg While I would say it's safe for work, I also work in the medical field so my perception on that might be off. But I thought it was better to post a link than the actual photo here. Working with radiation and physics stuff most of the article I read are on the dose's a person receives and what type of training the people running the machine should have for their own safety,, but in none of the machines out there are you "nude" eta spell check What does how much they make an hour have to do with their inclination to take pictures with their phones, or whatever? Like, people who don't make a lot of money are more likely to be perverts? |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() newleaf - 2010-01-06 8:45 PM KSH - 2010-01-06 9:23 PM Gaarryy - 2010-01-06 12:07 PM here is a link to what an image looks like with the back scatter machine. DUDE that's a total "nude" type of picture of someone. Totally NOT cool. Not cool at all. I would not be comfortable with that. Really let's think about this... who is back there monitoring this stuff and reviewing it? $12 an hour employees... IF the make THAT much. What keeps them from taking pictures of what is on the screen with their phones? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Backscatter_x-ray_image_woman.jpg While I would say it's safe for work, I also work in the medical field so my perception on that might be off. But I thought it was better to post a link than the actual photo here. Working with radiation and physics stuff most of the article I read are on the dose's a person receives and what type of training the people running the machine should have for their own safety,, but in none of the machines out there are you "nude" eta spell check What does how much they make an hour have to do with their inclination to take pictures with their phones, or whatever? Like, people who don't make a lot of money are more likely to be perverts? Usually someone who is working a job... where they are not getting paid what they think they should... tends to be not as dedicated to that job. It's not a career, it's not their passion, it's a paycheck. Am I saying that applies to EVERY employee. Of course not. But it does apply to many. Having worked in many situations (for 20 years) with $8-$12 employees, I saw more apathy than dedication. Thus the comment. But yes, rich people are pervs too. |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Am I missing something? The picture is of a totally faceless alien-looking being. There's no way to tell the person in the photo apart from anyone else, as far as I can tell. I can't really picture anyone who wasn't a total freak being remotely turned on by that. I agree that it might be amusing for the first couple of hours, but after the first thousand or so people passed through your scanner, I bet it would get old really quickly. |
![]() ![]() |
Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I would not be comfortable with that. Really let's think about this... who is back there monitoring this stuff and reviewing it? $12 an hour employees... IF the make THAT much. What keeps them from taking pictures of what is on the screen with their phones? The threat of federal prosecution and monitoring the viewing station by camera should be sufficient. But nothing will be 100%, just like hospitals. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() jmk-brooklyn - 2010-01-06 8:11 PM Am I missing something? The picture is of a totally faceless alien-looking being. There's no way to tell the person in the photo apart from anyone else, as far as I can tell. I can't really picture anyone who wasn't a total freak being remotely turned on by that. I agree that it might be amusing for the first couple of hours, but after the first thousand or so people passed through your scanner, I bet it would get old really quickly. Agreed. Meh. Don't like it, let that $12 employee pat you all over.... or don't fly |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() OK. I fly every week, a few segments. Let's get to brass tacks. F'in rediculous. We're debating the imaging and pat down of people as they roll through security. On the record, secruity IMHO should be wide open, do what they need to do. Let's run down the list of why (especially from this group of folks): * People need to be accountable. That has no boundaries. You fly, play by the rules. * Don't float the "it's my physical privacy" argument. Most triathletes wear relatively small clothing (shorts and bra-type top, if a gal) as a matter of practice. Your image is public record. Some people buy pictures of that public record. Any imaging done at security is less spicy than any race photog could do, who record you without your knowledge. That should mitigate most of the "I'm not comfortable being naked" argument. * IM and some HIM athletes have wetsuit strippers. These are people that reach into whatever area they need to to drag the wetsuit off you to save a couple seconds. I'm sure the same standard isn't applied to them at the airport. * Specifically to KSH - you're worried about imaging but have the pics up in the album, and on last year's hottie thread you