Airport security - the right way?

[Skeptic Guy]

I call BS on, "The whole time, they are looking into your eyes — which is very embarrassing. But this is one of the ways they figure out if you are suspicious or not. It takes 20, 25 seconds," said Sela.

I realize they ask other questions at various times, like your origin, destination and who packed your bags, but this strikes me as a carefully crafted myth to discourage attempted terror attacks.

Nobody's that good at detecting other people's future behavior. It's like serial killer profiling or the polygraph.

And I bet they are successful at nailing a lot of false positives.

I have to say that, while I would like to believe it, it smacks more of a lie-detector than anything else and we know how reliable those are.

It's not meant to predict future behavior. It is meant to detect current suspicious behavior, which is not a paranormal power.

But I wonder how accurate it is in being able to "detect suspicious behavior"...I can imagine nervous flyers getting caught up in it and a lot of false positives...but I really don't know for sure. I'd like to find out more about it.

Live in Pyongyang, do ya? That sucks.

Here in America, we can go where we want when we want, but there are people in place to make sure we do it safely. There are people in our country that disagree with the safety measures and are willing to sacrifice them for the sake of convenience, but at least they don't get locked up for speaking their minds like they do in your country.

No, nor do we WANT to live in Pyongyang...and that's kind of the point.

And the point is that the new proceedures really don't make us safer, therefore the cost is too great.

 

[BeAChooser]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/gird_your_loins_for_chaos_ksvDskjCCBGAG25lyUqFZJ

Furious travelers and maxed-out security workers are bracing for a week from hell amid rigid new airport-security guidelines -- including full-body searches or electronic scanning -- that promise to make the trip home for Thanksgiving anything but festive.

Delays "could get very bad . . . especially on Wednesday, if more people opt for the body search instead of the scanner," said one Transportation Security Administration worker at La Guardia Airport yesterday. "I don't think we would have the personnel to move the lines."

Feeling safer yet?

Do you think this would be happening if the elite were forced to get in line too?

Hmmmmmm?

 

[elgarak]

Summarizes my take. Banning certain items, and checking the hell out of normal, upstanding, non-terrorist passengers is a fundamentally flawed approach. Even weapons are not a problem if the plane is full of people who have no intention to use them and just want to get from A to B.

There are always items that can be (mis-)used on the plane, and are allowed to be carried on board.

What needs to be done is take out the people with evil intentions. With a small amount of banned-item-checking to prevent the really obvious (time bombs), and to have a stressor applied to passengers to judge their behavior by. Which is the Israeli approach.

Why do false positives matter? As long as there are no false negatives (terrorist slipping through), and the false positives (suspicious behavior passenger that get taken out and inspected more thoroughly) are much fewer in number than the TSA approach of inspecting thoroughly everyone, it's still the better approach.

 

[uruk]

Bastard! Oh man, I hope Al Quaeda doesn't read the JREF forums...


You know, I don't see why these scanners are so controversial. The people looking at them can't see faces, can't have any cell phones or cameras in their office with which to photograph the images, and they only get to see the image for a short time anyway. I've passed through one already, and I did a King Tut pose. I've got plenty more planned, too. Sumo stance, Yoga stance, Jesus pose, Michael Jordan, etc. To me, it almost seems like the scanners are controversial because people are arrogant enought to believe that the entire world WANTS to see them naked.

TSA's methods need not become more aggressive, as things seem to be working fine now. Passengers are irritated, sure, but the craziest thing to happen on an airplane since the Shoe Bomber guy was that JetBlue flight attendant going nuts, right?

The only thing the media's fixation with TSA is doing is creating more xenophobia. You're welcome, Islam.

Yea this whole body scanner thing looks more like politicians trying to look like they are doing someething while not not really doing anything at all.
There are many ways to get contraband on board that the body scanner or a patdown won't detect. "Think keistering"

Anyhoos the body scanner does not bother me that much. I think I actually busted a few. Or at least that what's what the TSA agents said as they were running and screaming from behind the display, trying to scratch thier eyes out.

You takes your chances I say

 

[BeAChooser]

http://xkcd.com/651/

Too funny.

 

[bigjelmapro]

Not to mention the 3 hours of time that EL AL wastes from every passenger, every flight, both ways. Also the tickets become more expensive when more money goes to security.

Not 3 hrs. Interviews are around 10-15 minutes at the most.

Prices per ticket are competitive to that of Air France, KLM, United, etc. and not more expensive mainly because the El Al security expenditures are significantly lower due to its realiance on experienced employees rather than TSA expenditures on redundant minimum wage employees and the exorbitant prices it spends on full body scanners and other expensive machinery.

So 2 more baseless accusations to chock up. I can see a trend with you.

EDIT: As a sidenote, I haven't heard of any potential terrorists being caught in TSA run US airports post 9/11 with all these ridiculous measures (ie removal of shoes) in place. Anybody else?

 

[nchammer326]

Doesn't seem much better than the TSA:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9578604

http://bigpeace.com/pschweizer/2010/11/22/airport-security-israeli-style-strip-search-anyone/

 

[MikeSun5]

Do you have any evidence at all these things are making us safer?

