red456

Problem is that in each case, it is the choice of the individual to have the Pap or prostate check administered by a person of their choosing and whom they most like trust. If one is required to use an airliner for transportation, one has no choice but to submit to what many women and not a few men consider a humiliating process carried out by a total stranger.

Mats

Air India 182 crashed in 1985, off the Irish Coast. Two Sikh terrorists were able to load unaccompanied bags on the aircraft. They loaded the bags in Vancouver and had them interlined to Air India in Toronto. They agent refused the request because the passengers had no confirmed seats on Air India. The passengers put up a fight and the agent backed down and accepted the bags. This is detailed in "The Sorrow and the Terror" by Blaise and Mukherjee.

- - -

As far as paps and prostate exams, I offer my patients a choice. For male patients over 50, I always point out that a prostate exam is recommended but that I understand how uncomfortable this is. It's entirely the patient's call. Women usually don't need to be convinced to come in for a pap. It's a whole lot different from the TSA. I don't choose people at random for a prostate exam, I don't claim that a computer picked them up, I don't insist on a pap smear because a patient is wearing shoes.

Where I DO understand the TSA's problems is with Department of Transportation exams. I do lots of these (they're hopelessly boring.) The DOT requires that the examiner check certain things on these commercial drivers license exams. One of those items is hernias. I have no idea how a hernia could impair one from driving safely, but I'm required to conduct the dreaded exam.

This sends some drivers THROUGH THE ROOF! I know that some examiners skip the hernia exam and just check the box. I'm not comfortable with that plan--it's ripe for a law suit. I'm always apologetic and claim that it's the DOT's idea, not mine.

Almost all of the patients recognize that I'm just doing my job, following the protocol, and protecting my licensure, and not exactly enjoying it. But there have been a few who have complained bitterly. In the past they've probably gone to see doctors who just take their money, check their blood pressure, and sign the form.

In other words, an unpleasant procedure or a loss of modesty is a whole lot worse if it appears 1. unnecessary and 2. the government's idea.

So I can identify with the TSA screener who is thinking to himself or herself, "I really don't want to be touching this person. This is so stupid. But it's not my decision."

bdschobel

The TSA screener who doesn't like touching people should get another job. It's quite a bit different from being a doctor! Doctors have to touch people (well, unless they're radiologists or certain other specialties, and even they had to be trained as regular doctors). And doctors get respectably compensated for their trouble. I wouldn't do pat-downs on strangers for $30,000 a year or so. No way.

Bruce

The Real McCoy

Please explain this statement. I can't think of no situation where one would be required to use an airliner for transportation. I can only think of situations where one would choose to use an airliner for transportation.

red456

I'm beginning to smell a troll, too - however....how else is one supposed to get across the country in a hurry if one needs to do so?

bdschobel

What about going to Hawaii? Would you swim, Mr. McCoy?

Bruce

Flaflyer

“After secured cockpit doors, flight crews that stay in the cockpit and do not surrender control of the plane, and passengers who will resist, 9/11 style attacks will almost certainly not occur again.”

I agree, yet like generals preparing to fight the last war, the primary focus of TSA is to make darn sure no one carries a box cutter on a plane. The core of the screening process is designed to do just that. While they may be doing a good job of finding box cutters, the tunnel vision prevents an open mind to consider what new threats they should be concerned about. TSA needs to “think outside the box”. Unfortunately they cannot cut their way out of the box they’re in, even with the 150 tons of box cutters and nail clippers they have confiscated.

Not to take TSAs’ side, but patting does have one advantage over flashing. I have seen obese people who could hide a large ceramic or carbon fiber knife between two rolls of fat. Neither visual nor WTMD inspection would find it. But then would such an item need to be carried on your person, might it be missed in the carry on?

As for the poster who said I can't think of no (double negative) situation where one would be required to use an airliner for transportation, I look forward to his next Trip Report, “Chicago to Sydney in my Winnebago”.

exerda

Would patting down someone find that knife, though? I don't believe the TSA is in the business of re-arranging those particularly portly pax's skin.

A ceramic knife or carbon fiber should be caught by the X-ray machine, as it will still have a different transmissiveness to x-rays than the items around it. Whether or not the person operating the x-ray notices is another issue--I know people who have forgotten large metal knives in their carry-ons and who haven't been stopped at the checkpoints.

The Real McCoy

I can think of no reason one would be required to travel accross the country, to Hawaii or to Sydney.

My only point is that flying is a choice, not a necessity or a requirement. If people feel so strongly that reasonable screening procedures are a viloation of their rights, annoying, stupid, etc. etc. etc. then they are absolutely 100% free to choose not to fly.

This isn't to say that one should be subjected to "whatever the TSA wants to do" when one chooses to fly. But, if the screening procedures are reasonable, as judged by society, then just deal with it! Obviously, the vast majority of the American flying public have no issue with the TSA screening procedures. If a person does have deep-seeded anymosity toward the TSA procedures, then perhaps they need to re-evalute themselves and determine why they are so at odds with the vast majority of the American flying public.

Of course, people are perfectly free to try to effect change in TSA procedures if they disagree with the policies. However, many of the anit-TSA types here seem to complain just for the sake of complaining.

If you have to take your shoes off, so what? What's the big deal? If a TSA agent wants to fudge their time stamps on moving folks through the line, so what? What's the big deal? If you have to remove your laptop from your bag before going through screening, so what? What's the big deal?

I guess it just must be nice to have such wonderful lives that the biggest concern you have to deal with is whether or not some person who's just trying to do their job, earn a living, and possibly help to keep air travel safe wants you to take your shoes off!

red456

Do you recall eyecue's post in which he related the experience of having to lift the roll of fat on a fellow TSAer (I believe) while the person was, for whatever reason, going through a screening?

PhlyingRPh

This is a completely unscientific observation but, I have seen screeners at ORD signal one another when a particularly attractive woman in revealing clothes was in line in front of me. She was stopped and received a secondary screening.

Of course, most men traveling with a buddy that day probably did the same thing, but the other men didnt have the means to stop her in her tracks or inspect her underthings in her rollaboard.

Cholula

The original poster in this thread has been permanently suspended for a TOS multiple handle violation.
Since he/she is no longer able to respond to posts in this thread, I am locking it.
If any of you wish to continue discussion on this topic, feel free to start a similar thread in the Forum.
Thanks.


_____________________________

Cholula
Travel Safety/Security Forum Moderator