The Transport Security Administration says its techies have failed to create software that would allow passengers to appears less naked when going through scanners, so it is removing the devices.

link 

Still, the union representing the screeners argues that the numbers show a majority of them are doing a great job.

"If you look at a population the size of a small city -- 56,000 people in this work force -- and the numbers then on an annual basis are then really, really small," said David Borer of the American Federation of Government Employees.

"A small price to pay for safety." -- Multitudinous Apologists.

[sarcasm]

Originally Posted by: Wade 

Call me one of those apologists.

I just HOPE this change doesn't result in any acts of terrorism killing a lot of Americans. I would guess that if they are suspending this kind of checking, they have something else equally effective and less intrusive. Hopefully, we will never find out the hard way that they don't.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

Okay, you're an apologist. :)

P.S. No more than the scanners were ever shown to prevent acts of terrorism in the first place.

The reality is that *NO ONE* has *EVER* met the burden of proof that should have been required before the TSA and company decided to commit millions of violations of individual's rights daily.

Originally Posted by: Wade 

If true that the 9/11 bitches used utility knives, then I can tell you right now that the TSA would not prevent another 9/11 and I know this for a fact because I have traveled numerous times with a utility knife in my luggage. Actually, I think they used exacto knives, right?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Okay, you're an apologist. :)

P.S. No more than the scanners were ever shown to prevent acts of terrorism in the first place.

The reality is that *NO ONE* has *EVER* met the burden of proof that should have been required before the TSA and company decided to commit millions of violations of individual's rights daily.

Originally Posted by: Wade 

If you're talking carry-ons, that's surprising and a potential problem. Of you're talking check-in luggage, you don't have access during the flight anyway so no big deal.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

I could care less about getting my body scanned, but I hate waiting in line as much or more than anybody. However, I hate getting killed even more.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

It was carry-on. When I travel, I do not trust check-in luggage, lol.

Two things. How much less could you care since you have made it clear that it is possible for you to care less. Also, how many times have you been killed that you know you hate it? Did you not get 72 virgins the first time?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I wasn't trying to beat the scanner though. It wasn't something I aimed for. I didn't want to miss my flight.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I didn't mean to imply that you were, but people have been hauled away in handcuffs for similar stuff. Maybe there is some subtle profiling going on even though they supposedly don't do that, and maybe you look harmless hahahaha.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

I would suggest that the burden of proof be on those risking LIVES, rather on those risking money and inconvenience. In other words, it needs to be proven that the various security measures do NOT greatly reduce the chance of terrorist acts, NOT on the TSA or airlines to prove they do.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

Seriously?

I guess that's why you're a conservative and I'm not.

To me, those who would use the state to restrict my freedom ALWAYS have the burden of proof. And some vague notion of "might prevent some nasties" isn't ever enough to meet the evidentiary burden.

To quote a non-random dead guy, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."

Originally Posted by: Wade 

Flying is not a freedom.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins