Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 105 posts

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#81

Post by prodigal_erik »

cheald wrote: post #71
icefox wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently when I choose not to go through the digital strip search they spent a good 20 minutes going through my stuff, asking me questions and getting a pat down.

The point is that if enough people are opting out, it's going to be a lot harder for them to take the time to individually harass people.

Not harder, just slower, and why would they care about that? There are many people with enough empathy and diligence to feel bad if you miss your flight. But I don't see how any of them could stomach working for TSA.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#82

Post by Pinckney »

aneth wrote: post #25
danilocampos wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scan is for detecting additional, nonmetallic threats, especially explosives. Just one problem: nothing in the new procedures can prevent moving the same thing via your rectum. So if we want to pretend everyone will adhere to a specific conception of the threat model, sure, spend a bunch of money and alienate the traveling public.

So because it doesn't provide absolute security it doesn't provide "additional" security? Those are two very different things.

Actually, they provide less security when used to replace, rather than supplement metal detectors. You can conceal a (sheathed) knife or (very small) pistol within your anus, with lube, patience, and some not inconsiderable discomfort. Neither will be detected by body scans, though they would be apparent to metal detectors.

They are superior only in the very specific case of explosives or ceramic knives concealed under clothing.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#83

Post by jamesbritt »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #30
_ouxp wrote: post #6

The TSA is now calling National Opt-Out Day "irresponsible." John Pistole, TSA Administrator: "On the eve of a major national holiday and less than one year after al Qaida's failed attack last Christmas Day, it is irresponsible for a group to suggest travelers opt out of the very screening that could prevent an attack using non-metallic explosives." http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/11/12/131275949/protest... That…

"On the eve of a major national holiday and less than one year after al Qaida's failed attack last Christmas Day, it is irresponsible for a group to suggest travelers opt out of the very screening that could prevent an attack using non-metallic explosives." He seems to be overlooking the possibility that things are getting so bad with the TSA that increasing numbers of travelers would rather take their chances with t…

My biggest terror fear is the TSA.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#84

Post by aneth »

barrkel wrote: post #77
aneth wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantics. The suggestion that full body scanners and effective pat downs provide no (or little) additional security over the status quo is difficult to believe. I'm guessing the same people critical of this policy criticized the previous one for being easy to circumvent. What do you all suggest we do?

Of the zero successful terrorist incidents in the last quarter-billion US flights in the past 9 years, how many would this technology and procedure have stopped? How much money do we need to spend to prevent these zero events from occurring in the next 9 years? And how much did extra was spent on preventing the third of a million motor deaths that occurred during the same period? There is a huge lack of rationality i…

So we should keep security the same until something terrible happens? Or should we continue to improe security based on new information and technology?

What's irrational is to assume because nothing has happened in the last 8 years (successfully anyway) that our current measures are adequate for the next eight.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#85

Post by dalke »

robfitz wrote: post #58
Gibbon wrote: post #52

I'm emigrating from Canada to New Zealand and we're flying on Nov. 25. Since I'm near the border, we're flying from Detroit to Fort Worth and then LA.. I am not looking forward to this flight. I've already had dozens of medical x-rays in the past few months, and don't particularly want to get another dose, however low it may be. On the other hand, opting out sounds really unpleasant. I especially don't want my wife p…

I've opted out twice and it really hasn't been a big deal. It's slightly slower, but the security guys treated me fine. It was no more invasive than being patted down before entering a nightclub to make sure you aren't carrying anything pointy. Given your health concerns, opting out seems like the clear choice (though bear in mind I'm pulling from a sample size of only 2).

What kind of nightclubs do you go to? I've never seen that before. The most has been to check for ID.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#86

Post by dalke »

danilocampos wrote: post #20
aneth wrote: post #15

This anti scanner fad stinks of mob mentality and hysteria. There is no evidence images have been stored at airports or that harm is caused by scans. There is a pathetic lack of rational discussion of factual policies and why such policies might be necessary, whether we like them or not. I expect more from the HN crowd. Someone want to fill us on on facts instead of speculation and fear mongering?

Let's start with this: In a free society, people are being coerced to participate in a security procedure that violates their privacy. Don't want to go through the porno scanners? Okay, punk — have fun being aggressively groped in punishment. You don't get to enact this kind of invasive, extreme policy on a whim. Extreme measures call for extreme circumstances and at this point, no one has made any sort of compelling…

Don't forget that "no one has made a compelling case that this will increase overall commercial air travel security" along with "money better spent on inspecting all cargo shipped on commercial flights." After all, that's how the printer cartridges were shipped.

