Recent travelers, what has your airport security experience been like?

[Cruiser 4 Life 66]

To those of you who think that being groped as if you were a prison inmate just to get on a plane or backscatter x-ray machines make you safer: Last week's incendiary packages were on CARGO PLANES -- which have nothing to do with passenger aircraft. Second of all, in terms of safety, you might consider what a group of scientists wishes to bring to the attention of the Administration:

Look, we all want to feel safe when we travel. But there is a difference between actual security and "security theatre." Airport security is done in reactive mode, under the assumption that terrorists are always going to repeat what they did before.

 

Our last president was half right when he said, "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we." Yes, terrorists ARE innovative and resourceful. But so far all we have done is try to plug holes after they have sprung instead of preventing them in the first place.

 

Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who would trade liberty for temporary security deserve neither." Life is full of dangers. I drive two major highways in New Jersey just to get to work every day. The chances of me becoming a red splotch on the pavement on Route 46 are far greater than of being killed by terrorists on an airplane. By all means, let's be vigilant. But strip-searching every air passenger or groping them (and who's going to screen potential TSA employees to make sure they are not pedophiles or sex criminals?) is just security theatre.

 

Oh, there have been many found who are both pedophiles and sex criminals.

 

This one legally groped kids at the airport then raped kids when he was off duty:

 

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20100310child_rape_charge_rocks_tsa_logan_employee_pats_down_air_travelers_at_scan_stations/

 

To you people making comments that this is no big deal, are you comfortable letting pedophile TSA agents grope your kid's genitals? If so, maybe you need to be locked up too.

[iancal]

I think that the larger issue is cargo. It does not make much sense to me to inspect the passengers, the checked baggage, but NOT the cargo notwithstanding the preclearance of shippers. Perhaps I am missing something or am not privy to all of the security precautions relating to cargo.

[Rutland Gate]

Der TSA employees ist only following orders!

[Old As Dirt Mom]

Here is why my familiy and I won't be flying anytime soon:

 

 

TSA screener accosts 3-year-old child at security checkpoint

[RuthC]

Here is why my familiy and I won't be flying anytime soon:

That is so upsetting to watch. As an adult I can understand the process (not necessarily the reasoning, but rather what I am supposed to do), but a child does not have the ability to do that.

There has got to be a way to introduce some sense to this whole process.

[Rutland Gate]

I made a rather flip posting earlier about "Der TSA Employees", but I have to add that this blanket disrespect for Americans by our own US government is alarming. I am a 100% totally and permanently disabled veteran from my contributions during the Vietnam War. I get along quite well with the use of a cane and the Veterans' Administration has provided me with the absolute best of care. That allowed me to become a Vice President of a Fortune Five company before my retirement. After I retired I went back into National Service working for a company which supplied 33,000 Pentagon workers with emergency escape masks and trained them in their use. (All were very cooperative and attentive, as most had been there on 9/11 when the plane hit.) Now I have a Department of Defense Identity Card as a Captain in the Army retired on disability, a Veterans Administration Card identifying me as totally and permanently combat disabled, a Pentagon entry pass (they told me to hold on to it if I was ever called back to give my classes again). None of this means anything to TSA screeners. I am singled out and embarassed by intrusive hand inspections of my body because I can't raise my arms to go through the xray machines. I'm tired of it and I would like someone in Government to make sense and get rid of the extreme people who seek to intimidate normal people, not only from the US, but from our many loyal allies. The normal people are not so hard to identify. And by the way, the TSA has yet to find a significant peril.

[cruisemom42]

To those of you who think that being groped as if you were a prison inmate just to get on a plane or backscatter x-ray machines make you safer: Last week's incendiary packages were on CARGO PLANES -- which have nothing to do with passenger aircraft. Second of all, in terms of safety, you might consider what a group of scientists wishes to bring to the attention of the Administration:

Look, we all want to feel safe when we travel. But there is a difference between actual security and "security theatre." Airport security is done in reactive mode, under the assumption that terrorists are always going to repeat what they did before.

