Disagreeing with Ace on Body Scanners, Pat Downs

18Nov/1010

Disagreeing with Ace on Body Scanners, Pat Downs

Ace wonders whether we're making too big a deal about this, and whether it's kind of duplicitous of "conservatives" to want security and at the same time react so strongly against these means and procedures. He says, in closing, yeah, he'd go for El Al-style security measures (i.e., screw the anti-profiling cant), but that's not realistic.

Personally, I don't care much about some gloved ninny touching my junk through my trousers, but I understand that some people do. I don't fly enough for the backscatter machines to put my cancer into remission, either, but I respect the probably much better judgment of people who want to see FDA data about this shit before they do. How do the Roentgens compare, for example, to acceptable levels of basement radon?

I haven't looked at the comments, but I imagine he's getting an earful. In my opinion, it's a terrible idea to roll over to the TSA and their governmental backers, because it's a slippery slope.

We already know how invasive Obama and company want to be with respect to our personal finances and electronic communications. We know that they believe government agencies have a right to a variety of kinds of medical information that up until this point have been confidential---that despite Barry's refusal to share his own medical records with his employers, offering a paragraph of air in their place---in exchange for "free" medical care. We also know that despite all of this hunger for control, it's a crime to ask anyone to carry identification to the polls or prove citizenship to a police officer in Arizona.

We know they want to prevent us from acquiring ammunition, using oil, using regular light bulbs, eating salt, or drinking alcoholic beverages with caffeine in them. They'd like your cell phone to shut down your car, or vice-versa, whether it's being used by the driver or passenger.

It's too much. They've gone WAY too far. They've made things swell for everyone else at the continued cost of those who respect the law. Fuck 'em. They want to show us that we are subjects of a sovereign government that makes its own law (for our good). This is as good a place as any, and timely, too, to push back.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Filed under: Too Lazy to Categorize Leave a comment

Comments (10) Trackbacks (0) ( subscribe to comments on this post )

enoch_root
November 18th, 2010 - 12:15

I tell you what – howabout we try the least invasive and least expensive approach first… then, let’s discuss police-state-style searches.

That is, do some profiling. A lot of it. It’s more or less free. Less obnoxious to the greatest amount of travelers, etc.

I mean, for the Greater Good and all… surely, we can all agree.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
snaqwells
November 18th, 2010 - 13:47

Thanks for pointing to his post, I was starting to feel all alone in the world. :D

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Tom Usher
November 18th, 2010 - 14:29

You’re right; this is as good a place as any to push back and hopefully a whole bunch of people will next Wed. on “Opt Out Day”.

The thing that I’ve been noticing lately is that many are just refusing to go along. Whether it’s blocking the morons from Westborough Baptist or refusing to be groped, people or just saying no. And the really cool thing is, the powers that be don’t know how to react.

It seems as though the powers have been pushing our buttons for the last decade or so, gradually increasing the intrusions and consuming our liberty. And it seems this has been done for a reason, maybe to spark some sort of violent reaction so the government can sweep in and clamp down. It seems as though they’ve prepared and waited for us to act just as they planned. And now we’re screwing them all up by peacefully refusing and going all M.L.K. on ‘em.

If I’m right and not just hopelessly delusional (the latter being far more likely), I would expect the pushing to start to get a whole lot worse. The question is whether we’ll continue to resist with non-violence or let them put us just where they want us and get one of the good guys to swing first.

Either way, something’s got to give eventually.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Enoch_Root
November 18th, 2010 - 15:35

Tom – I love that comment – and I for one have been anxious for the bow to break.

I know I am bored as hell. And tired of waiting for something to give.

And, you know, sadly excited to see this house of cards reduced to its foundation (foundation remaining in tact). I love the foundation. Beautifully-crafted. This old house needs to be dozed though. Too many varmits.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
SarahW
November 18th, 2010 - 16:03

His argument, however, is built on one hella huge fallacy: that the scans and grabs are effective at stopping bombers.

They aren’t, and since they misdirect and dilute resources and create security lapses that can be exploited, we are actually worse offf.

I saw on of the recent headlines has TSA now touting that the scans are good because they are catching *contraband*. Invasive searches on non-suspects to catch other crimes is not a point in favor of the searches.

It’s the opposite. I wonder if they have any kind of clue at all.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
snaqwells
November 18th, 2010 - 16:27

They’re claiming not just contraband, but also knives. One could also argue that the ability to circumvent a security measure does not make that measure useless; especially if the methods of circumvention reduce the size and scope of the contraband able to be squeezed through.

I’ll restate that the argument to be had here is over efficacy and cost-benefit. The TSA is claiming they’ve found over 130 items, but won’t say what they are other than examples such as heroin and ceramic knives. Personally, I’d like to see a more thorough accounting for the items confiscated to determine

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bohemian
November 18th, 2010 - 17:45

Damn skippy Dan. We’re getting rolled here and it is time for the docility to stop!!!!!

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
SarahW
November 19th, 2010 - 12:15

They don’t at all, snaqwells, because children are exempt from pat-downs.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
SarahW
November 19th, 2010 - 12:16

Also, it’s so easy to create a diversion, a terrorist could set one up at enter the plane with only a cursory pass through the metal detector, if that.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
killtruck
November 20th, 2010 - 15:39

I can see why those that have concerns over “the grope” and the body scans have those concerns. I just don’t understand what the hell they want them to do then.

Profiling as an official policy will never happen. So what solution do the people against these other 2 measures suggest we do then?

I’m hearing equal arguments from both sides of the scanner radiation issue. Personally, I’d opt for the scanner.

TSA sucks. TSA is like the mailroom of federal law enforcement. Unfortunately, they’re the ones with the most interaction with the public.

Leaving security checks to the airlines might be better. Then people like me that don’t care about getting groped or body scanned if that means a lower chance of hanky panky on my flight can trade our liberties for peace of mind, and everyone else can do… whatever.

Amtrak is also still in business.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )