To add to Formo (who just got an applause point), I think when you purchase a computer, the company should get to see your genitals. Same when getting a haircut. It would make the world so much safer.

Of course, if the person refuses to show their genitals, it's their right. Instead, we should have a balding guy in his 50s feels your genitals to make sure you don't have a weapon.

If it could save only one child....

--

For those who didn't get it, an absurdity with an absurdity. It's absurd for a bunch of reasons. Let's not forget that it's still safer, even with terrorists, to fly than it is to drive to the airport.

It's also absurd because the Founding Fathers believed in Rights, including Rights that are assumed. Like the Right to Privacy for instance. They had no idea you could invade people's homes with satellites. Does that make it ok because it wasn't specifically stated that the government cannot invade people's homes with satellites in the Constitution? Hell no. Thus, we got the Right to travel.

It's become pretty fucking embarrassing defending America's overreaction to 9/11. Europeans think we're nuts. And they're RIGHT. Heck, the freaking Israelis deal with terrorism daily and they think we're idiots. I don't even have a counter to them because they too are RIGHT.

Our overreactions have made it embarrassing to be an American.

---

ZS, yer right.

With all this 'safety' the hoards of sheeple want the government to provide, I'm reminded of the movie 'Demolition Man' with Snipes and Sly. Yeah sure, that society was probably the safest society one could live in.

But they traded one fundamental right to get that safety. Freedom.

No thanks. You can keep your safety. I'll fight until the last breath for my freedom.

---

I'm curious why you believe this. I understand that in private places, when you purchase a ticket of some kind you have to follow the regulations that that company or venue has setup. For instance the no-camera policies at certain museums, concerts, etc., That is perfectly legal.

However, I think the right to privacy is more fundamental. One of the criteria for privacy law is "expected privacy." Basically whether or not a person should reasonably expect privacy in their current situation. For example a women complained about how a neighbor filmed her having a nude hot tub party in her backyard and tried to file a privacy-based lawsuit. She lost because they determined that she couldn't expect to have that amount of privacy in her backyard. And because the person filming didn't trespass onto private property but merely filmed from their own property.

So in the case of travel, I believe I should expect a certain level of privacy. I think it's reasonable to expect to have the level of privacy where I don't have to admit to a revealing scan before I enter a plane. However that point is still debatable. Of course I rarely fly and have decided not to since the recent scanners have been introduced.

I mainly oppose a lot of the efforts of the TSA because I don't believe they're actually helping keep us safer.

I have flown at least 30 times since 9/11 and I have never had my genitals felt, and I have to go into the heightened pool because of my leg. I have to have my knee unit and foot tested for explosives in every pass. I am wanded and patted down every time. Talk about over reactions, one report in the 10's of thousands that fly don't make it the norm. Yet you are screaming from the mountaintops in an over-reaction as well..

But don't mistake that as I agree with the measures taken by our government and the TSA. But I will be damned if I am going to sit here an let you call me Un-American, dim witted or "you don't get it" because my view differs from yours.

I happen to disagree... little else.

Dissolve the TSA for all I care, I have little issue with wiping that agency from the process.

That said, I don't think it logical to allow anyone to board a plane unchecked at all.

So that answer lies somewhere in the middle, but that question has been asked several times in this thread, propose something different and less intrusive and time consuming than the point people enter the terminal.

The location is the most logical in the process.. once your past that check you don't have to worry.. especially in connections.

Now I do believe their measures are overboard and intrusive.. but propose something in place than slinging labels on those that don't agree with your point.

Sure the numbers support that air travel is safer than a car in the numbers.. but when something does go wrong, those aboard and those in the path of where it lands have little chance for survival.. and the numbers of those effected as demonstrated in metro areas can be significant... where in auto accidents.. the risk for large totals of casualties is far less likely. That is the point of why I don't have qualms with heightened regulations.

But my latest post is a argument against it being a violation of your rights.. which I don't believe it to be.