 

 

Sigh......once again, the same small group of scientists that have already been mentioned multiple times in this thread. It would be almost funny if it wasn't a little sad. Do people even read what others post?

 

I am certainly no advocate of accepting what I'm told at face value. I research anything that's important to me as well as I'm able. I wish others would do the same before making snap judgements and inflammatory statements.

 

Our security system is woefully imperfect, of that I'm sure. On the other hand, no one has flown any planes into buildings since security was stepped up. And the thought did cross my mind that the would-be terrorists used a cargo plane to try to ship their "bombs" because they felt it wouldn't be possible to do so on passenger planes given the additional security.....

[world~citizen]

"[sigh......once again, the same small group of scientists that have already been mentioned multiple times in this thread. It would be almost funny if it wasn't a little sad. Do people even read what others post? "

 

Its not the number of concerned academics, it is the quality of concerns they represent.

 

"I am certainly no advocate of accepting what I'm told at face value. I research anything that's important to me as well as I'm able."

 

Not many people do, and I applaud you for this...

"I wish others would do the same before making snap judgements and inflammatory statements."

 

What makes you so sure they don't? BTW, "snap judgement" and "inflamatory comment" seem an unnecessarily aggressive manner with which to express your concerns.

 

"Our security system is woefully imperfect, of that I'm sure. On the other hand, no one has flown any planes into buildings since security was stepped up. ....."

 

The offensive weapons were box cutters, allowed under old regulations I am made to understand, but not now.

 

I have not been discourteous in my observations as you have been to others because I know you are sincere. There are a number of legitimate concerns made by thoughtful people who have spent their lives in the industry, and my experience with (but not in) the industry suggests they should be given due consideration.

 

In my view, and this is opinion here, the stakes are too high not to.

 

Certain Senate members have asked for an independent review of the safety issues surrounding these machines. I hope it happens.

 

Smooth sailing...

[world~citizen]

I made a rather flip posting earlier about "Der TSA Employees", but I have to add that this blanket disrespect for Americans by our own US government is alarming. I am a 100% totally and permanently disabled veteran from my contributions during the Vietnam War. I get along quite well with the use of a cane and the Veterans' Administration has provided me with the absolute best of care. That allowed me to become a Vice President of a Fortune Five company before my retirement. After I retired I went back into National Service working for a company which supplied 33,000 Pentagon workers with emergency escape masks and trained them in their use. (All were very cooperative and attentive, as most had been there on 9/11 when the plane hit.) Now I have a Department of Defense Identity Card as a Captain in the Army retired on disability, a Veterans Administration Card identifying me as totally and permanently combat disabled, a Pentagon entry pass (they told me to hold on to it if I was ever called back to give my classes again). None of this means anything to TSA screeners. I am singled out and embarassed by intrusive hand inspections of my body because I can't raise my arms to go through the xray machines. I'm tired of it and I would like someone in Government to make sense and get rid of the extreme people who seek to intimidate normal people, not only from the US, but from our many loyal allies. The normal people are not so hard to identify. And by the way, the TSA has yet to find a significant peril.

 

I am not an American (I am Canadian) but I have to salute your service, the way of life you fought for, your sacrifice and the sentiments expressed on this board.

 

Like you, like all of us, I want strong airport security. I actually feel sorry for the TSA guys on the ground...they are performing their responsibilities as required of them. They take the heat for the policies which I am sure puzzle them as much as us.

 

Smooth sailing to you...

[cruisemom42]

"[sigh......once again, the same small group of scientists that have already been mentioned multiple times in this thread. It would be almost funny if it wasn't a little sad. Do people even read what others post? "

 

Its not the number of concerned academics, it is the quality of concerns they represent.

 

"I am certainly no advocate of accepting what I'm told at face value. I research anything that's important to me as well as I'm able."

 

Not many people do, and I applaud you for this...

 

"I wish others would do the same before making snap judgements and inflammatory statements."

 

What makes you so sure they don't? BTW, "snap judgement" and "inflamatory comment" seem an unnecessarily aggressive manner with which to express your concerns.

 

"Our security system is woefully imperfect, of that I'm sure. On the other hand, no one has flown any planes into buildings since security was stepped up. ....."

 

The offensive weapons were box cutters, allowed under old regulations I am made to understand, but not now.

 

I have not been discourteous in my observations as you have been to others because I know you are sincere. There are a number of legitimate concerns made by thoughtful people who have spent their lives in the industry, and my experience with (but not in) the industry suggests they should be given due consideration.

 

In my view, and this is opinion here, the stakes are too high not to.

 

Certain Senate members have asked for an independent review of the safety issues surrounding these machines. I hope it happens.

 

Smooth sailing...

 

It concerns me because people reading this thread who haven't done any other reading (or followed the previous links given) might not understand it is the same group. People tend to think there is a huge consensus of opinion on these safety concerns, and that simply isn't the truth. Also, as I've previously noted, if you read their concerns in context (not in a publication with a bias), they are relatively modest.

 

I don't understand how your comment about the box cutters relates to what I said. My statement was that security has been stepped up and no planes have been hijacked or exploded by terrorists since then. I realize box cutters weren't contraband in those days. But it would be much more difficult to hijack a plane now than it was then, even if some other weapon was used (increased screening, air marshals, reinforced cockpit doors, etc). We can't be perfect and foresee every type of assault a terrorist could dream up. But we can keep limiting their options more and more.

 

Of course, that entails limiting some of our options as well....

 

Regarding "inflammatory statements" do I really need to go back and quote them throughout this thread? I am still waiting for some backup on your statement that a scanner gives you a blast of radiation that exceeds that of a medical x-ray. Even if, as you restated later, the radiation from the scanner concentrates up to 20 times in the skin (unproven), that still means you'd have to go through a scanner 250 times to equal the radiation from ONE chest x-ray.

 

If I have been discourteous I apologize. I don't think I was except in my initial comment to you, which was meant tongue-in-cheek, sorry if you did not take it so. I am used to writing factually, and perhaps that seems brusque to some.

[cruisemom42]

There's just as much danger to a plane hitting a flock of ducks on take off and and slamming into the ground in a ball of flames - searching little boys underpants won't make that go away, or do you propose we make ducks and little boys illegal too?

 

 

 

Airports are very proactive in regards to keeping birds away from runways. It almost seems like you are suggesting that they don't spend a fair amount of money and manpower in this area, so here are a few news stories with details regarding activities at airports that might be used by cruisers:

 

New York:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/nyregion/03birds.html

 

Tampa: http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/airlines/article968067.ece

 

Seattle: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008638646_webseatacwildlife16m.html

 

 

Just as TSA is very proactive. So.....not sure I understand what point you are making? The threat of hitting a flock of ducks and of being impacted by terrorists can both be reduced with planning and proper tools.

 

As to all the hyperbole by everyone (not just you) about screening grandmas and children -- drug runners have realized for years the benefits of using people who "don't fit the profile" to smuggle substances onto planes. Certainly terrorists can't be far behind....

 

Basically, my feeling is that if you are able to fly, you should be able to withstand a random security screening. Children need to be told in advance what to expect -- just like you would explain to a small child about getting a shot at the doctors office; another unpleasant experience, but a necessary one.

[world~citizen]

It concerns me because people reading this thread who haven't done any other reading ...

 

And there is so much reading to do.

 

My reference to the mandatory chest xray was to indicate the protocol changed with respect to the annual physical examination from every one to every two years to avoid unnecessary exposure to radiation. I was in error. It was changed to every three years.

 

Of course, the point was to draw attention to an even greater debate, to wit: is there really a safe level of exposure to radiation? A great body, and in my view growing body of medical expertise says no.

 

It is not just the same group of people who have raised concern. For example Dr Sarah Burnett, who works as an independent radiologist in London England cautions the scanners may not be safe for certain people, particularly children and women in the early stages of pregnancy. "It is illegal to expose people to any level of radiation without medical justification," she says. More correctly I suppose, it was.

 

She also notes she is particularly concerned about the potential effects on women in their first trimester of pregnancy. That is when the risks of the baby developing genetic abnormalities are highest because radiation exposure can damage the body's reproductive DNA.

