But how many children have to be fondled for a safe flight ?

http://www.newser.com/story/105351/t...-year-old.html

This site has a lot of recent stories that piss me off.

I just don't see that one as an issue. The 3 year old started having a melt down when her teddy bear was taken (to go through the baggage scanners).

Then - the little girl set off the metal detector TWO times.

What choice was there except to search her?

3 year olds have tantrums...that's what they do...

exactly?

If this has been linked before forgive me didnt read whole thread ....

http://www.wcvarones.com/2010/11/tsa...-homeland.html

OK buddy....when its your 3 year old daughter let me know how the strip search worked

obviously wasn't a strip search - did you watch the video? I did.


If a 3 year old SETS OFF THE METAL DETECTOR TWO TIMES - then they can't just say "ok - have a nice flight" - they have to check the kid...

Your position is crazy (and with your strip search comments - you're being intentionally deceptive)

The last time I flew they made this 3-4 year old girl go through the dectector 5 times. She was screaming and screaming. It turned out she was wearing a belt. The TSA kid had the biggest "deer in headlights" look ever.

Good for them.

If a 3 year old sets off a metal detector the first thought should not be ZOMG a terrorist MULE ! Unfortunately you have burger flippers working as TSA agents who have no common sense. Both PARENTS and child should be pulled aside for further questioning by a supervisor before submitting any child to "advanced screenings"

I agree with you.

Parents should be pulled alongside (in the video - I thought the Mother is the one holding the child - but I could be wrong)

Also - things should be slowed down - give the parents a chance to calm kid down before preceding - etc. Definitely agree that the procedure needs to be modified when a child is involved - but a child who sets off the metal detector still has to be searched.

On a side note - has the metal detecting wand - which led to a specific body part search been totally discontinued?

Who needs the wand when you can just see people naked instead?

the wand is being redeployed to search cavities that the AIT cannot see

Quote of the Day: When it comes to the fight against terrorism, Americans are willing to go to almost any lengths.
They will (with a 70%+ approval at the time) invade another country (Iraq) for the first time in American history.
They will approve the practice of waterboarding (until after the fact).
We will send unmanned drones into areas 7k miles away to kill terrorists & chalk up civilian deaths as "collateral damage."

Where we self-righteous Americans will draw the line: our waistline.

I think we Americans may have our priorities skewed.

Metal detectors, x-ray machine, full body scanners, pat downs, the B(omb) word being treated like the N-word in Harlem.

I understand that after 911 the gov't had to make sure that our planes would never be used as missiles against us again. But wasn't this accomplished by steel-reinforced doors? Now (not to sound callous) the worst case scenario is a couple of hundred lives. Wouldnt more lives be lost, havoc caused if a bomb was set off in a shopping mall, sports stadium, or Times Square? And with little relative security.

So why does everybody still focus on the airports? "Please report any unattended bags","Did you pack your bags yourself?". Seems the huge security presence at the airports is more symbolic than anything else. Symbolic in the way that it may make people feel "wow are airports are safe as chit, so that means the rest of the country is".

Am I the minority in thinking that if a terrorist wants to instill terror at this point, he will not do it at an airport, so maybe the gov't can just chill on beefing up the security?

THoguhts?

P.S. I love sneaking my liquids in my carry-ons.

xx44, Do you think the terrorists could have duplicated 9/11 with the security safeguards we have in place now?

Just with the steel reinforced doors they would not be able to.

FWIW, this is pre-9/11. I remember hearing this announced repeatedly in the Miami airport in 1993.

I think they'd get their asses beat by all the passengers. Iirc it wasn't the box cutters that allowed them to get control of the plane but a package they said had a bomb.

I was crunching when I posted itt. But my point is why make such a big deal about the airports?

Passengers prevented the Christmas bombing and the shoe bombing too.

Yeah, passenger planes being used as weapons will never happen again, no passengers are gonna sit idlely by while the terrorists command the airplane, they are either gonna get control back or crash the plane trying to.

The reason they didn't on 9/11 is because they thought it was gonna be a standard hijacking, where they make some demands, blah blah, They didn't know it was a suicide bombing.

Planes being blown up is still a threat, but the days of hijackings are pretty much over.

fwiw you're allowed to say the B-word all you want if you and the TSA officer are the same political persuasion.

Naw, if I were a terrorist wanting to **** **** up in the USA I would buy the largest suitcase that would be plausible for a "carry on" I could find, fill it with explosives, book a flight at the busiest possible time and detonate it in the middle of the security screening area. Actually you wouldn't even need to book a flight to do this.

Careful with these ideas. You don't know how many terrorists are also poker players!

(is suicide bombing +EV?)