Post: #1

For those of you traveling into and within the United States, you're well-familiar with the absurdly invasive TSA Body Scanners (at most major US airports). Do you guys just walk through, getting blasted with radiation in the process, or do you opt for the (also invasive) pat-down? The U.S. government claims the radiation from the machines is negligible, but I'm sure I don't need to point out the problems with that assertion. The pat-down has its own problems; among them: it takes quite a bit longer.

What have you guys, since the advent of this new procedure, been doing? I've tended to opt for the pat-down, since I can't imagine those machines are safe, and I worry about them saving those pictures of my precious cock and making millions by selling them. At the same time, I sometimes figure I'm getting poisoned by shit all around me and, since I don't seem to worry about all of that, why not go along?

To paraphrase Bobby Knight: "When rape is inevitable, might as well lie back and try to enjoy it."

Post: #2

(06-26-2012 03:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  I sometimes figure I'm getting poisoned by shit all around me and, since I don't seem to worry about all of that, why not go along?

Biggest factor; how many times will you fly between the ages of 25-50.

Cancer takes a long time to develop as far as I know. ..It's also dose related.

Post: #3

(06-26-2012 03:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  For those of you traveling into and within the United States, you're well-familiar with the absurdly invasive TSA Body Scanners (at most major US airports). Do you guys just walk through, getting blasted with radiation in the process, or do you opt for the (also invasive) pat-down? The U.S. government claims the radiation from the machines is negligible, but I'm sure I don't need to point out the problems with that assertion. The pat-down has its own problems; among them: it takes quite a bit longer.

What have you guys, since the advent of this new procedure, been doing? I've tended to opt for the pat-down, since I can't imagine those machines are safe, and I worry about them saving those pictures of my precious cock and making millions by selling them. At the same time, I sometimes figure I'm getting poisoned by shit all around me and, since I don't seem to worry about all of that, why not go along?

To paraphrase Bobby Knight: "When rape is inevitable, might as well lie back and try to enjoy it."

How often do you fly? If you are really worried about levels of radiation and alleged groping get TSA PreCheck. With that you can still go through the old fashion metal detector and don't have to take off your shoes or remove laptops, liquids. Or maybe just take a train?

Post: #4

(06-26-2012 03:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  For those of you traveling into and within the United States, you're well-familiar with the absurdly invasive TSA Body Scanners (at most major US airports). Do you guys just walk through, getting blasted with radiation in the process, or do you opt for the (also invasive) pat-down?

Invasive? A pat down? Unless I am missing something,some of you guys on that side of the pond seem to take these things way too seriously. I've been patted down many times in Europe,had it done at Gatwick the other day after I set the detector off and it was not invasive,my cock was not groped or ass hole fingered. Maybe they do it differently stateside? As for the full scanner,everyone has to do it at Moscow's Domodedovo airport where I fly through quite often,never given it a second thought to be honest. Cancer will be the last of my concerns since I'm much more likely to die slamming into a mountain side on some unserviced regional airline somewhere in the FSU then living long enough to get cancer.

That is why I think I must be missing something,what exactly is it that caused such a media ruckus when these things were introduced in the States? Are you guys more protective of your private space then Europeans?

Post: #5

(06-26-2012 07:43 AM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 03:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  For those of you traveling into and within the United States, you're well-familiar with the absurdly invasive TSA Body Scanners (at most major US airports). Do you guys just walk through, getting blasted with radiation in the process, or do you opt for the (also invasive) pat-down?

Invasive? A pat down? Unless I am missing something,some of you guys on that side of the pond seem to take these things way too seriously. I've been patted down many times in Europe,had it done at Gatwick the other day after I set the detector off and it was not invasive,my cock was not groped or ass hole fingered. Maybe they do it differently stateside? As for the full scanner,everyone has to do it at Moscow's Domodedovo airport where I fly through quite often,never given it a second thought to be honest. Cancer will be the last of my concerns since I'm much more likely to die slamming into a mountain side on some unserviced regional airline somewhere in the FSU then living long enough to get cancer.

That is why I think I must be missing something,what exactly is it that caused such a media ruckus when these things were introduced in the States? Are you guys more protective of your private space then Europeans?

I go for the grope. Because it's more of a inconvenience to the TSA. And as for it being invasive? It is. In America we're used to being citizens who had the God given right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects from illegal searches and seizures, except on finding of probable cause or warrant. The TSA turns that on it's head.

Post: #6

I go for the grope. It's not that bad and takes a couple of minutes unless you're being difficult.

Post: #7

I don't like the back-scatter machines and if I'm not late for my flight, I go for the pat down. I don't worry about the radiation, but I don't like having to assume the perp/surrender position just to get on a freaking plane. It's not a huge deal, but it's a small thing that I would rather not go through.