do? Conflict. Bottom line: it's something other than the nakedness that's causing the consternation. The loss of freedom, the specific methods of the TSA, whatever. But it's very unfair to condemn people that want to see your body for security reasons, period. I reject the "They're $12/hr employees, what are they going to do with my film?"argument. That's ignorant. There are hundreds of volunteers and spectators at every tri, you don't know what they make, and they've got the opportunity to photograph you up-close-and-personal and use those images without reprocussion. And I will throw into the fray...I"m not comfortable (allthought I'd like to be), with the patdown. The potential for abuse is large....I'm in favor of it, but want rules that govern how/when/who. That's the only element of this diatribe I'd like to spend more time figuring out. |
![]() ![]() |
Pro ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() rkreuser - 2010-01-07 12:12 AM OK. I fly every week, a few segments. Let's get to brass tacks. F'in rediculous. We're debating the imaging and pat down of people as they roll through security. On the record, secruity IMHO should be wide open, do what they need to do. Let's run down the list of why (especially from this group of folks): * People need to be accountable. That has no boundaries. You fly, play by the rules. * Don't float the "it's my physical privacy" argument. Most triathletes wear relatively small clothing (shorts and bra-type top, if a gal) as a matter of practice. Your image is public record. Some people buy pictures of that public record. Any imaging done at security is less spicy than any race photog could do, who record you without your knowledge. That should mitigate most of the "I'm not comfortable being naked" argument. * IM and some HIM athletes have wetsuit strippers. These are people that reach into whatever area they need to to drag the wetsuit off you to save a couple seconds. I'm sure the same standard isn't applied to them at the airport. * Specifically to KSH - you're worried about imaging but have the pics up in the album, and on last year's hottie thread you do? Conflict. Bottom line: it's something other than the nakedness that's causing the consternation. The loss of freedom, the specific methods of the TSA, whatever. But it's very unfair to condemn people that want to see your body for security reasons, period. I reject the "They're $12/hr employees, what are they going to do with my film?"argument. That's ignorant. There are hundreds of volunteers and spectators at every tri, you don't know what they make, and they've got the opportunity to photograph you up-close-and-personal and use those images without reprocussion. And I will throw into the fray...I"m not comfortable (allthought I'd like to be), with the patdown. The potential for abuse is large....I'm in favor of it, but want rules that govern how/when/who. That's the only element of this diatribe I'd like to spend more time figuring out. I favor the imaging technology, but I think your comments really miss the boat. Most people are not triathletes, and are not comfortable with their bodies. Think about how many people avoid going to a gym (or even exercising outdoors) because of issues about their bodies. And one's image is not a matter of public record. Especially naked, or nearly so. If I choose to post x-rated pictures of myself on the web, that's one thing. But if you take a picture of me in a situation where I have a reasonable expectation of privacy (in my house, through the window, for example, or off the TSA screen), you have in fact committed a crime. You mentioned wetsuit strippers. I have never done an IM or HIM; neither have many other triathletes. There is only one person besides myself that I allow to take off my clothing, and I am married to her. And KSH does have a point about unmotivated, underpaid and apathetic employees trying to make a buck. I am less concerned about this overall, since I would hope there would be a supervisor around, but it is in fact a realistic possibility that an employee will grab a screen shot and sell it. After all, celebrities often find "nude" pictures of themselves on the web, which are just a head photoshopped on a body. Like I said, though, I am in favor of the imaging, if it actually detects things that we are missing now, and it is applied universally so the terrorists don't figure out to strap bombs to little kids or grandmothers. |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() rkreuser - 2010-01-07 12:12 AM OK. I fly every week, a few segments. Let's get to brass tacks. F'in rediculous. We're debating the imaging and pat down of people as they roll through security. On the record, secruity IMHO should be wide open, do what they need to do. Let's run down the list of why (especially from this group of folks): * People need to be accountable. That has no boundaries. You fly, play by the rules. * Don't float the "it's my physical privacy" argument. Most triathletes wear relatively small clothing (shorts and bra-type top, if a gal) as a matter of practice. Your image is public record. Some people buy pictures of that public record. Any imaging