You have to say that, otherwise people will say "if that's what's needed to make flying safe then I'm willing to put up with it."

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#87

Post by dalke »

aneth wrote: post #29
danilocampos wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's start with this: In a free society, people are being coerced to participate in a security procedure that violates their privacy. Don't want to go through the porno scanners? Okay, punk — have fun being aggressively groped in punishment. You don't get to enact this kind of invasive, extreme policy on a whim. Extreme measures call for extreme circumstances and at this point, no one has made any sort of compelling…

We have always been coerced into procedures that violate our privacy when we fly. If we were not, terrorists would regularly board aircraft with guns and ammo. From a shitload of personal travel (I fly twice a month) I have found 95% of the TSA to be good humored and responsible. The situation today is fa better than it was when run by private companies.

"far better than it was" ... citation needed? I thought the GAO has reported several times that it's as easy to get "bomb parts" and other weapons through TSA security as it was in the pre-TSA days.

I've been trying to find the report. The closest I got to was one on "TSA's Cost and Performance Study of Private-Sector Airport Screening" which said there are methodological problems in the TSA's report on the cost of private security over TSA-base ones. It pointed out that a handful of airports (including SFO) use private security.

So, how has SFO compared to LAX?

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#88

Post by sixtofour »

sp4rki wrote: post #69
sp332 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's what I meant when I said they might not have authority. But they have been delegated that authority by the DHS, which does have cabinet-level executive status. So it's arguable. It's interesting how you consider any interaction with your "private parts" to be sexual in nature. If you lean against a table, are you having sex with it? Are you having sex with your underwear right now?? The agent isn't touch…

If I lean against a table it's not sexual, but when the table grabs my balls it sure as hell is. What I find interesting is that you equate an inanimate object in contact with a sexual organ with a human being fondling your penis, vagina, or breasts. I honestly care less about the pats, if a dude or dudette wants to touch my balls and buttocks to make sure I'm not packing (pun intended), then go ahead. But to see the…

An argument could be made, a really depressing argument in so many ways, that including children and grandmothers in the TSA's sexual assaults is for their protection, because if they were exempt, they could be targets for hiding contraband.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#89

Post by sixtofour »

techiferous wrote: post #31

This reminds me of Gandhi's non-cooperation attitude and shrewdness in dealing with unjust people or policies in power. As an individual, you are powerless when you go through the security line. As a group, however, the American people have all of the power. Because this is both a democracy and a capitalist country (however flawed it may be), if there is an organized and concerted effort against the TSA policies, the…

The way to stop the sexual assaults is not to target the sexual assaults, but to target flying. Don't opt out of the scanners, the opt out won't be available forever anyway. Just don't fly. Not on a particular day. Just don't fly.

Currently, there are two major kinds of travelers, business and vacation. It will be difficult to curb vacation travel, since you want to go somewhere and you only have a week to do it.

Business travel would be possible to cut drastically. And it would be good for business too. "All" it would need (and I realize "all" encompasses a lot), would be much more excellent process and data integration and sharing. I don't mean adding the word "solution" to a Lotus notes sale. I mean systems that make it all but irrelevant whether your employee or vendor is on site or on the moon.

I'm not an enterprisy guy, so I know I've stated that in a clumsy and probably mistargeted way. But it does seem that if anyone, or any industry, could cut the need for travel and increase the value of services and products sold, the world would beat a path.

Maybe the cost/benefit lines didn't cross. Maybe we'll look back and have the TSA to thank for that crossing, and a better way to do global business.

Re: National Opt-Out Day Called Against Invasive Body Scanners

#90

Post by sixtofour »

nitrogen wrote: post #40
jberryman wrote: post #35

Not sure how feasible or legal it is to do this, but a good strategy for a demonstration might be to hand out fliers to people waiting in the security line. On the fliers would be some information on the new security policy and body scanners and an example image of a body scan. Also attached would be a sticker that says "opt out". That we people can make an informed and visible decision before they encounter the TSA…

Better yet, t-shirts. The front of the t-shirt is innocuous (so the security guards don't get alarmed too early), but the back explains the body scan process to everyone in line behind you, with example images.

Wear your Fourth Amendment tshirt whenever you fly.
Post reply on HN