You know the process before purchasing the ticket.. or at least you should if you have done an ounce of research, and once you agree to purchase, you are agreeing to the regulations of that ticket.

BTW.. for the Shepple comment, what about the other suppression's in that mode of travel.

How dare they tell me I can't make a phone call on the runway.

How dare they tell me I can't go to the restroom when I wish.

How dare they require that I buckle the seatbelt at any time during flight.

How dare they limit the number of drinks I can get on the flight.

How dare they only supply a bag of pretzels and little else for choice.

How dare they require me to sit in the seat number I purchased when I would rather sit in my choice.

None of those lack of freedoms are bitched about, or followed with belittling of others opinions which are trampled on if they disagree with your viewpoint upon..

Reality is that method of travel is restricting and inconvenient.. your normal freedoms are restricted.. and many openly agree to them and pay a premium to travel in the mode.

It sucks.. but you as an American have the freedom to choose alternatives to that method of travel.. let alone that freedom to actually travel anywhere you wish.

So label me because I speak my opinion.. but all I ask is inspect your words and accusations, because you apparently aren't looking at the broad spectrum of my opinion.

---

To be clear, I disagree vehemently with the scanners and think they are way overboard and too intrusive. However the last couple of years, in flights or waiting for flights all you hear from those in lines is the wait it causes.. I think this scanner is being thought of something that will speed up the process.

Don't mistake my viewpoint on the lack of constitutional rights as an agreement with the process.. just from a legal stance, I don't see the "rights" argument being valid as you as a person are agreeing to the process based on your agreement in purchase.

Your rights are to accept or decline the terms of service to board a flight.. and no one is infringing upon that right of choice.

---

Hmm, but what if it's hurting individual airline businesses? Shouldn't each airline have the right to choose if they want to screen their passengers? I'm sure if there was an airline that proposed a "no new scanners" policy a certain percentage of people would be filling up those flights.

But individual airlines don't control and regulate the airspace over this country. They basically use the airways much like we as individuals use the road system.

Both are regulated and have rules governing them.

One of the regulations for use is the security measures that are put in place at the terminals.

Again.. much of the regulations restrict your freedom.. but as illustrated by the very safety numbers that Air travel boasts.. the ATC system is effective... and part of their responsibilities are safety and security. Been that that for decades and decades.

The costs of airtravel are hurting the businesses far more than the inconvenience of the additional security.

I am going to Florida in June.. the cost of roundtrip tickets for 5 and rental car made the choice for me.. I will drive the trip. Security had no role in the choice.

---

It's a given that air travel is a choice and not a right. However, I'm still not sure how much I agree with the idea that you should lose your right to privacy simply because it's privately regulated.

Like Zombie mentioned how would other places hold up with these restrictions? What if high schools started putting in these scanners? Or private venues that put on shows? Could they get away with requesting a naked photo of you before you enjoy the show?

Although air space is federally regulated you can still buy a plane, get your flying license and fly around without anyone scanning your body and rooting through all your belongings. You can even go to a private plane company and pay for a pilot to fly just you and a few other people around without subjecting yourself to any of the TSA security measures.

I do understand that the TSA regulated airlines fly thousands more people daily than private entities. However, if the TSA's reasoning behind their new measures is improved national security it's complete bull. A smokescreen.

I'm also interested in the TSA's privacy policy. Do they know who you are when they scan you? How long are these scanned pictures saved? I'm sure they have to store them and track them in case something does happen. Isn't that the biggest invasion privacy there? I mean, I wouldn't care too much if a couple dudes have to look at my junk before I get on a plane. Yes, I think it's a complete invasion of my moral right to bodily privacy but I could handle the potential embarrassment just to get on a plane. But if they keep the pictures? That's way overboard. I don't want to know that there's a picture of my junk floating around in the governments archives. If anything it's turning us into more of a police state without legitimate reason.

I went to Best Buy on Saturday to purchase some AV equipment that were closing out..

