being sued for objecting to sexually intrusive scans

Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Previous topic | Next topic

just-me
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Mar 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,178

26 Nov 2010, 7:33 pm

NathansMommy wrote:

just-me wrote:

NathansMommy wrote:

I personally have no problem with the body scan. I would prefer it over a patdown. If i'm about to jump on an airplane with some weirdo with a knife strapped under his... you get the point, I would rather he be caught at security than let on the plane to go crazy on innocent people. If it means that ten million innocent travelers have to be subjected to body scans or patdowns just to catch the one person who has sinister plans, i'm fine with it. I totally agree that it might be humiliating and uncomfortable for some people, and that it is an invasion of privacy, but I would rather let someone look at a three second personal scan of me than be put in a potentionally dangerous situation.

well using that logic i think the government should also keep cameras and audio surveillance in every room in your house including your bathroom. I know having a camera in your bathroom is a little invasive but its to keep you safe.

After all someone might break in and harm you or your family. they might have a gun. and dont worry the video of you in the shower wont be viewed by anyone other then the government employees keeping you safe. that's not at all like 1984 is it....

I don't agree to your argument on this one. I don't think it really applies to the topic. We are talking about flying, not what goes on in a private residence. At my home, I am responsible for my safety and the safety of my family. I can decide if I want to add extra locks to my doors, bar my windows, use a home security/monitoring system or keep a gun if I feel it necessary. I can also choose to not do any of these things. If I choose to buy a home and make it my own, I can decide what I want to do with it. It would be my own property; my own private residence. I don't agree that government surveillance of someone's home would be a safety measure and I don't feel it necessary.

It's the same as with my car. I wear seatbelts. I make sure my son is properly in his booster seat with his belt on. If a friend asked me to give them a ride somewhere and I agreed, then they got in my car and didn't buckle up, I would ask them to do so. If they refused, I could easily tell them I’m not going to give them a ride. At that point, I would feel that this is my car and I am the one driving it. It is my responsibility to ensure the safety of everyone in the car. If they refused to put their belt on after I told them they must do so in order for me to give them a ride, I would refuse to take them. Plain and simple: my car, my rules. If you don't like it, you don't have to drive with me.

I think this is the same type of thing that is going on with the airports. They are trying to ensure the safety of all airport employees and passengers; however I agree that the way things are currently going could use some revision.

When it comes to airport security, I’m not saying "Yes, this is definitely the way to do things! No changes needed. Make this permanent." I'm just saying that I personally do not feel that it is as extreme as some people think. Have any of you ever gone to a concert or big festival? Well, I have been to many. They don't do body scans, but they sometimes do pat downs. That is what most of these clips I see on the news channels about the airport security checks remind me of. Nothing perverted, no groping. And I have yet to see anyone being told to strip down naked while someone snapped pictures and poked and prodded their nude bodies.

I am not an argumentative person and I am not trying to void anyone else's opinion of these scans, I am just stating how I feel. If you disagree, that's perfectly fine.

My point with that was to point out it is an invasion of privacy. an invasion done to protect you. but where do we draw the line?

If we keep implementing more security every time there is a terrorist attack then we may end up with it everywhere. after all they dont just target airplains. they target buses, subways and streets in big city's.

btw they have strip searched people. here they are doing it to a 3 year old. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjS4ZxZ7jic[/youtube]

And here they are pulling a mans pants down.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvODHCNTCiY[/youtube]

I dont want to argue with you either i just wanted to explain to you my point of view. we can agree to disagree but i just wanted to show you why i think it is very over invasive.

Either way your entitled to your own opinions.

Last edited by just-me on 26 Nov 2010, 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

26 Nov 2010, 7:50 pm

The only odd thing in here is the lawsuit. Not allowing the guy in because he is too paranoid to trust x-rays' safety or is self-centered enough to think that the cops want to see the completely unerotic result that the x-ray would yield from his body is non-sense.

X-rays at airports are an utter waste of money and of time. But they are not a plot to kill you nor to see you nakid.