Nice try, but I said "safeLY," smarty. There's no proof that the security measures are making anything "safER" just like there's no proof that the measures are making no difference at all.

And the point is that the new proceedures really don't make us safer, therefore the cost is too great.

Again, I'd like to see proof of that.

This is starting to sound like a Head & Shoulders Shampoo argument. One side says we don't need H&S shampoo (security) because there is no dandruff (terrorism), while the other says we don't have dandruff because we already use the shampoo.

Anyhoos the body scanner does not bother me that much.

True... They don't seem to bother the majority of people, either. A lot of this is simply media frenzy combined with the CTers who think this is just one more step towards the inevitable complete government domination.
tinfoil Body Scanners = NWO!! O noes!)

I will concede that the number of legit attacks versus the sheer volume of people that fly every day do not seem to warrant extra security measures, but there are new methods devised every day by nutjobs to beat those measures. If the scanners and fondling decrease the already super-low odds of an attack, I don't see how that's bad.

 

[elgarak]

Doesn't seem much better than the TSA:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9578604

http://bigpeace.com/pschweizer/2010/11/22/airport-security-israeli-style-strip-search-anyone/

This here is the complete story of the girl in your second link. Has some interesting details, such as that she had an earlier run-in with Israeli airport security because of a keffiyeh (the Palistinian head scarf made famous by good-ole Yassir Arafat) she had bought in Jerusalem (the Arabian part, I presume). I.e., she herself may have been already be on on some kind of black list.

One observation of mine: So far, all the 'horror' stories about Israeli security checks I have read came from young women/girls. These women/girls are either incredibly naive about the nature of Israel and Palestine, or flat-out lie, and always seem to be flirty with Palestine culture and some of their male members. They either don't know, or are unable to hide, that one of the more common threats to Israeli security are young women being seduced by male Palestinians, which are then (knowingly, or unknowingly to the girls) (mis-)used as mules (for explosives, information or accessory electronics hidden in their belongings). In short, most of those stories can be also understood as Israeli security being successful.

 

[BeAChooser]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7308912.html

Cabinet secretaries, top congressional leaders and an exclusive group of senior U.S. officials are exempt from toughened new airport screening procedures when they fly commercially with government-approved federal security details.

Why should ANY government employee be allowed to skip a scan if a scan is as safe as we are being told, not an invasion of rights, and doesn't take all that much time (it doesn't)?

Sure, let them move to the front of the line to save them delay, but scan them.

The American people should insist on this. They (or the staff accompanying them) could be just as crazy as anyone else (some of them are).

If they choose not to be scanned, then they should also be subject to the same "pat down" and "groping" that the rest of us will be. No exceptions.

But of course, none of them will choose to not be scanned, will they, since the government has assured us this is safe and not an invasion of one's person, privacy or Constitutional rights.

So this really shouldn't be an inconvenience to them.

And there is no chance that any pictures of that person will become public ... they are only temporary images. Right?

So make them be scanned. FOR OUR SAFETY.

 

[JeanFromBNA]

Summarizes my take. Banning certain items, and checking the hell out of normal, upstanding, non-terrorist passengers is a fundamentally flawed approach. Even weapons are not a problem if the plane is full of people who have no intention to use them and just want to get from A to B.

There are always items that can be (mis-)used on the plane, and are allowed to be carried on board.

What needs to be done is take out the people with evil intentions. With a small amount of banned-item-checking to prevent the really obvious (time bombs), and to have a stressor applied to passengers to judge their behavior by. Which is the Israeli approach.

Why do false positives matter? As long as there are no false negatives (terrorist slipping through), and the false positives (suspicious behavior passenger that get taken out and inspected more thoroughly) are much fewer in number than the TSA approach of inspecting thoroughly everyone, it's still the better approach.

Instead of relying on many inconsistently screened, poorly paid, minimally trained TSA employees it would be more effective to use professional security agents. Law enforcement and professional security personnel use effective observation skills during the course of their work almost every day. Inserting random additional searches into the overall security matrix would make weapons smuggling more risky and less rewarding to attempt.

 

[elgarak]

Instead of relying on many inconsistently screened, poorly paid, minimally trained TSA employees it would be more effective to use professional security agents. Law enforcement and professional security personnel use effective observation skills during the course of their work almost every day. Inserting random additional searches into the overall security matrix would make weapons smuggling more risky and less rewarding to attempt.

Indeed.

There was this incident where a guy took off his clothes down to tight biker shorts. Of course he was a smeghead who wanted to push things (and got it), but the insistence of the TSA screeners on dressing again and patting him down shows that they are automatons that just follow a script, without knowing why the script is there. The better procedure would be to go through his clothes, and send him on with a "Nice shorts" one liner.

 

[rwguinn]

Indeed.

There was this incident where a guy took off his clothes down to tight biker shorts. Of course he was a smeghead who wanted to push things (and got it), but the insistence of the TSA screeners on dressing again and patting him down shows that they are automatons that just follow a script, without knowing why the script is there. The better procedure would be to go through his clothes, and send him on with a "Nice shorts" one liner.

Instead, they arrested him and his buddy, who recorded the whole thing on a cell phone...