Post: #8

(06-26-2012 08:30 AM)j r Wrote:  I don't worry about the radiation, but I don't like having to assume the perp/surrender position just to get on a freaking plane.

This is another factor for me as well. Though, to be fair, the grope is also perp-like.

The way I see it, I get to chat with the TSA guy and yuck it up about how ridiculous all of this is, instead of getting blasted with a question-mark's worth of radiation. They usually volunteer complaints themselves--with very little prompting.

I speak on my cell phone on a headset, keep electronics away from my nuts, and do other things that help me feel like I'm at least mitigating the amount of poisons and bullshit going into my body. If I were to apply the you're-going-to-die-anyway mentality, I wouldn't take any health precautions whatsoever.

Post: #9

You should go for the grope as invasive as it is. I avoid flying in America for these reasons but the body scanners are pretty much toxic and emit more radiation than a microwave or a Xray machine. If your a frequent flyer in time it will fuck things up but the TSA staff have it the worst. Most will develop cancer from these machines.

Vorkuta don't be so gullible. Just by sheer numbers and rates alone in the western world one of us in this post of 9-10 people thus far will get cancer.

Post: #10

Always go for the grope. It's a few extra minutes and doesn't bother me as much as having to stand there wondering how much radiation I'm being blasted with.

Post: #11

(06-26-2012 07:43 AM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 03:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  For those of you traveling into and within the United States, you're well-familiar with the absurdly invasive TSA Body Scanners (at most major US airports). Do you guys just walk through, getting blasted with radiation in the process, or do you opt for the (also invasive) pat-down?

Invasive? A pat down? Unless I am missing something,some of you guys on that side of the pond seem to take these things way too seriously. I've been patted down many times in Europe,had it done at Gatwick the other day after I set the detector off and it was not invasive,my cock was not groped or ass hole fingered. Maybe they do it differently stateside? As for the full scanner,everyone has to do it at Moscow's Domodedovo airport where I fly through quite often,never given it a second thought to be honest. Cancer will be the last of my concerns since I'm much more likely to die slamming into a mountain side on some unserviced regional airline somewhere in the FSU then living long enough to get cancer.

That is why I think I must be missing something,what exactly is it that caused such a media ruckus when these things were introduced in the States? Are you guys more protective of your private space then Europeans?

I've had patdowns on boths sides of the pond and stateside it's definitely more thorough than the patdown you get in the UK. They also talk you through it step by step so you don't freak out when they're checking behind your balls.

Post: #12

(06-26-2012 07:54 AM)vinman Wrote:  And as for it being invasive? It is. In America we're used to being citizens who had the God given right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects from illegal searches and seizures, except on finding of probable cause or warrant. The TSA turns that on it's head.

Ah,I get you. I thought people meant it's invasive physically,but you mean it's invasive politically. That's cool,I can respect that view point, however if it helps to stop some nutcase from hijacking the plane is it not a price worth paying? I know that personally,the tighter the security measures at an airport, the safer I feel flying.

Post: #13

(06-26-2012 02:48 PM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 07:54 AM)vinman Wrote:  And as for it being invasive? It is. In America we're used to being citizens who had the God given right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects from illegal searches and seizures, except on finding of probable cause or warrant. The TSA turns that on it's head.

Ah,I get you. I thought people meant it's invasive physically,but you mean it's invasive politically. That's cool,I can respect that view point, however if it helps to stop some nutcase from hijacking the plane is it not a price worth paying? I know that personally,the tighter the security measures at an airport, the safer I feel flying.

The point is that a lot of the measures are not actually that helpful - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater

Post: #14

(06-26-2012 02:48 PM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 07:54 AM)vinman Wrote:  And as for it being invasive? It is. In America we're used to being citizens who had the God given right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects from illegal searches and seizures, except on finding of probable cause or warrant. The TSA turns that on it's head.

Ah,I get you. I thought people meant it's invasive physically,but you mean it's invasive politically. That's cool,I can respect that view point, however if it helps to stop some nutcase from hijacking the plane is it not a price worth paying? I know that personally,the tighter the security measures at an airport, the safer I feel flying.

Your more likely to die eating McDonalds (food poisoning) or from a bee sting then having some "nutcase terrorist" hijacking your plane. Like the above poster noted the systems are flawed and can be cracked anyways.

These body scanners have nothing to do with making your flight safer they are just a money pit that invokes control on the people (they had plans for the scanners prior to the underwear bomber. Policy takes 2-3 years to roll out like this. they had the scanners in airports in a few months).


"Terrorism" only kills a few hundred Americans per year. If the Govt put as many resources towards terrorism as it did preventable things that actually kill 100K + people per year (heart disease, etc) the country would be a radically different place.