 

With respect to my comment that "my understanding" (a qualifying statement) was that radiation exposure was greater than with medical Xrays: from the StudyHealth community:

 

...Because use of the machines is fairly new and there has not been enough time, researchers are not able to make a definitive determination of just how full body scans directly relate to an increased risk of cancer and tumors in people and but will be able to do so at some point in the future.

 

As we have both noted, some have suggested methodological errors in risk calculation focussing around concentration in the skin. Others noted unexpected illness in security guards at Heathrow. As the StudyHealth community suggests, we will see.

 

And as to what happens if the machines malfunction...that is another story - unfortunately also subject to debate.

 

Smooth sailing...

[fatcat04]

Basically, my feeling is that if you are able to fly, you should be able to withstand a random security screening. Children need to be told in advance what to expect -- just like you would explain to a small child about getting a shot at the doctors office; another unpleasant experience, but a necessary one.

 

What to expect.. hmmm. Okay. I am sitting here imagining the conversation I should apparently have had with my nine year old son before a 40 something year old male TSA agent barked at my son to "spread your legs, shoulder width" so the TSA agent could touch my son's genitals and buttocks in the name of national security.

 

And no, we won't be flying any more.

[cruisemom42]

What to expect.. hmmm. Okay. I am sitting here imagining the conversation I should apparently have had with my nine year old son before a 40 something year old male TSA agent barked at my son to "spread your legs, shoulder width" so the TSA agent could touch my son's genitals and buttocks in the name of national security.

 

And no, we won't be flying any more.

 

That is certainly your choice. I'm a mother of a son who has always traveled with me as well, and i'm not unsympathetic to something like that. Perhaps the agent could have been nicer, but then perhaps if I'd explained to my son that there was nothing to fear, just the man doing his job to make sure nothing unsafe got onto the airplane, it wouldn't have been a big deal. Not all touching is sexual in nature. I think people sometimes forget that.

 

If this heightened security had been instituted earlier and I had chosen to stay at home and not fly, my son wouldn't have gotten to be fascinated by the Beefeaters and the Ravens at the Tower of London, or discovered he liked penne a l'arrabiata in Rome, or run through the fountains of Peterhof, or taken a Samurai swordsmanship class in Japan. Priceless memories to me that I don't think I would've wanted to miss out on for a two-minute "pat down" at an airport.

 

No, I don't think they've come anywhere near close to making me want to stop traveling the world. But of course, to each his own level of comfort.

[Cybergoth]

This guy refused to be scanned or patted down in San Diego. He lived to blog about his ordeal. Best quote:

After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, "if you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested."

 

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html

 

 

(I found that on another board: http://forums.whyweprotest.net/7-chit-chat/if-you-touch-my-junk-ill-have-you-arrested-73578/ )

[ironin]

[DizzyDallasDi]

Quote:

After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, "if you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested."

 

So, I'm guessing his junk wasn't touched?

[Alegria-Paz]

Where's your line then, Cruisemom? Being groped by a stranger, even though you are not a criminal and are not suspected of committing a crime does not bother you. Submitting to what equates to a virtual strip search (again, something usually reserved for those who have BROKEN THE LAW) is no problem for you. Well, then, where is your line? Do you not have a line? Are you willing to subject yourself to anything they claim is necessary?? Or is it only when it personally offends your sensibilities that you will stand up for your rights??

 

So, what if the next thing is: Mandatory cavity searches? Mandatory physical strip searches in a back room? Arbitrary detention? Being completely GROUNDED... told that you cannot fly or CRUISE or travel anywhere outside of the country for "security" reasons... no more Peterhof, Rome, Japan... or anywhere!!?? Would you endure it all... no matter what is said is necessary for purposes of national security?? What about when those high school educated TSA folks are ARMED? (I read that TSA is quietly lobbying for law enforcement capabilities). What if, then, your question is taken for resisting arrest and you end up in jail instead of on vacay?

 

When will you & everyone say enough is enough: time to stop the charade at the airport!!! When you wake up and realize that you are living in a police state? By then, I fear it will be too late.

