TSA will soon be "psycho-bullying" people into body scanners

[Stumblingdrunk]

Patdown's inmates get in intake are more invasive then what TSC does. So yea he'd keep his job.

i did not mention inmates anywhere..

[Melena]

Well he is a cop, and when they arrest someone they do an invasive pat down of anyone they arrest to check for weapons, so the point stands.

[Stumblingdrunk]

Well he is a cop, and when they arrest someone they do an invasive pat down of anyone they arrest to check for weapons, so the point stands.

if your point is ignoring what i said, to continue your mindless "HEY GUYS ITS NO BIG DEAL LULZ!!" rant, then i guess you're right

[Stumblingdrunk]

or are you trying to say that we commit a crime by purchasing an airline ticket?

[aurik]

If you're gay, can you request to be groped by someone of the opposite sex instead?

[Stumblingdrunk]

If you're gay, can you request to be groped by someone of the opposite sex instead?

i was wondering about that, maybe this will be the year that the republican party goes all in with a "gays are a national security threat" campaign

[Norellicus]

Well he is a cop, and when they arrest someone they do an invasive pat down of anyone they arrest to check for weapons, so the point stands.

So you're comparing a search based on due cause to one that is being performed by default on anyone who wants to ride an airplane?

[Melena]

or are you trying to say that we commit a crime by purchasing an airline ticket?

Ok, your a fucking idiot. You asked if he'd get fired for giving the same kind of pat down at work that the TSA does. I say he wouldn't, and the best you can say is we are committing a crime by purchasing a ticket. If you've read anything i've said prior, i'd take the body scanner over the pat down any day of the week as those are our two options. Do I like them? No, I think it's a huge waste of money for a marginal at best way of preventing a bomb or weapon from being brought on board, but it won't stop me from flying. At this point your just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Kuya]

If you're gay, can you request to be groped by someone of the opposite sex instead?

Or what if you're a straight? Can you request that the agent not be gay?

Amid recent controversy over airport pat-downs, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality is calling for the Transportation Security Administration to institute some "common-sense, healthy 'discrimination'" by banning "self-acknowledged homosexuals" from doing security screenings, "so as to avoid [passengers] being put in sexually compromising situations."...

http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet...tsa/index.html

[Stumblingdrunk]

Ok, your a fucking idiot.

You seem to think that no difference exists between an inmate and a suspect, and i'm the idiot? ok

Edit:

At this point your just arguing for the sake of arguing.

half of your posts in this thread have been about how posting in this thread is pointless. You might be confused about which one of us is just arguing for the hell of it

[Norellicus]

Also, since I've missed a page and a half let me sum up some counter arguments...

It's a deterrent

To a rational person. A fanatic isn't going to give two shits, he's already justified his actions in his own mind if he's in the airport with a bomb and no blueshirt is going to stop him.

The attacks we missed didn't work, therefore we succeeded

Let's assume you're right; does this new method stop those same exact attacks? Experts say no. A backscatter wouldn't pick up most powders, liquids, or low-density plastics (like the ones the underwear bomber had!), and a patdown would require some very careful feeling to accomplish anything. Invasive as they are, experts also say that the new patdowns wouldn't likely find molded or shaped devices, and it definitely won't find devices they've ingested or otherwise inserted into their orifices. These are the cases the justification for the backscatter rides on; without them, they don't detect anything that couldn't already be found using prior methods (inadequate as they may have been). SO WHAT FUCKING GOOD DOES THIS DO?

Keeping bombs off planes reduces terrorism

We already went over this shit, it doesn't. Johnny McTurban can't straight up hijack the plane anymore unless the pilot is dumb enough to leave the cockpit, which I'm pretty sure every code in the book now says not to do, even in hostage situations. So his only other option is to attempt to blow it up, kill 200 people, and strike fear in the rest of the flying public. Except why go through all that trouble when he can (and will!) set off his device in the security line before he's been screened? He can easily get just as many people that way, have the added benefit of mechanically shutting down an entire airport for some period if time, and it'll still incite fear in the general public about the safety of the airport itself, if not the entire industry. Not to mention the hundreds of other ripe targets available year round via sporting events and other large gatherings. So what makes you think planes are the prime target here? Because CNN said so? Because all we ever hear about is the thwarted plane bombings? Do you also assume robberies don't happen simply because they don't report the thwarted ones?

[Kuya]

While the foot soldiers might not be the brightest, i think it's a foolish thing to think that these particular terrorists, the ones doing the planning, are these irrational religious fanatics that have no reason. And when he said deterrent he didn't mean, i think, that they would just give up if you, for example, set up dick watching machines, but that it would decrease the chances that they would, for example, attack using airplanes. It doesn't mean they won't try to do something else. So i think you misunderstood: by deterrant, he does not mean some demoralizing agent.

[Norellicus]

Refer to my third point then.

[jmc]

Implementing new security measures as a deterrent is great. Implementing a deterrent that results in the recording of naked images of everyone that gets on a plane, and or a mild public sexual assault however, is not great. Would you keep your job if you patted down a suspect in the same manner?

Speaking of keeping job during a patdown.....

I'll be damned if a male TSA agent pats down my girlfriend.

If a male police officer pats down/searched a female, he will lose his job and the department would quickly have a lawsuit on their hands. Why hasn't any females filed suits against getting patted down by TSA male agents?

[Salodin]

Why hasn't any females filed suits against getting patted down by TSA male agents?

Female TSA agents don't exist?

They aren't retarded. I have never seen some one get searched by a person of the opposite sex at an airport. It's just common sense.

[Kuya]

Can you get sued for letting a lesbian police officer pat down another woman?

[aurik]

It doesn't matter if we reduce the number of planes they attack when there are plenty of other attack vectors that are as of yet completely untapped. A deterrent isn't much good if all it accomplishes is to redirect the terrorists into equally viable alternatives.

[aurik]

Also who gets to pat down a pre-op transgender? Post-op?

[jmc]

Female TSA agents don't exist?

They aren't retarded. I have never seen some one get searched by a person of the opposite sex at an airport. It's just common sense.

I thought there was a CNN article posted earlier about a female getting patted down by a male TSA agent, including patting around her chest.

[Correction]

Also who gets to pat down a pre-op transgender? Post-op?

In both cases, the rookie, obviously.