This is the same argument I brought up in the fat tax food thread. Americans scream and holler when Govt says they can't eat a fatty cheeseburger and say it infringes on their rights but they let Govt trolls grope their balls and breasts in airports for some mythical threat.


Terrorism and the Drug War are the biggest money pits in the USA Govt. The billions dumped upon those two things is obscene and neither problem gets/will be fixed.

Post: #15

If you do choose to go through the AIT machine let me give you some advice:

Don't act like the machine is zapping you and fake a semi-convulsion. They have no sense of humor whatsoever when you do that.

Also, if you get the rub down don't say things like "Ohh yeah baby" or "harder sexy" because they don't think that's funny either.

Aloha!

Post: #16

(06-26-2012 02:48 PM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 07:54 AM)vinman Wrote:  And as for it being invasive? It is. In America we're used to being citizens who had the God given right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects from illegal searches and seizures, except on finding of probable cause or warrant. The TSA turns that on it's head.

Ah,I get you. I thought people meant it's invasive physically,but you mean it's invasive politically. That's cool,I can respect that view point, however if it helps to stop some nutcase from hijacking the plane is it not a price worth paying? I know that personally,the tighter the security measures at an airport, the safer I feel flying.

So would you feel even safer if everyone flying was subject to cavity searches? Is that not a price worth paying?

Post: #17

I'm surprised to see so many people say they are worried about the radiation, it must be negligible and you'd be through the scanner in seconds.

Post: #18

[/quote]

"Terrorism" only kills a few hundred Americans per year. If the Govt put as many resources towards terrorism as it did preventable things that actually kill 100K + people per year (heart disease, etc) the country would be a radically different place.

This is the same argument I brought up in the fat tax food thread. Americans scream and holler when Govt says they can't eat a fatty cheeseburger and say it infringes on their rights but they let Govt trolls grope their balls and breasts in airports for some mythical threat.
[/quote]

Really a great point Kosko! I never looked at it like that.

Post: #19

(06-26-2012 06:41 PM)AlphaTravel Wrote:  I'm surprised to see so many people say they are worried about the radiation, it must be negligible and you'd be through the scanner in seconds.

A X-ray only last a few seconds also but they make you wear a lead plate.......

Post: #20

I've never been "groped." The most I've gotten is the wand - no TSA agent has ever run their hands over me. And I've been "randomly" selected for additional screening on many occasions. First of all, I make sure I'm well prepared for security screening in that any and everything that could set off the detector is removed from my person. I'm just fine with this, as opposed to stepping through a machine. I don't know the particulars of how much radiation is emitted, etc., but given the choice, I'd take the human with the wand or hand.

Post: #21

I am sure U.S is the #1 target for terrorist. They should have high security system.
Most countries don't need procedures that intensive.
They found a bomb in some guys shoes. now every airport in the world has to check people's shoes.
they found a liquid bomb. now you can't carry any liquid in the airplane worldwide.

I hate they require the same procedure to safest countries.

Post: #22

I opt-out since it has been proven to cause cancer. I will post link later. The TSA man with gloves simply patted me down with no groping which was no different from getting into hood clubs. LaGuardia didn't even have an opt-out option. As of 5/31/2012, they are still using metal detectors at the gate Delta flies from.

Post: #23

(06-26-2012 06:36 PM)Vice Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 02:48 PM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(06-26-2012 07:54 AM)vinman Wrote:  And as for it being invasive? It is. In America we're used to being citizens who had the God given right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects from illegal searches and seizures, except on finding of probable cause or warrant. The TSA turns that on it's head.

Ah,I get you. I thought people meant it's invasive physically,but you mean it's invasive politically. That's cool,I can respect that view point, however if it helps to stop some nutcase from hijacking the plane is it not a price worth paying? I know that personally,the tighter the security measures at an airport, the safer I feel flying.

So would you feel even safer if everyone flying was subject to cavity searches? Is that not a price worth paying?

Yeah.

Are you really scared of "some nutcase hijacking the plane"?

You realize the odds of that happening don't you?

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Benjamin Franklin

Post: #24

(06-26-2012 03:51 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  Do you guys just walk through, getting blasted with radiation in the process, or do you opt for the (also invasive) pat-down?

I go through airports at least once a month. I usually go through the body scan. My dentist also periodically takes xrays when I go to get my teeth cleaned, and I heard the other day on the radio that there is a recent study that those xrays may be dangerous to your health. I also occasionally wear a blue tooth when talking on the phone or talk directly into my cell phone almost on a daily basis, and I heard on the radio that there are studies that these practices can be dangerous. Sometimes I feel like James Bond.

Post: #25

I always take the Body Scanner over the pat-down and don't give it a second thought. Then again I might feel differently if I was boarding a plane every week.