 

We are a free people. We have rights... or used to. It scares me how easily and willingly my fellow Americans hand over our rights ~ just throw them all away.

 

I am heartened by the people here who have expressed their discontent with the decline of civilization as seen in our airports, but we need to put an end to this waste of resources now. Enough is enough!

[ironin]

Quote:So, I'm guessing his junk wasn't touched?

 

No, but a TSA agent did apparently pursue and attempt to detain him outside the security area (at the ticket counter after he'd surrendered his ticket) at which time the agent threatened him with both arrest and a lawsuit seeking a civil fine of $10,000 if he did not immediately return and submit a search anyway.

 

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."~Ben Franklin

[fatcat04]

No, but a TSA agent did apparently pursue and attempt to detain him outside the security area (at the ticket counter after he'd surrendered his ticket) at which time the agent threatened him with both arrest and a lawsuit seeking a civil fine of $10,000 if he did not immediately return and submit a search anyway.

 

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."~Ben Franklin

 

That and when the TSA agent said he "gave up a lot of rights when I bought my ticket." I wonder if they enumerate somewhere on our ticket which of our inalienable rights we have become alienated from due to purchasing passage from point a to point b on a plane? And if they can take those away so blithely, which rights will be next?

[cruisemom42]

Where's your line then, Cruisemom? Being groped by a stranger, even though you are not a criminal and are not suspected of committing a crime does not bother you. Submitting to what equates to a virtual strip search (again, something usually reserved for those who have BROKEN THE LAW) is no problem for you. Well, then, where is your line? Do you not have a line? Are you willing to subject yourself to anything they claim is necessary?? Or is it only when it personally offends your sensibilities that you will stand up for your rights??

 

So, what if the next thing is: Mandatory cavity searches? Mandatory physical strip searches in a back room? Arbitrary detention? Being completely GROUNDED... told that you cannot fly or CRUISE or travel anywhere outside of the country for "security" reasons... no more Peterhof, Rome, Japan... or anywhere!!?? Would you endure it all... no matter what is said is necessary for purposes of national security?? What about when those high school educated TSA folks are ARMED? (I read that TSA is quietly lobbying for law enforcement capabilities). What if, then, your question is taken for resisting arrest and you end up in jail instead of on vacay?

 

When will you & everyone say enough is enough: time to stop the charade at the airport!!! When you wake up and realize that you are living in a police state? By then, I fear it will be too late.

 

We are a free people. We have rights... or used to. It scares me how easily and willingly my fellow Americans hand over our rights ~ just throw them all away.

 

I am heartened by the people here who have expressed their discontent with the decline of civilization as seen in our airports, but we need to put an end to this waste of resources now. Enough is enough!

 

It appears that reasoned debate has fled this thread and is now simply rhetoric. I think this will be my last response here. :cool:

 

I am a fairly frequent traveler. I have been through both the new scanner and the enhanced pat down. I did not feel that I was "groped" (and no sensible person would, assuming the agent followed the procedure). I did not feel that I was subjected to a "virtual strip search". You are simply being inflammatory with this kind of statement.

 

I point you to a small survey on the Air Travel board here at CC in which over 50% of travelers who have responded thus far have "no issues" with the new scanners. It doesn't seem like I'm alone:

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1308966

 

(By the way, it might make interesting reading for those concerned about the radiation levels, given some responses by those in the radiation industry.)

 

Honestly, I don't know what my "line" is. Suffice it to say this doesn't come close. As a young teen I was nearly strip searched flying out of Thailand with my parents. (As it was, the "pat down" was much more thorough than anything I've ever been subjected to in the US. In fact, the search I got in Copenhagen a couple of years ago was also more thorough. But I digress......) It certainly didn't put me off travel.

 

As to rights, the US has a long tradition of deciding that the public good, on occasion, trumps the individual's rights. Smoking regulations, speed limits, seat belt laws, mandatory vaccinations, blood alcohol limits -- all of these trammel our individual rights but promote the greater public good.

