Poll
Question:
Airport Body Scanners - What would you do?
Option 1: To through it.
votes: 16
Option 2: Avoid it.
votes: 5
Recently we've had to travel a good bit and we came face to face with the infamous body scanner at the airport. Though there are mixed feelings about both privacy and radiation exposure, I was personally very adamant about going through it. Fortunately, each time we flew, we managed to avoid it by being in the right place and in the right line. If it had come down to it, I would have opted for the pat-down rather than go through the body scanner - but neither of us was flagged for one on any of our recent trips
The whole experience just got me wondering what most people would prefer given all the hoop-la about them.
Case in point: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/03/tsa-radiation-test-bungling/ (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/03/tsa-radiation-test-bungling/)
I'll take that pat-down. It's no more degrading, and I can avoid some radiation in my life.
I've been picked for the whole extra-special-searching before and I'll be flying in a couple weeks, so we'll get to see if I have the chance. [roll]
To through it
wait... so hard to tell in that horribly written article, but the bungled tests showed ten times more radiation than what the machines actually are because they didn't DIVIDE by ten? Not that the machines are ten times worse than what tests showed...
I fly like 4 times a year... just do whatever gets me through faster and lets me deal with fewer idiots.
Xray, I'll go pat down.
mmWave, I'll go thru. I personally promise they are safe :-X
I just go wherever directed. I only fly 5-6 times per year though. I've went through it once since they've been introduced.
Do the pat down.
From now on, I will go to the airport with a 16" squash or cucumber in my shorts, something absurd.
And wear this shirt:
(http://www.snorgtees.com/media/catalog/product/d/o/donttouchmy_fullpic.jpg)
[laugh]
For me personally, it's the unnecessarily addition and ultimately cumulative dosage of radiation that you get. I know we get low doses of radiation from all sorts of things daily, and I'm all for airline safety, but this just seems a bit too much risk for passengers.
I'll be curious to see if cancer increases over the next 10 years.
Just wear a set of pants and some underwear you don't care about and proceed to piss yourself as they pat you down. [thumbsup]
That'll learn them.
Quote from: lethe on May 04, 2011, 10:29:12 AM
Just wear a set of pants and some underwear you don't care about and proceed to piss yourself as they pat you down. [thumbsup]
That'll learn them.
and eat a pound of asparagus before
Go through it and stand proud. 8)
In that article, there was a link to the TSA's website on their testing procedures.
What I find amusing, assuming the TSA's number are correct, is that you're going to be subjected to WAY more radiation on the flight than going through the body scan device.
* One year of naturally occurring background radiation: 300 millirem
* Annual recommended limit to the public of radiation from man-made sources: 100 millirem
* Chest X-ray: 10 millirem
* Flight from New York to Los Angeles: 4 millirem
* One day of natural background: approximately 1 millirem
* Drinking three glasses of water a day for a year: 0.045 millirem
* One backscatter X-ray screening: approximately 0.005 millirem
http://www.tsa.gov/research/reading/xray_screening_technology_safety_reports.shtm (http://www.tsa.gov/research/reading/xray_screening_technology_safety_reports.shtm)
FTR...I fly a lot. I go whichever path they tell me.
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on May 04, 2011, 11:54:37 AM
In that article, there was a link to the TSA's website on their testing procedures.
What I find amusing, assuming the TSA's number are correct, is that you're going to be subjected to WAY more radiation on the flight than going through the body scan device.
* One year of naturally occurring background radiation: 300 millirem
* Annual recommended limit to the public of radiation from man-made sources: 100 millirem
* Chest X-ray: 10 millirem
* Flight from New York to Los Angeles: 4 millirem
* One day of natural background: approximately 1 millirem
* Drinking three glasses of water a day for a year: 0.045 millirem
* One backscatter X-ray screening: approximately 0.005 millirem
http://www.tsa.gov/research/reading/xray_screening_technology_safety_reports.shtm (http://www.tsa.gov/research/reading/xray_screening_technology_safety_reports.shtm)
FTR...I fly a lot. I go whichever path they tell me.
that's assuming the scanner machine works properly and is configured properly. apparently, they've been fudging their inspections on them.
moreover, you can't avoid the radiation in the plane. you CAN avoid the radiation from the scanner (by refusing it)
Quote from: ducatiz on May 04, 2011, 11:56:34 AM
that's assuming the scanner machine works properly and is configured properly. apparently, they've been fudging their inspections on them.
moreover, you can't avoid the radiation in the plane. you CAN avoid the radiation from the scanner (by refusing it)
Yes, I'm assuming the assumptions are correct. You may have noticed that in my post.
