The new airport full body scans

[MooseMom]

My son always flies British Airways...they pretty much know him at Heathrow by now.  I don't anticipate a big problem over there, but I worry about him here at O'Hare.  American Airlines will accompany you if you have a handicap but ONLY if you are in a wheelchair, so the disability has to be a physical one; that's no help to us.  I've spoken to BA in the past, and they are willing to keep an eye on him as much as they can, but when we get to O'Hare for his return flight to the UK, there won't be any BA staff (or staff from any airline, actually) that would accompany anyone through security.  It is more of a federal/airport situation than an airline problem.

[billmoria]

Many more airports have a common policy and workforce for help. It was better before when airlines ran their own. We fly American out of Heathrow. We have been to O'Hare. I would call American (is he flying home with AA?   or BA if he is flying home with BA) Don't take no for an answer, ask to talk to a supervisor. Physical is not the only type of disability. Mention the Americans with diabilities act if they seem hesitant. Would your son feel funny riding in a wheel chair?

[MooseMom]

I mentioned AA simply because we were trying to find out what their age requirements were for travelling as an unaccompanied minor.  They told us that for a traveller as old as my son, the only way they would accompany him is via a wheelchair.  BA seemed more amenable to our needs because we have flown exclusively with them since 1985.

My son would be acutely embarrassed if he had to sit in a wheelchair.  I wouldn't do that to him.  I am hoping that they'll just let me go through security with him, but I don't know if it is up to BA exclusively since he will not be technically an unaccompanied minor.  I'll just call BA here and ask them about it, but you know how it goes..someone tells you one thing, but then you get to the airport and they tell you something entirely different. I'm sure it'll get sorted.

[Riki]

Mom puts me in a wheelchair when we travel for 2 reasons.  1, I'm not that fast a walker, and because of my eyesight, I have trouble in crowds, and 2, we can get through customs so much faster in a chair than without.

It's odd that they wouldn't treat your son as a unaccompanied minor, because of his disability, even if he's not a minor anymore.  If you talk to the right people, exceptions can be made.  Make sure if's ok with your son, though.  For all I know, he may like the idea of no longer flying as an unaccompanied minor

[MooseMom]

Riki, we've talked to airline people about this, and they are pretty adamant.  My son travels at high season, since he is a student, and staffing problems are always a consideration.  We have been paying an extra 100 quid for the service, and it has been worth it. 

I am pretty confident that my son can make this trip with no problem; he's been travelling back and forth since he was 4 months old.  It's nothing new to him.  But with the usual chaos that comes with holiday travel PLUS the new security measures, I'm concerned that he will become overwhelmed and confused, particularly if some security guy starts giving him a hard time.  And I don't want to embarrass him by having to make some announcement that he is autistic.  He knows he is autistic; it's something that we talk about a lot.  I try to tell him that everyone has something that makes their life a challenge, and autism is his particular challenge.  He's not sensitive about being autistic, per se, but like most kids his age, he is sensitive about being different, and his peer group can be devastatingly cruel.

I think I will just have to tell him that if something happens in security that he doesn't understand immediately, he will simply have to explain to the TSA agent that he is autistic and would the agent mind explaining things again?  We want him to lead an independent life, and getting through airport security is part of that, I guess.

[Sluff]

I don't care about the scans because everyone has to go through and I don't think I have anything more or less that the average man but I will not allow another individual touch my very sacred jewels... I'll drive thank you.

[looneytunes]

A friend of mine had bilateral masectomy in 2005 with reconstructive surgery.  She flew out of St. Louis this week and said that the scanner showed her implants and they pulled her aside for a "pat down".  When she explained, the TSA agent asked her to open her blouse to allow them to see there was nothing outside of her skin.   She was livid!  She said the "pat down" was more of a "feel up" and she will never fly again as long as these rules are in place. 

[Riki]

That's crazy.. like the woman they talked about on Countdown.. she was a flight attendant, breast cancer survivor, and she wore a prosthetic breast.  She was asked to remove it.  She did it, but I would have told them to kiss my ass

[Sluff]

A friend of mine had bilateral masectomy in 2005 with reconstructive surgery.  She flew out of St. Louis this week and said that the scanner showed her implants and they pulled her aside for a "pat down".  When she explained, the TSA agent asked her to open her blouse to allow them to see there was nothing outside of her skin.   She was livid!  She said the "pat down" was more of a "feel up" and she will never fly again as long as these rules are in place.

