FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - split thread: profiling
View Single Post
Old Nov 15, 2005 | 8:14 am
  #75  
Superguy
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited500k30 Nights20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by Bart
Well, for what it's worth, I disagree with the use of the technology just on general principle. If we're at the point where we have to scan people with x-ray like devices that allow us to see under their clothing, then screening has gone too far. I am one of the skeptics who believes that reasonable pat-downs, as we've discussed, is still the better alternative to these "virtual strip searches" as you put it. I argued that society takes a ridiculous Puritanical view only from the standpoint that we (as a whole) tend to giggle like school boys (or girls) when it comes to issues as these. We're actually pretty inconsistent. On the one hand, we're a pretty promiscuous and shameless society, and on the other, we're quite conservative and bashful.

Just to digress a bit: a woman came through our checkpoint dressed in a rather provocative fashion. She had on a camisol which showed off her silicone-enhanced cleavage, and a pair of pants with the sides cut out that pretty much revealed that she was either not wearing any panties or had a pretty thin thong on. She was also a selectee and had to undergo the mandatory secondary screening. I heard my screener offer her the option of being screened in a private room, which she declined. And my screener also explained each step of the process, including demonstrating on herself how she was going to pat down any sensitive areas. It was a textbook screening. Afterwards, the woman seemed upset, and I asked her what was wrong. She said she never felt so humiliated in her life. I managed to explain that she did nothing wrong, and that we were mandated to screen her in this fashion because of the SSSS on her boarding pass. I escorted her aside and had her sit down someplace out of sight so she could regain her composure, and she thanked me for my kindness. Still, I must admit that I was left scratching my head at how she could feel "humiliated" given the daring way she was dressed. Could be a guy thing that we men will never understand, and I'm sure women will sympathize with her. My point here is how there's an apparent contradiction in how we're fairly open about the human body on the one hand and very secretive on the other.

My opposition to the imagery technology is that screening, in my mind, should be thorough yet not to the point of being overly intrusive. It's called "screening" not "searching." I'm not a big fan of the upper-torso pat-down (except for the circumstances I mentioned previously) and I wish TSA would construct better private screening areas (meaning more than just a broom closet), with a few structures on the checkpoint itself that could reasonably accomodate private screening. I think the reason most people reject private area screening is because they know they're going to be crammed inside some broom closet that also serves as a storage area where screening is just impossible to do.

Yet here is where we also come across another contradiction. If we were to scale back on some of the things we do, there would be another cry on these boards about how sloppy, haphazard or just lazy we are by not conducting a thorough screening.

Ok, I think we agree for the most part on this. I agree that it seems contradictory that the woman would respond in such a way when she's flaunting what she's got.

And I agree that private screening needs to be done in an appropriate facility. Maybe something could be done with these puffers that could be darkened or something? That could give them a dual use. Then again, they might not be big enough fora person and a screener. I've seen them as I walked past checkpoints in SFO, but didn't see any in use at the time.

Personally, I'm with you on the risk management aspect of things. We can never reduce the risk to 0 on anything ... but we can take steps to mitigate things. A good start is with plugging the bigger holes like cargo, then fine tuning from there.
Superguy is offline