But the point is that you'd need to go through the scanner 800 times to equal the exposure of 1 cross country flight.
Again, assuming that everything is accurate as stated.
Even so, why voluntarily add extra radiation to yourself if you can avoid it??
(http://images.wikia.com/hulk/images/e/e2/Incredible_hulk.jpg)
...you never know... [roll]
Quote from: Monster Dave on May 04, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
Even so, why voluntarily add extra radiation to yourself if you can avoid it??
...you never know... [roll]
I guess we should stop drinking water then too. It has a higher radiation content than the scanner (again, assuming that the information the TSA has posted is correct).
I saw the movie Scanners back in the 70s and there is no way I'll let a scanner have a piece of me. Having my head blow up would just ruin my flight. :-\ ??? ???
Quote from: akmnstr on May 04, 2011, 12:50:12 PM
I saw the movie Scanners back in the 70s and there is no way I'll let a scanner have a piece of me. Having my head blow up would just ruin my flight. :-\ ??? ???
[laugh]
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on May 04, 2011, 12:49:11 PM
I guess we should stop drinking water then too. It has a higher radiation content than the scanner (again, assuming that the information the TSA has posted is correct).
Now lets not over react. It's a legitimate question. Nothing here has been alarmist in anyway.
Besides, I'd be far more concerned about the water from my tap being unsanitary and poisoning me than anything else!!
Not overreacting.
I already said I go through them if they ask me to.
get a nice raging hardon and then get scanned
air travel is so disgusting now anyway...
deregulation and terrorism saw to that
sure scan me
unfortunately I am old enough to remember
how nice it once was
Quote from: RAT900 on May 04, 2011, 01:36:51 PM
unfortunately I am old enough to remember
how nice it once was
I agree. It used to be so nice to be able to not have to worry, for your loved ones to be able to walk you to the gate, but I think most of all I miss the observation decks that airports used to have to watch planes take off.
Quote from: Monster Dave on May 04, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
Even so, why voluntarily add extra radiation to yourself if you can avoid it??
(http://images.wikia.com/hulk/images/e/e2/Incredible_hulk.jpg)
...you never know... [roll]
or worse:
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_QHiSwVmo2lg/THmd3mnTHjI/AAAAAAAABHo/sYFK9wlLIwE/s400/snookie.jpg)
Quote from: Raux on May 04, 2011, 01:24:12 PM
get a nice raging hardon and then get scanned
I had the same idea, but for the pat down. Maybe some inflatable fake one that gets bigger the more they pat you.
I spend too much time thinking about shit to pull on TSA. I've come close a couple of times to losing it and getting cuffed and spread. I just have this problem with authority.
Quote from: akmnstr on May 04, 2011, 01:42:28 PM
I had the same idea, but for the pat down. Maybe some inflatable fake one that gets bigger the more they pat you.
I spend too much time thinking about shit to pull on TSA. I've come close a couple of times to losing it and getting cuffed and spread. I just have this problem with authority.
they aren't going to cuff you for having a dildo in your shorts. you might end up in someone's fantasy workout, but not cuffed as long as you comply.
It's a lot faster to go through the scan. They will either violate you manually or with minuscule amounts of radiation. I get more radiation by standing in front of my microwave.
An alternative is to not fly at all.
Quote from: duccarlos on May 04, 2011, 01:49:30 PM
It's a lot faster to go through the scan. They will either violate you manually or with minuscule amounts of radiation. I get more radiation by standing in front of my microwave.
An alternative is to not fly at all.
Microwave radiation is not the same. Neither is Radio wave radiation or cel phone radiation or light bulb radiation.
Xray radiation is a different beast altogether.
like the last post says, if you don't like it don't fly.
that is what everyone seems to always say about everything, "if you don't like the rules of the forum, leave and make your own but you can't criticize it" ,etc.
so why should the tsa and body scanners be any different, they should just make it simple, you do this or you don't fly simple as that, no if ands or buts in the equation.
ooh wait is that a bit draconian and rigid? hmmm funny how people suddenly want to bend or break rules if they don't agree with them and will try to justify how the rule is no longer valid, etc., see the saying of "if you don't like, make your own" isn't always as clear cut or even feasible.