OMG! That is just ridiculous. Why do they need to do a pat down if they can see with a full body scan? Sounds a little backwards, I mean if thats the case then why have the dang scanners to begin with.

[Sluff]

TSA security people have no formal experience. They are not law enforcement but yet they have the right to cause such embarrassment. I thought our liberals just told us that our security when flying was the safest it has been in 8 years. If that is true than who's jobs are we providing by accepting this new found invasion techniques.

[Kitts]

What about catheters? Do you think TSA agents are trained to recognize them? I'm afraid that if I go through the body scanner, they'd want to pat me down anyway because they're concerned about that thing "strapped to" my chest.

Based on this, I'd say that fear is not unfounded. And that it wouldn't be pleasant. This is so completely wrong that I actually don't know what to say.

[aharris2]

I don't care about the scans because everyone has to go through and I don't think I have anything more or less that the average man but I will not allow another individual touch my very sacred jewels... I'll drive thank you.

I guess this disappoints a lot of the ladies out there, not to mention Mrs. Sluff 

[aharris2]

Dress it up however you like but it still remains the same. This is an extreme invasion of privacy.

I don't want to be touched, I don't want to be "viewed naked", and I don't want to be unnecessarily exposed to radiation.

Random intense screening is an absurdity, window dressing to show the citizenry that we are doing something about terrorism. Well, while you were feeling up my grandma, and irradiating that randomly selected small child, the terrorists (there's two just in case one gets randomly selected) just passed through the gate. Absurd, ridiculous, ineffective, poorly thought out.

Who is the terrorist now? Where does this road lead? Are random cavity searches next? All this just because I choose to fly?

It is not acceptable and it needs to be fixed!

[Bill Peckham]

I think the Israeli approach needs to be put in perspective. They have one major airport and five or so minor ones - the US has 100 times as many. But that isn't the main barrier. Consider that the Isralies know a lot more about everyone with an Israeli passport than the the TSA knows about an individual with a state drivers license. The Israeli screening process works because they only have to screen the people who they don't know - for that to work in the US you'd need to be known by the TSA. We'd need national biometric ids for one, that's usually a deal breaker for anyone who cares about state power.

In the last 8 years we've given up a lot more freedom then invasive screening at airports. This is getting attention because the demographics of who flies. In a sense we're lucky that extremists have an aviation fetish. Now that there is little chance they could commandeer an airplane - passengers will fight back, armored cockpit doors - they're limited in how many people an attack can kill at a time and defending against it is relatively easy.

Because these disproportionate fears the public has have been fed rather than quashed, what happens if there is Mumbai style attacks? What Constitutional rights would people be prepared to dispense with then?

As far as the scanners I think there needs to be some sort of independent measurement of the delivered radiation - it's a device controlled by software, how would you ever know if it was delivering 100 times the radiation it is suppose to? Anyone with a history of skin cancer would have to opt out and be groped. I think people living with a transplant or otherwise immune compromised would have to think hard about the additional radiation. 

[BigSky]

I highly doubt there is an invasion of privacy in the matter because people are doing business with the airlines.  The airlines are not forcing the would be customers to do business with them. The airlines need stuff put in place to try to protect themselves and their customers. 

This is no different than stores no allowing people to carry firearms in their stores.  Even though its a Constitutional Right and one may have a CC license, its still doesnt give them the right to carry into a store if the store is posted against having weapons.

I think the Israeli approach needs to be put in perspective. They have one major airport and five or so minor ones - the US has 100 times as many. But that isn't the main barrier. Consider that the Isralies know a lot more about everyone with an Israeli passport than the the TSA knows about an individual with a state drivers license. The Israeli screening process works because they only have to screen the people who they don't know - for that to work in the US you'd need to be known by the TSA. We'd need national biometric ids for one, that's usually a deal breaker for anyone who cares about state power.
 

A biometric id could be issued to those who wish to go through the process.  These people could be fast tracked when they wanted to fly.  Those who do not want one would not have to get one, but they would go through extensive screening before  being able to fly.

[Sluff]

I don't care about the scans because everyone has to go through and I don't think I have anything more or less that the average man but I will not allow another individual touch my very sacred jewels... I'll drive thank you.