 

Again, most travelers have a choice: either the scanner or a pat down. If you object to both of these, then how exactly do YOU propose to keep passengers from bringing items on board planes that could pose a significant danger to the safety of others? It seems like there is a lot of nay-saying, but no one is proposing a better alternative......

[Alegria-Paz]

It amazes me that you are so convinced that TSA prevents people from bringing dangerous items aboard... in fact, we know the contrary is true. We know other countries have used the whole body imaging scanners and rejected them as being ineffectual. We know there were other tools the TSA felt were necessary (remember those puffers - they blew air on you and supposedly detected bombs) which ended up breaking and being deemed ineffective... and wasting loads of money. Those machines are long gone from the airports -- in a landfill somewhere, I guess. There is no proof that anything the TSA has done since 9/11 has thwarted any attack (using the fact that no attacks have occurred is faulty logic).

 

I love how it's up to you what is or is not reasoned debate. Just like it's up to your opinion what is acceptable in US airports. Well, it's not up to you or anyone. We have rights as Americans... read the Constitution if you are unclear on this. Your opinion really doesn't matter here... nor does mine. You can believe in your rights as outlined in the Constitution... as an American citizen... or not. But, they still exist. (Until they are stripped from us). In other words, surveys or public opinion polls do not matter. Rights are not up for debate. But, it does amaze me that people don't know their rights or care about them.

 

Just because someone may not brag on this board about how frequently they travel, does not mean he or she is not a frequent traveler. Many people here have been traveling regularly and extensively and internationally since 9/11.

 

Note: a strip search in Thailand is different than the US government mandating strip searches of US citizens. Do you not understand the distinction? You seem to be juxtaposing and confusing an annoying experience abroad with the full scale loss of your rights as an American citizen at home, in your own country.

[Alegria-Paz]

The alternative is for the 16 intelligence agencies, law enforcement officials and other countless government employees to do their jobs... and not to pass off the pain to everyday Americans when they fail at their jobs. They fail at their jobs and pass the buck to Americans in the form of security theater. Security theater makes you feel safe because all the smoke and mirrors makes you think the government is "doing something." But, are you safe? No. Security is an illusion.

 

How many people are employed by the government in this country in trying to thwart criminals in federal, state and local agencies? I would really love to see those numbers.

 

The answer is for those people to do their jobs BEFORE criminals get to the airport... not to suspect ALL US CITIZENS of being criminals.

 

The very excellent Washington Post article posted in this thread brings up this point.

[Taxguy77]

Quote:

After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, "if you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested."

 

So, I'm guessing his junk wasn't touched?

 

Don't go to Vegas, you'll lose.

[Alegria-Paz]

By the way, virtual strip search is not inflammatory... it's factual.

 

The blog of the man who refused both the nude machine and the groping in San Diego... and was first escorting from the screening area... then threatened with a $10,000 fine and a civil suit.

 

Read this blog, then ponder your freedom (or lack thereof).

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/

 

His entire first person account is written here... as well and video to back it up... and his analysis, which (in case you don't click) includes the following extremely astute commentary:

 

"Every attempt to blow up a plane since 9/11 has been stopped by passengers after the government failed to provide protection for them. Every incident, however, has been met by throwing more money and less sensibility at the problem. Aside from securing the cockpit doors and the realization by passengers that they must fend for themselves because they're more likely to be killed by a hijacker than flown safely to their destination where the hijacker's demands can be met, security is largely the same as it was before 9/11.

 

The only thing changing is the amount of money being spent on the problem and the constant erosion of liberty, and all I did was draw attention to this. If you want to argue that the airlines are private, you're preaching to the choir. I refused the x-ray machine, and then I refused a groping by a government official. I mildly protested, and when they told me that I could submit to the screening or leave the airport, I left peacefully. The only time I got angry during the entire encounter was when I was unlawfully detained and threatened with a lawsuit and a fine.

 

If you think the government is protecting you, ask yourself this: If the official at the end of the video thought I had an incendiary device, why would he want me to go *back* into a small area crowded with hundreds of people instead of leaving the airport as quickly as possible?"