done at security is less spicy than any race photog could do, who record you without your knowledge. That should mitigate most of the "I'm not comfortable being naked" argument. * IM and some HIM athletes have wetsuit strippers. These are people that reach into whatever area they need to to drag the wetsuit off you to save a couple seconds. I'm sure the same standard isn't applied to them at the airport. * Specifically to KSH - you're worried about imaging but have the pics up in the album, and on last year's hottie thread you do? Conflict. Bottom line: it's something other than the nakedness that's causing the consternation. The loss of freedom, the specific methods of the TSA, whatever. But it's very unfair to condemn people that want to see your body for security reasons, period. I reject the "They're $12/hr employees, what are they going to do with my film?"argument. That's ignorant. There are hundreds of volunteers and spectators at every tri, you don't know what they make, and they've got the opportunity to photograph you up-close-and-personal and use those images without reprocussion. And I will throw into the fray...I"m not comfortable (allthought I'd like to be), with the patdown. The potential for abuse is large....I'm in favor of it, but want rules that govern how/when/who. That's the only element of this diatribe I'd like to spend more time figuring out. Maybe not 100% accurate. Usually, in that legal-ese of race registration, you sign a waiver specifying that you allow your image to be used for any commercial or private duplication purposes. What's often called a "standard model's release". But I agree that the scanner image isn't to be feared as a big brother intrusion. I welcome the use of technology to aid in security. And that's HUGE for a leftist liberal such as myself ![]() OT: Why is the exit side left pretty much wide open? This a-hole in Newark (redundant) walks through the exit to kiss his girlfriend good bye and shuts down EWR for 6 hours? |
![]() ![]() |
Master ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I have not problem with the pics. It would take a special kind of perv to view those as "nude pics" in a creepy way. However, I do have a problem with not following Israeli methods. Time after time, we have proven that good police work trumps systems, technology, or policy. Stopping the New Year Bomber? Good police work. The Campus Cop that lead to finding Jaycee Lee Duggard? Good Policework. The system that allowed her to go all those years - despite parole checks and neighborhood tips? Emphasizing procedure and policy over good policing. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() I invite all parties here to think about whatever photos they may currently have in their public albums and ask themselves if the TSA-generated scanner images are really all that bad. I would argue that they are not. However, I would also argue that a continual, incremental whittling away of privacy is a slippery slope indeed. I tend to agree with Doug's comments about the Israeli methods. ETA - edited to be a nicer guy. Edited by dave699 2010-01-07 9:44 AM |
![]() ![]() |
![]() | ![]() KSH - 2010-01-06 8:23 PM Gaarryy - 2010-01-06 12:07 PM here is a link to what an image looks like with the back scatter machine. DUDE that's a total "nude" type of picture of someone. Totally NOT cool. Not cool at all. I would not be comfortable with that. Really let's think about this... who is back there monitoring this stuff and reviewing it? $12 an hour employees... IF the make THAT much. What keeps them from taking pictures of what is on the screen with their phones? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Backscatter_x-ray_image_woman.jpg While I would say it's safe for work, I also work in the medical field so my perception on that might be off. But I thought it was better to post a link than the actual photo here. Working with radiation and physics stuff most of the article I read are on the dose's a person receives and what type of training the people running the machine should have for their own safety,, but in none of the machines out there are you "nude" eta spell check Someone else posted the more accurate version (with the privacy filters) of what the TSA employees would see in a link - this is directly from the TSA web site: ![]() There is no way anyone would be able to identify who this person was. Are we really concerned about images like this? |
![]() ![]() |
Champion ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() lisac957 - 2010-01-07 10:51 AM [ Someone else posted the more accurate version (with the privacy filters) of what the TSA employees would see in a link - this is directly from the TSA web site: ![]() There is no way anyone would be able to identify who this person was. Are we really concerned about images like this? Sadly the answer is yes. And to those people I say, book a train or get in the car for your destination. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() Suuuuuure, that's the TSA TELLS us, anyway. ![]() That image creeps me out. Seriously. It doesn't take much to get me excited, and that alien/ghost/freak porn doesn't do it. |
|