 

[DavidJames]

A lot of this is simply media frenzy combined with the CTers who think this is just one more step towards the inevitable complete government domination.

Indeed. It's mildly amusing to see so many here caught up and contributing to all the hyperbole.

The perfect juxtaposition between media frenzy and reality was on display last night on the local (Denver) news. First there is the national story about the horrible horrible TSA tactics and the people revolting, then there was the local reporters interviewing passengers at DIA who almost unanimously were ho hum about the situation.

 

[elgarak]

Indeed. It's mildly amusing to see so many here caught up and contributing to all the hyperbole.

The perfect juxtaposition between media frenzy and reality was on display last night on the local (Denver) news. First there is the national story about the horrible horrible TSA tactics and the people revolting, then there was the local reporters interviewing passengers at DIA who almost unanimously were ho hum about the situation.

Well, most people don't have much choice. They want to get through it.

Personally, I don't mind getting porno-scanned (I know the radiation is negligible, but I'm a physicist and engineer, and know how the x-rays are generated. I don't mind being seen naked, and if someone gets a kick out of it, good for them. I'm not a sex-object often enough. ) or patted down. So I treat this whole thing just like a service call to an internet provider. I just go with the script.

That doesn't mean that I don't think that TSA violates rights (they do, for quite some time now), or that I consider the procedures effective for improving safety.

 

[MikeSun5]

Well, most people don't have much choice. They want to get through it.

Personally, I don't mind getting porno-scanned (I know the radiation is negligible, but I'm a physicist and engineer, and know how the x-rays are generated. I don't mind being seen naked, and if someone gets a kick out of it, good for them. I'm not a sex-object often enough. ) or patted down. So I treat this whole thing just like a service call to an internet provider. I just go with the script.

That doesn't mean that I don't think that TSA violates rights (they do, for quite some time now), or that I consider the procedures effective for improving safety.

I think this type of attitude will end up prevailing. Most of us just want to get the damn traveling over with. The new security might suck, but so did the old security. The benefit now is that with the baggage x-rays and porno-scanners (I'm stealing that ), you can potentially get from your home all the way to your seat next to a fat person on the plane without being touched by anyone.

 

[WildCat]

porno-scanners (I'm stealing that ),

I'm calling dibs on stealing "freedom frisk".

 

[MikeSun5]

I'm calling dibs on stealing "freedom frisk".

I read this and immediately pictured an Uncle Sam poster with him wearing a latex glove on his pointing hand.

 

[Skeptic Guy]

Nice try, but I said "safeLY," smarty. There's no proof that the security measures are making anything "safER" just like there's no proof that the measures are making no difference at all.



Again, I'd like to see proof of that.

This is starting to sound like a Head & Shoulders Shampoo argument. One side says we don't need H&S shampoo (security) because there is no dandruff (terrorism), while the other says we don't have dandruff because we already use the shampoo.


(SNIP)

It's only going to stop the stupid terrorists. The ones hanging bombs off their bodies. I can think of a couple of ways to sneak a bomb onboard a plane that a back-scatter won't find. They have been mentioned a couple of times.

Plus, there are a number of articles out there that cast doubt on the efficacy of these units to find what they were designed to find.

The fact is that the terrorists haven't done the same thing twice. 9/11 should not have happened to begin with, we had the procedures in place to thwart it from the start. They just were not followed. A 9/11 attack won't happen again, the passengers are not going to let it.

They keep coming up with different ways to attack planes and that will continue. Are we going to keep layering on security checks as we go along? How much of a delay will result? What if one of the bombers just gets in line at a security check point and pulls the trigger? How are we going to stop that?

It just goes on and on and on. We need to provide smarter security, not more of it.

 

[BeAChooser]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...wanting-pumped-milk-passed-X-ray-machine.html

Breast-feeding passenger claims she was harassed by TSA for not wanting her pumped milk passed through X-ray machine

… snip …

She had 12 ounces of breast milk with her and as per TSA guidelines, she requested the milk not be passed through the X-ray scanner because of possible radiation.


… snip … she had printed out the rules from the TSA website and intended to show it to the agents when she was once again asked to go through additional screening when she requested her pumped breast milk not be passed through the X-ray machines.

… snip …

When she went to retrieve the papers from her bag to show the TSA agents the guidelines, her hand was swatted away by the security guard who would not let her touch her own belongings.

The guidelines state: 'Mothers flying with, and now without, their child be permitted to bring breast milk in quantities greater than three ounces as long as it is declared for inspection at the security checkpoint.'

… snip …

Ms Armato was ushered into the special screening box where she stood for almost an hour in tears - and missed her flight home to her baby.

Finally allowed to show the TSA manager their own guidelines, the man reviewed the papers, but then decided not to follow federal law leaving the new mother frustrated.

After her long wait she was patted down, sent back to the security box, and then eventually told by the security manager that she had two options - to either pass her breast milk through the X-ray machine or dump the milk in the trash.

She is then told that that she has to pour all of her milk into eight individual 1.5 ounces containers, and then go through security again if she wants to take the milk home to her baby.

Here's video of the incident:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XhnZlmLGK8

TSA is truly stuck on stupid.