Quote from: ducatiz on May 04, 2011, 01:44:29 PM
they aren't going to cuff you for having a dildo in your shorts. you might end up in someone's fantasy workout, but not cuffed as long as you comply.
The almost being cuffed thing has to do with my temper tantrums and nothing to do with dildos yet. I'm just a grumpy old fart that annoys everyone. Based on what you say, that a dildo won't get me cuffed, I may just have to try it.
I fly a lot for work and have yet to encounter a scanner. I haven't decided yet what I'll do when I encounter one.
Quote from: akmnstr on May 04, 2011, 01:58:01 PM
The almost being cuffed thing has to do with my temper tantrums and nothing to do with dildos yet. I'm just a grumpy old fart that annoys everyone. Based on what you say, that a dildo won't get me cuffed, I may just have to try it.
I fly a lot for work and have yet to encounter a scanner. I haven't decided yet what I'll do when I encounter one.
they may not be able to cuff you, but i'm sure like all things in life, they can make your life a living hell for a few hours enough to make you forever remember it and miss your flight at the very least if you come off as a smart a$$
Quote from: akmnstr on May 04, 2011, 01:58:01 PM
The almost being cuffed thing has to do with my temper tantrums and nothing to do with dildos yet. I'm just a grumpy old fart that annoys everyone. Based on what you say, that a dildo won't get me cuffed, I may just have to try it.
I fly a lot for work and have yet to encounter a scanner. I haven't decided yet what I'll do when I encounter one.
yeah, they've had people show up with all kinds of prankish behavior. as long as they complied, they were fine.
i thought about trying to get my wife to wear a strap on to the airport, but she would hit me with a brick for suggesting it .. she's a bit more straightlaced than me.
Quote from: ducatiz on May 04, 2011, 02:00:48 PM
yeah, they've had people show up with all kinds of prankish behavior. as long as they complied, they were fine.
i thought about trying to get my wife to wear a strap on to the airport, but she would hit me with a brick for suggesting it .. she's a bit more straightlaced than me.
[laugh]
I have little choice in the matter. I need to fly once in a while, but not so much that this dosage of radiation will be a problem. So I will choose the convenient way to get through security. If having a 50 year old dude grab my junk gets me through the line quicker, then go for it.
Quote from: duccarlos on May 04, 2011, 02:04:01 PM
I have little choice in the matter. I need to fly once in a while, but not so much that this dosage of radiation will be a problem. So I will choose the convenient way to get through security. If having a 50 year old dude grab my junk gets me through the line quicker, then go for it.
what if he's wearing a clown suit and taking pictures of you?
Quote from: ducatiz on May 04, 2011, 02:06:18 PM
what if he's wearing a clown suit and taking pictures of you?
then you just pretend it's your birthday
"Castillo complained about her treatment at the Dallas airport, saying a TSA agent touched her "vagina" four times during a pat-down."
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42877532/ (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42877532/)
Quote from: Raux on May 04, 2011, 01:24:12 PM
get a nice raging hardon and then get scanned
This.
Makes for an awkward moment or two with the patdown folks also. Accompanied by a wink or two.
Quote from: kopfjäger on May 04, 2011, 02:23:28 PM
"Castillo complained about her treatment at the Dallas airport, saying a TSA agent touched her "vagina" four times during a pat-down."
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42877532/ (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42877532/)
Quotehow far will the TSA go, asking “Are rectal exams in our future?â€
Actually for most men, they are. But not at the airport
Quote from: kopfjäger on May 04, 2011, 02:23:28 PM
"Castillo complained about her treatment at the Dallas airport, saying a TSA agent touched her "vagina" four times during a pat-down."
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42877532/ (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42877532/)
the article doesn't mention that she's actually 650 lbs and touching her "vagina" is hard to avoid
Its all a waste of time
as suicide bombers will just get more sophisticated in their delivery systems
a walking human with surgically implanted C4 or whatever new designer plastic explosives are on the market,
a laptop with a good battery in it
and a pair of wire leads coming out of their "pacemaker" can't be that far ahead on the horizon
Quote from: ducatiz on May 04, 2011, 02:41:46 PM
the article doesn't mention that she's actually 650 lbs and touching her "vagina" is hard to avoid
her vagine...start to hang loose like sleeve of wizard
Quote from: RAT900 on May 04, 2011, 02:47:12 PM
Its all a waste of time
as suicide bombers will just get more sophisticated in their delivery systems
a walking human with surgically implanted C4 or whatever new designer plastic explosives are on the market,
a laptop with a good battery in it
and a pair of wire leads coming out of their "pacemaker" can't be that far ahead on the horizon
ever the optimist
Do you have any good uplifting predictions for the weather as well? [cheeky]
I'll drive. I'm also thinking about finally getting my pilots license, so I can use my dad's C172.