I guess this disappoints a lot of the ladies out there, not to mention Mrs. Sluff 

I'm married remember? We all know where the sex life goes once you are married.  Besides what is average? Thats kind of like asking what is normal...


Don't misunderstand me. Im all about keeping our citizens safe, but right now our citizens face more danger in southern Arizona along interstate 8 than the airplane.

[Sluff]

A biometric id could be issued to those who wish to go through the process.  These people could be fast tracked when they wanted to fly.  Those who do not want one would not have to get one, but they would go through extensive screening before  being able to fly.

There is a card that truck drivers need if they do business at the ports called a TWIC card. If a frequent flyer were able to use something similiar it would clear alot of this up.

[Bill Peckham]

I highly doubt there is an invasion of privacy in the matter because people are doing business with the airlines.  The airlines are not forcing the would be customers to do business with them. The airlines need stuff put in place to try to protect themselves and their customers. 

This is no different than stores no allowing people to carry firearms in their stores.  Even though its a Constitutional Right and one may have a CC license, its still doesnt give them the right to carry into a store if the store is posted against having weapons.

I think the Israeli approach needs to be put in perspective. They have one major airport and five or so minor ones - the US has 100 times as many. But that isn't the main barrier. Consider that the Israelis know a lot more about everyone with an Israeli passport than the the TSA knows about an individual with a state drivers license. The Israeli screening process works because they only have to screen the people who they don't know - for that to work in the US you'd need to be known by the TSA. We'd need national biometric ids for one, that's usually a deal breaker for anyone who cares about state power.
 

A biometric id could be issued to those who wish to go through the process.  These people could be fast tracked when they wanted to fly.  Those who do not want one would not have to get one, but they would go through extensive screening before  being able to fly.

I think there is a privacy issue because the search is mandated and conducted by the federal government. If it was up to the airlines to establish their own security procedures then people could choose their airline by the level of assumed risk they were willing to take but that's not the situation.

Since the TSA can't manage to identify flight crews and active duty military I'm skeptical of their ability to identify frequent fliers. Even if they did manage to create a card it still means my 77 year old Mom gets groped every time she flies because she has a pace maker. And little kids get searched in ways we don't normally allow little kids to be searched.

I think this whole airport security theater will look ridiculous in a few years. In the same way preparing for nuclear war by building bomb shelters and practicing duck and cover seem ridiculous today.

[BigSky]

Yes but the key point is one does not have to fly, people choose to fly.

Not sure its so ridiculous until a better standard comes down the pike.


Something is up for this happen to this extent.

Its doubtful terrorists will try to take a plane by storm again.   Seems they will try the method Yousef did in the Philippine Airlines Flight 434 bombing but have several people bring components onto a plane for final assembly.

[Bill Peckham]

People choose to drive but that doesn't mean that by driving you give up your right to not be searched.

People choose to go to malls but going to a mall doesn't mean that you've given up your right to not be searched.

The forth amendment is pretty clear.

If there are already people in the United States willing to blow themselves up and with the tools to do so and with the ability to go through the sort of metal detectors used up until last month than there are plenty of other places we should be more concerned about. This is a reaction to the underpants bomber, taking off your shoes is a response to an attempt by the shoe bomber and the no fly with fluids rule is a response to an attempt.

A guy had a bomb up his butt and tried to kill someone in Saudi Arabia last year. Preflight security will get to know you in a biblical sense if a butt bomb gets on a plane.

[okarol]

Here's A List of US Airports Currently Using Full Body Scanners http://gizmodo.com/5694997/heres-a-list-of-us-airports-currently-using-full-body-scanners?skyline=true&s=i
 

[BigSky]

A person driving themselves is not the same as someone doing business through an airline.

A person can certainly charter a private plane and avoid being searched all together.   

As to the mall scenario.  If the mall says you will be searched before you enter, yes you have given up your right not to be searched if you want to enter the mall.


The Forth Amendment is pretty clear, not sure how  it even applies in this matter.

 If one wishes to fly commercial they must give consent to being searched in order to fly.

So either one  gives consent, thus making the 4th irrelevant or they do not give consent and do not get to fly, thus  making the 4th irrelevant again.