Inuyasha wrote:

Yeah, but just wait till the new Congress comes to town,

hahahahahahahahahahaha :lol:

hahahahahahahahahahaha

_________________
.

Mainichi
Velociraptor

Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 461
Location: Texas

26 Nov 2010, 8:18 pm

The TSA needs to excludes the elderly, children, people with disabilities and medical conditions from the pat downs.
If you have a Latex allergy, are you excluded from a pat dowsns? The tsa employees were latex gloves and it could be life threatening for people with latex allergies

The Israeli Airport security works much better. They are not afraid to use racial profiling and it works.

NathansMommy
Raven
Raven

Joined: 30 Aug 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 117
Location: Northeast Oklahoma, USA

27 Nov 2010, 12:22 pm

just-me - I definitely agree that the videos you posted show obvious injustices and abuse of power. These people are taking it to the extreme. My personal stance is still that I don't *personally* mind if I have to go through a body scanner or a simple pat down, but these people who are strip searching babies and throwing people to the ground really make me sick. I think they are going beyond protocol; however if protocol gives security the "right" to strip people and verbal/physically abuse them, I am not ok with that. They are taking this to a completely different level that is beyond an efficient security check. I totally see where you are coming from. I am all for thorough screenings to make sure all passengers are safe when flying, but in the instances you showed, I find no need for things to go as far as they did.

And trust me, I am all for civil disagreements!

just-me
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Mar 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,178

27 Nov 2010, 3:12 pm

NathansMommy wrote:

I dont mind going through security checks either as long as they are reasonable. My hope is that they find a better way to search people, that is not as demeaning, or invasive.

NathansMommy wrote:

but these people who are strip searching babies and throwing people to the ground really make me sick. I think they are going beyond protocol; however if protocol gives security the "right" to strip people and verbal/physically abuse them, I am not ok with that. They are taking this to a completely different level that is beyond an efficient security check. I totally see where you are coming from. I am all for thorough screenings to make sure all passengers are safe when flying, but in the instances you showed, I find no need for things to go as far as they did.

And trust me, I am all for civil disagreements!

I wonder if the tsa agents who do these things get any sort of punishment for there actions? i think there should be some sort of system in place that keeps the tsa agents in line. keeps them from abusing there power and makes them accountable for there actions.

just-me
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Mar 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,178

27 Nov 2010, 3:15 pm

Mainichi wrote:

You bring up a very good point. do they have any special procedure for people with latex allergies? i wonder ... :?:

jojobean
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk

28 Nov 2010, 6:01 am

I will give you guys a hint...this has nothing to do with security

_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin

Beauty_pact
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Age: 143
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,314
Location: Svíþjoð

28 Nov 2010, 8:46 pm

jojobean wrote:

I will give you guys a hint...this has nothing to do with security

It has to do with fear.

Fear, uncertainty, doubt... an excellent way to control the population.

Is that what you refer to? If so, I agree. I have a lot to say about this, but very few would take me seriously, nor anyone else who would say the same things.

jojobean
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk

30 Nov 2010, 2:31 am

Beauty_pact wrote:

jojobean wrote:

I will give you guys a hint...this has nothing to do with security

something along those lines. ya. Those who thought I was just a nut are starting to believe me more. I say we have less than 3 years before all hell breaks loose in the US.

_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin

Beauty_pact
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Age: 143
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,314
Location: Svíþjoð

08 Feb 2011, 5:22 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Mindslave wrote:

The state can do whatever it wants to.

Yeah, but just wait till the new Congress comes to town, you can bet the people sueing American Citizens are going to end up wanting to have lawyers before the end of this.

There is apparently already a hearing scheduled in the Senate

http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index ... splay=2010

Don't expect much of it, but you can expect something to happen in House come January.

Did something happen in January? Or was it just all talk?

Nosirrom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: Inside my cranium.

09 Feb 2011, 3:02 am

Unfortunately. A person with ASC will say there is no sexual implications. NT's however are notorious for being messed up in the head and will probably exploit people sexually in these scenarios.

I think it is disgusting that this man is being sued.

I think that any person that tries to smuggle a bomb onto a plane is stupid. There are more people in the airport than on the plane. Seriously. I don't understand why they would want the plane itself. If someone could point the reason to me. As far as I can tell, if they wanted to kill people there are easier ways.

Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Jump to:

being sued for objecting to sexually intrusive scans Post Reply New Topic

being sued for objecting to sexually intrusive scans