Another reason to refuse the "Security Theatre" lines: "Airport passenger screener charged in distributing child pornography"
(http://articles.philly.com/2011-04-23/news/29466700_1_tsa-spokeswoman-ann-davis-child-pornography-federal-agents)
(http://media.philly.com/images/600*450/20110423_inq_tsa23z-a.JPG)
Quote from: kopfjäger on May 04, 2011, 02:23:28 PM
"Castillo complained about her treatment at the Dallas airport, saying a TSA agent touched her "vagina" four times during a pat-down."
Why is vagina in quotes? Are we not sure that's what it really is?
Quote from: lethe on May 04, 2011, 02:53:32 PM
ever the optimist
Do you have any good uplifting predictions for the weather as well? [cheeky]
Ambrose Bierce, from the Devils Dictionary
OPTIMISM, n.
The doctrine, or belief, that everything is beautiful, including what is ugly, everything good, especially the bad, and everything right that is wrong. It is held with greatest tenacity by those most accustomed to the mischance of falling into adversity, and is most acceptably expounded with the grin that apes a smile. Being a blind faith, it is inaccessible to the light of disproof -- an intellectual disorder, yielding to no treatment but death. It is hereditary, but fortunately not contagious.
CYNIC, n.
A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Quote from: RAT900 on May 04, 2011, 02:59:17 PM
Ambrose Bierce, from the Devils Dictionary
OPTIMISM, n.
The doctrine, or belief, that everything is beautiful, including what is ugly, everything good, especially the bad, and everything right that is wrong. It is held with greatest tenacity by those most accustomed to the mischance of falling into adversity, and is most acceptably expounded with the grin that apes a smile. Being a blind faith, it is inaccessible to the light of disproof -- an intellectual disorder, yielding to no treatment but death. It is hereditary, but fortunately not contagious.
CYNIC, n.
A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Stay away from Asia, they are searching you out as your eyes are prized for their bitter flavor.
Quote from: zarn02 on May 04, 2011, 02:56:41 PM
Why is vagina in quotes? Are we not sure that's what it really is?
Well.....she did weigh over 600 pounds.
Quote from: lethe on May 04, 2011, 03:13:19 PM
Stay away from Asia, they are searching you out as your eyes are prized for their bitter flavor.
;D
Quote from: ducatiz on May 04, 2011, 02:41:46 PM
the article doesn't mention that she's actually 650 lbs and touching her "vagina" is hard to avoid
I guess you didn't see the video. That's a fine looking 650.
Quote from: kopfjäger on May 04, 2011, 04:18:44 PM
I guess you didn't see the video. That's a fine looking 650.
oh THAT suzie castillo!
Changes may be upcoming for frequent or "trusted" travelers:
http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/112680/frequent-fliers-security-speed-wsj?mod=bb-budgeting (http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/112680/frequent-fliers-security-speed-wsj?mod=bb-budgeting)
I'm not sure if that's inviting trouble though or not.
"I know! Lets let the government ENGINEER common sense!"
[thumbsup]
we're all so screwed in this [leo] state.
Quote from: avizpls on May 06, 2011, 11:36:23 AM
"I know! Lets let the government ENGINEER common sense!"
[thumbsup]
we're all so screwed in this [leo] state.
let's not get this locked with political editorials okay?
For those arguing about the radiation-this particular type is concentrated on the skin, not throughout the whole body like what you'd experience on the plane. The TSA does not allow it's employees to have radiation monitors, so no one actually knows if anything is malfunctioning.
Some third party estimates based on the figures they did release indicate that TSA will kill nearly another 9/11 per year with this backscatter bullshit. Lucky for them, it'll take 10-15 years, and you'll never be able to prove it.
Take the pat down, people.
Quote from: MrIncredible on May 06, 2011, 04:19:05 PM
For those arguing about the radiation-this particular type is concentrated on the skin, not throughout the whole body...
How can radiation only be limited to the skin?
Quote from: Monster Dave on May 06, 2011, 04:25:53 PM
How can radiation only be limited to the skin?
A lot has to do with the type. The experts at UCSF wrote a letter of concern:
http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf (http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf)