She was obviously NOT a freaking terrorist. There was no need to pull a child this young out for a random pat-down.
They don’t pat down the girl because they think she’s the terrorist, they pat down the girl because they think it is possible for the adults to use her to bring weapons on board the plane, ceramic weapons that would be undetectable by the metal detector. I’m not saying I agree, I’m just explaining what they are thinking.
It would be interesting to see what free market solution would be in place should the government exit the airline industry altogether. Does anyone think that airlines would not require some form of consent to search as a condition to use their property for air travel?
It would be interesting to see what free market solution would be in place should the government exit the airline industry altogether. Does anyone think that airlines would not require some form of consent to search as a condition to use their property for air travel?
A free market solution… Let me see, I guess some airlines just wouldn’t require any if they so choose, but do you think people would board that plane or go with that airlines, when there is another one with a metal detector, X-Ray screening of belongings, patting down before flight? I guess if more people go to the flights that have such a check point, then the ones that don’t would see that it is hurting their business not to have such measures in place. Maybe the consent to be searched would be covered in the inital ticket purchase, or something like that, and any specification with what you can board with and so forth given then as well, or if it’s changed any or whatever a way for one to find out beforehand, etc.
They don’t pat down the girl because they think she’s the terrorist, they pat down the girl because they think it is possible for the adults to use her to bring weapons on board the plane, ceramic weapons that would be undetectable by the metal detector. I’m not saying I agree, I’m just explaining what they are thinking.
I know what they are thinking, but they need to be patting down Mooslim kids instead of blonde white girl. A little profiling goes a long way - reference El Al.
It would be interesting to see what free market solution would be in place should the government exit the airline industry altogether. Does anyone think that airlines would not require some form of consent to search as a condition to use their property for air travel?
Whatever method they would employ, it would not be an increasingly tyrannical government imposing the searches.
Up until the “naked machine”/sexual assault parameters came on-line, the procedures were generally just an inconvenience rather than an intrusion. (IMO)
Up until the “naked machine”/sexual assault parameters came on-line, the procedures were generally just an inconvenience rather than an intrusion. (IMO)
Comparing a TSA pat down to a sexual assault really trivializes a real sexual assault.
Comparing a TSA pat down to a sexual assault really trivializes a real sexual assault.
Yes and no. I spent a fair amount of time doing volunteer work with victims of sex crimes/abuse/assault as has my wife (me as a volunteer her as a psych professional).
Many women who have suffered some form of sexual trauma report feeling terrorized by these procedures.
The fact is you have no control, no right to say no and now, no right to leave rather than going through with the search.
For myself, my personal and professional business is being hampered by the fact that I will not fly because I know myself well enough to know that anyone forcing me to submit to this would likely end up hurt. Badly. And me in jail.
Many women who have suffered some form of sexual trauma report feeling terrorized by these procedures.
I think this illustrates my point. They were “damaged” by the real sexual assault not the TSA pat down. Most people do not suffer years of sexual emotional trauma from a TSA pat down whereas people who are subjected to a real sexual assault often suffer years of emotional trauma.
Please understand the distinction that I’m not defending TSA or government involvement in airline security. Rather I"m making a distinction between a vicious, violent attack involving malice and an intent to hurt and defile from an administrative pat down for security reasons from a person who in all likelihood is not intending to hurt or defile, has no malice, and is not doing it for some twisted sexual gratification. I think the comparison undermines the seriousness of a real attack.
1 Like
I think this illustrates my point. They were “damaged” by the real sexual assault not the TSA pat down. Most people do not suffer years of sexual emotional trauma from a TSA pat down whereas people who are subjected to a real sexual assault often suffer years of emotional trauma.
Please understand the distinction that I’m not defending TSA or government involvement in airline security. Rather I"m making a distinction between a vicious, violent attack involving malice and an intent to hurt and defile from an administrative pat down for security reasons from a person who in all likelihood is not intending to hurt or defile, has no malice, and is not doing it for some twisted sexual gratification. I think the comparison undermines the seriousness of a real attack.
I get what you’re saying but I still only partly agree with you.
It’s like you may not have caused the wound… but it doesn’t mean you are not causing harm by ripping the scab off.
What is interesting to me is the fact that a video of a 6-year-old going through a scanner that emits ionizing radiation isn’t news, but one of her getting a pat-down is.
If she (or her parents) were given a choice, then they chose the pat down.
If she was not given a choice, then it was because young children aren’t allowed to go through the apparatus.
(I don’t know the TSA rules, I’m just looking at it from a health perspective.)
Not all airports even have body scanners yet.
Comparing a TSA pat down to a sexual assault really trivializes a real sexual assault.
Calling this something other than a “real sexual assault” kinda trivializes what they are actually doing. Does the fact that it may be less violent than others somehow diminish its import? <_<
1 Like
Calling this something other than a “real sexual assault” kinda trivializes what they are actually doing.
No, it doesn’t. What is important is to recognize what they are actually doing, not exaggerating it something that it is not to appeal to emotion.
Does the fact that it may be less violent than others somehow diminish its import?
Straw man. I didn’t say that it was not important. I said the comparison trivializes actual sexual assaults. I’m calling BS if you say that you would be just as fine being held done, punched, kicked and forcibly anally sodomized as you would be having the back of someone hand brush your outer clothing while checking for weapons.
1 Like
Plenty of women have had their boobs groped by TSA Nazis. I’d call that sexual assault. Certainly not something one of us are allowed to do in the course of our day. I work in the Security field and can’t grope boobs.
Reductio ad Hitlerum is true I guess. I’m done here.
Whether one is killed in their sleep with poison or blown apart with explosives, the upshot is that you are dead. Dismissing one wrong by pointing at an even more heinous wrong does not make the former “OK”. It may be a form of mental triage, but both wrongs remain wrong.
Dismissing one wrong by pointing at an even more heinous wrong does not make the former “OK”.
Ridiculous.
Rational Biker is NOT making the claim that this is OK, he is merely making the claim that forcible rape is worse, and that claiming that neither is worse than the other trivializes forcible rape.
Whether one is killed in their sleep with poison or blown apart with explosives, the upshot is that you are dead. Dismissing one wrong by pointing at an even more heinous wrong does not make the former “OK”. It may be a form of mental triage, but both wrongs remain wrong.
Lets try not to confuse things here.
While I partially disagree with some of the conclusions RationalBiker has reached it is dishonest to twist his words into claiming he is saying that this is ok.
Everything he has put forth that I have read so far is that it is wrong (what TSA is doing)- but not as wrong as some of us say it is.
Those of us who disagree with his estimation of the seriousness of this violation are better served by using reason to dispute the conclusion he has reached than attacking him with false and twisted variations on his statements.
Edited to make a certain point clearer.
IF the government allows someone or something to slip through security and another plane blows up or crashes into a building, the public cries out that the government is not doing enough to protect it’s citizens and they want heads to roll.
And that is why new security proposals must be proven to be genuinely effective, rather than creating a false sense of security while being incredibly intrusive.
No airport in the world faces terrorist threats more serious than does Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv and yet it is the most secure airport in the world. Ben Gurion has experienced no serious terrorist incidents for more than 30 years. At the same time we don’t hear stories like the one above at that airport.
What infuriates people about TSA and what makes it different from Ben Gurion Aiport’s approach, is the repeatedly displayed lack of common sense. A person does not need to have a degree in security screening to see that this family clearly did not pose any security risks.
Ben Gurion Aiport has a very comprehensive security planning but this thread is about the pat downs so I will focus on that.
Are there occasional pat downs at the Ben Gurion Aiport? Yes - there is a chance of that. However, those are implemented in conjunction with behavior pattern recognition. This policy not only satisfies civil liberties questions (I think it would for any reasonable person) but for over 30 years has been meeting their security goals. Racial profiling is not as effective because an enemy of a different ethnic background (but similar beliefs..) could be missed and potentially able to successfully carry out an attack.
I can guarantee you that if TSA airport security staff was well trained in behavior pattern recognition and “given reasonable suspicion…” was in TSA’s vocabulary in relation to these pat downs - people like me would have a much easier time accepting this policy.
This is just one example of the kind of improvements which could be made.
Again, it is the lack of common sense, it is the blatant missing of the mark in terms of security like in the above example, which is infuriating. It is for this reason that TSA gets absolutely no sympathy from me even though, similarly to you, I do recognize the need for security.
1 Like
A person does not need to have a degree in security screening to see that this family clearly did not pose any security risks.
And where exactly in that video does it clearly show that?
Did it show what lead up to the pat down?
Did it show the behavoir of the parent(s), child before the pat down?
That asked, one might argue the video is shown out of context.
And also the rules and guidelines in airport security, like at that one, anyone know what they are? Do they need a reason, can they do random pat downs?
Reductio ad Hitlerum is true I guess. I’m done here.
They were just “following orders” too.