Inside Best Buy there are literally close to a what 30 or 40 security cameras, a scanner to get out the door and two guards/associates that stand by the exit. The security center in the store have two full time agents that watch the cameras in the store and outside the store at all times.

Is that the privacy in which you speak?

My point is simply this, there are freedom costs that you sacrifice to enter that store.. or any retail store of its ilk these days.

And there purpose is much less great than an attempt to make a service safer.. it is to protect their interests.

If the scanner at the door goes off.. you will be detained and searched. If you don't believe.. try taking something out the door with a tag on it. lol.

Again..I disagree with the scanners as being overkill and unnecessary.. but that doesn't mean that I think there should be no security measures in place.

The amount and type are the debate... not it if it against your rights, because once again, you know the process before you purchase the ticket. The scanners screens are not made for public viewing so there are levels of privacy taken.. but I too wonder about the policies surrounding the process of those watching the monitors.

Personally I couldn't work for the TSA as I would be uncomfortable with adhering to the policies of the current scanner mentality and the mindset that folks are guilty by default.

Hell I disagree with all forms of monitoring by others of me.. in a perfect world I would love to be free of all of them. But because a portion of my fellow man can't be rightfully trusted, I will have to deal with some of it.

But again.. I choose to live where I live partially because it is a more relaxed life than in others portions of the country.

Back to my freedoms and those that take them away from me, I blame a portion of my fellow man for that, as they are the ones that drive the creation of such monitoring devices.. the freedom I want is to have a system that passes judgment upon those and hands a rightful and lasting sentence to them.. one that would set an example and deter others from even attempting something like such.

Thus rendering the need for such monitoring actions that impose upon my freedoms unnecessary. And I am not talking about incarceration.. something with teeth.

---

IMO there are two rights being infringed by scanning and whatnot. Not just one.

Shawn, I expect you and I are going to disagree on the right of travel one forever or until I end up in Leavenworth or similar from sassing a TSA drone. So put that one aside.

What about the right against unreasonable search and seizure in our persons and property?

Can any local cop search the trunk of my car when I drive into their town on the theory that it's possible for a terrorist to make a bomb out of there car? On the theory that I've somehow consented to regular search because I'm using a public highway rather than driving without permission through my neighbor's corn fields to work every day?

Can any local cop search my house every day on the theory that there are some people out there, right now, making bombs and planning terrorist activities, in houses somewhere in America?

The fact of the matter is that the TSA searches millions of people and their bags every bloody day. Without a warrant. Without a demonstration of anything remotely resembling probable cause (or even "clear and present danger") against the individual being searched or against the owner of the property being searched.

All they have -- ALL THEY HAVE -- is the likelihood that, somewhere out there, there are bad people who will do bad things that kill people with extreme prejudice.

IMO, if Patrick Henry and Tom Paine and Sam Adams heard the rationalizations we give to ourselves in the name of safety, they'd shake their heads with disgust...and double their orders of tar and feathers.

I'm not advocating such.

But I won't be at all surprised when it happens. People where I work like to scoff and sneer and laugh at the tea partiers. All while having no idea just how tame the Sarah Palins and Glenn Becks are compared to the real Tea Partiers of the 1770s. And compared to the real Tea Partiers bubbling underground out there.

There are a hell of a lot more Tories around today than there were in 1776. The revolution that's coming may end with the extermination of the wolves rather than of the sheep -- there's an awful lot of sheep out there -- but its still going to come. And when it comes, it's going to be very messy.

In my opinion the likelihood that we'll see repeated "incidents" at security checkpoints, some of which turn very ugly, even mob-like, is far greater than we'll see repeated "saves" by TSA procedures.

I don't expect to be around them. I've already decided to drive to my only spring conference this year (in Ohio), and I've decided that I'm going to fly as seldom as possible in the future.

And I certainly won't be causing them. I'm too much of a sheep myself to go public with my anger.

But there are wolves out there.

And they're tired of living on diseased rabbits.

Real messiness is coming.

---