Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 16th Nov 2010 22:34 UTC
In the News As none other I know how problematic it is to discuss matters related to politics on the web. However, every now and then, there's no way around it, and this is one of those moments. There's this thing going on at airports in the US, and while many will see it as a separate issue, the body scanner issue, and the sad stories it has spawned, are symptoms of a far larger problem that is a direct threat to everything we've fought for during and since the Enlightenment.
Permalink for comment 450329
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Bullshit
by Aragorn992 on Wed 17th Nov 2010 14:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Bullshit"
Member since:

"If this isn't evidence enough for greater airport security (whether it be cargo or passengers) I don't know what is It is simply a fact of life now that airport taxes and security checks will have to be increased.

Greater airport security isn't achieved by these scanners (can't look through skin) and sexual assault groping. I can shove a bomb up my ass and short of the TSA sticking their hand in there, they won't be able to know.

Are you saying you have no trouble with TSA employees shoving their hands up your daughter's anus and vagina? I mean, all for security, right?

But sticking a bomb up your ass is indeed more difficult than if you hid it in your underwear. Thus, it will statistically reduce the number of successful attempts - or so the theory goes.

The point is that none of these methods are 100% foolproof, nor will they ever be. However, there are in the world today - plenty of skilled and highly motivated individuals who want to blow planes up. And we have lots of evidence to show that they're beating the current security methods (e.g. my link). Now I'm not saying increased security (and obviously these scanners have problems as well) will stop all of these attempts, it won't, but it will minimise the possibility by making the act more difficult to perform.

Of course your last point is extreme (and probably slightly unrealistic to what is _actually_ happening), and of course I would have a problem with that. But then it would still be my decision to book her on the flight and take her to the airport. If people really would have a problem with this then they will simply avoid flight but those who would continue to fly would at least be happy that such stringent security has been applied and the chance of (for example) bomb getting on has been minimised.

Obviously it comes down to a balance between security and as people have said "dignity"/rights/etc. I just think the balance is too light on the security side - that doesn't mean I'm advocating the other extreme though. It simply means id put up with more pervasive scanning and more thorough physical security checks.

Edited 2010-11-17 15:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1