[okarol]

TSA pat-down leaves Mich. man covered in urine
Mon Nov 22, 1:04 pm ET

ROMULUS, Mich. – A bladder cancer survivor from Michigan who wears a bag that collects his urine said a security agent at a Detroit airport patted him down so roughly, it caused the bag to spill its contents on his clothing.

Tom Sawyer, a 61-year-old retired special education teacher, said the experience left him in tears before he caught a flight to Orlando, Fla., on Nov. 7.

"I was absolutely humiliated. I couldn't even speak," he told MSNBC.com.

Transportation Security Administration chief John Pistole said he's concerned about people such as Sawyer who have had uncomfortable experiences with agents.

During an appearance Monday on CBS' "The Early Show," Pistole expressed "great concern over anybody who feels like they have not been treated properly or had something embarrassing" happen.

Sawyer said that once he got through security, he changed his bag, but didn't have time to change his clothing and had to board the plane soaked in urine.

"I was embarrassed to death," he told the Detroit Free Press.

Sawyer was diagnosed with bladder cancer three years ago and had to have a procedure that left him with a urostomy bag to catch rerouted urine.

Claire Saxton, executive director of the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network, said she's concerned Sawyer's story is indicative of a larger trend.

"TSA agents need to be trained to listen when someone tells them they have a health issue, because the one thing that Tom in his account talked about was he tried to explain and they just weren't even interested in listening," Saxton told The Associated Press.

"No one living with an `ostomy' should be afraid of flying because they're afraid of being humiliated," she said.

[cariad]

Well, I have only skimmed the responses so far, but am back with a report-from-the-scene so to speak.

I tried asking the ticket agent if she knew about whether my kids were preselected for screening, and she said I would have to ask at security. We were at O'Hare at around 4PM and had to deal with off-site parking and everything, so my husband and I have worked out a semi-complicated system that uses my 8-year-old as a luggage-watcher while we run back and forth from car to airport. We had approximately 10 bags, and this was packing very light. Car seats and any medical or child related equipment are free to check as cargo, so we brought Liot's car seat.

I had a drink in a metal travel cup that I brought with me, thinking I would finish the drink and pop the container into the checked baggage. I forgot to do this, and ended up placing it into my handbag. I thought I'll just take it out at security and place it in a bin. We get to the passport check and I say to one of them "My kids don't have to go through the x-ray machine, right?" Are they purposely as humourless as possible? The person just barked at me "metal detector!" Fine. We take off our shoes, queue up for the metal detector, and the 3 of us get through without incident. Where is my husband? I turn around to see him, arms up in the x-ray machine. Then a very friendly security agent tells me that he has to further check our shoes. He asks if there are any wires in the shoes and I realise that Liot wore his light-up Skechers, one of the great loves of his life. I ask if it was a problem to have him wear those, and he said "Nope! We see it all the time!"

We were in Wales about 2 days before Gwyn pointed out that I forgot to take the metal cup out of my handbag, and they had no way of knowing what was in it. It went through the metal detector, they must have seen this dense cylinder, and no one asked to look in my bag or open it up or anything. They were only concerned with the light-up shoes worn by a 4-year-old.

Passport control in Manchester was painless both in- and outbound. I hate returning to the US. All of these rules - shut your cell phones and cameras off or they will confiscate them, don't say anything wrong. They don't even say 'welcome home' anymore. Retrieving the car at O'Hare was a nightmare, and when we began our scurry back and forth, a cop started yelling at me that he was going to write me a $500 ticket. This after Gwyn asked if it was OK to park there while we loaded our bags. I was sitting in the car with Liot, and Gwyn was grabbing all the bags inside, along with our older child, and the cop started shouting that he could write me a ticket because there was no one in the drivers' seat. I am fairly confident that he pulled that rule straight out of his I was pointing to my husband crossing the road with Aidan and a load of baggage - it was just a further reminder that I live in a paranoid country, blindly devoted to pointless rules at the cost of common sense.

In terms of legality of the searches, I agree with Bill. Businesses are not allowed to override the rights given to you by the constitution. The 4th amendment certainly seems relevant to me. There is no probable cause in searching a 4-year-old. I don't care if they want to look at his shoes - though I think it's stupid - but I do not want them exposed to extra radiation and I sure as hell did not want anyone touching my boys.

[MooseMom]

LOL@Bill's "butt bomb".