Don't Touch My Junk

Discussion in 'Politics' started by daveboi, Nov 17, 2010.

  1. daveboi

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    North Las Vegas (NV, US)
    Verified:
    Photo
    The government is getting way too personal. Airports should use bomb sniffing dogs and profile for those who might be terrorists. The TSA do not need to need to take a picture or feel my junk just to fly. If you don't like that, the TSA will sue you and give you a $10,000 fine. I wouldn't want my 13 year old nephew or niece to have to deal with that.

    YouTube - Don't Touch My Junk Bro! - Interview With John Tyner
     
    #1 daveboi, Nov 17, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2010
  2. XSILVER

    XSILVER Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    Messages:
    828
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    755
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto
    I am not opposed to the new scanners at the air ports what so ever. It is for every ones safty and protection and so what if someone 3 floors up sees "my junk". Lets face it, We are posting pictures here on the net for ANYONE to look at and comment on. I rather have to go through the scanners than deal with a situation that i may not live through in the air.

    As for that interview, I saw it lastnight on the news and the people at the airport were nothing but professional in offering an alternitive and explaning step by step what the proceedure was going to be and even offering a private room for the pat down... That guy was just being a dusch and wanting to cause problems... thus recording it all on his cell phone
     
  3. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    I have read articles arguing that our screening procedures are utterly misdirected and ineffectual. This piece contains the following notable passage quoted from a piece of e-mail:
    On the other hand, this article argues that it is not possible to replicate the Israeli system in the US.
     
  4. D_Chaumbrelayne_Copprehead

    D_Chaumbrelayne_Copprehead Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    8,978
    Likes Received:
    11
    I'm not crazy about those security procedures, but I'm less crazy about being in an exploding airplane.
     
  5. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    they need to hire hotter tsa patters.
     
  6. DevonTexas

    DevonTexas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    853
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    867
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dallas (TX, US)
    Just for the record:

    I fly a lot and if singled out, I won't walk through the gene splicing x-ray, however, will then submit to a pat down and will then file a sexual abuse case against the TSA.
     
  7. D_Martin van Burden

    D_Martin van Burden Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,365
    Likes Received:
    6
    Okay, okay. I'm a little lost. I've walked plenty of times through the scanner. On occasion, I have been given a pat down. It's all of five seconds. Pat, pat, pat; you're good, have a nice flight.

    So, I watched that YouTube clip and my first thought was really simple. Did this issue not even come up in the pre-planning stages of the TSA? Here's the thing. At one point in our recent history, we got so freaked out by terrorist attacks that the Bush administration set up this massive system to beef up security, install new technologies to catch anything suspicious, tell us to keep our shampoo at home, and then make us all hypervigilant while we're waiting to board a plane. ("If you see suspicious activity...", "Please do not leave your bags unattended.")

    The scanners got a little more fancy. (I say so what if you're staring at my junk rather than checking for weird items.) And if you're skeeved about that, you still get patted down just like you've been patted down before.

    What's the big deal? Is it because that TSA officer was a little more explicit about where he would touch to do his pat-down? I mean, that's a rather well-informed description of what will happen over the next few seconds so that way there is no confusion about how the procedure works.
     
  8. D_Reuben Stallpisser

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is NOT the same as the five-second pat. I've had those, too. This is a full-fledged, full-body search. The back of the hand is not used, the palm of the hand is used. The screener frisks the groin as well as the limbs and waist. Several people have said screeners have gone even further and put their hands inside their clothing. This is not allowable for any other police agency in the country as a random screen. An over-the-clothing search is only allowed if there is probable cause to believe the person being searched is armed and dangerous. Touching inside the clothing is NEVER allowable.
     
  9. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,319
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,180
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    I'm having a titanium shoulder put in on 12/16 so I will be at the mercy of the TSA people as I will always beep when going through a metal detector.
    My favorite patdown took place at the Kathmandu Airport. It was done by the Military. A hot Nepali Soldier took me into a small room and did a very thorough grope of my body and yes he touched my junk and yes it chubbed up a bit.....
     
  10. HiddenLacey

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,470
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    249
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    somewhere
    Personally this wouldn't be a problem for me. I have nothing to hide, so I walk through whatever security is needed and before I know it, it's over. I'm on my flight and life goes on. The scanners are supposed to be for my protection, not as a source of naked parading or naked junk oogling. I would much rather walk through a scanner than have someone pat me down or physically search my person. Even if that happened I would deal with it and move on with my day.

    Though I'm not quite sure I understand why he had to go through the scanner if he was leaving the airport and not boarding a flight.
     
  11. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,897
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    600
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    Did he get you to strip first?

    Wouldnt it save a lot of money if instead of employing people to look at the monitors on these scanners just stick up a few screens so everyone could see the person in front wasnt hiding anything? So this was an idea brought in by the puritan right?

    Maybe someone can now do a real proper study of dick sizes if they get all these subjects going through? Can add it to the ethnic monitoring forms.

    Do I really care? no. Especialy if it made matters faster. but it wont. What I really find annoying is the arrogant overactive approach of some of these security people. We have to do this, but we dont have to start by assuming every passenger is a deadly enemy.
     
    #11 dandelion, Nov 17, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2010
  12. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    First people complain about the full body scanners. Then the TSA aims to do more thorough searches and the people who freely post their cock pics on the net while soliciting others to do the same get all bent out of shape. This is getting ridiculous.

    EVERYONE agrees that security needs to be heightened at airports. As a frequent traveller, we also need to make sure these proceedings go through at a quicker pace so that nobody misses their planes. The way things are now, we're already showing up to airports up to 3 hours early just to catch a flight. That is completely counterproductive and further shows that newer, updated methods are necessary. So if the full body scanners or the more thorough "patdowns" are not the ticket, then what should they do?

    Personally, I don't care either way. Just get me on the plane as safe and as fast as you can. It's not as if they're making you strip search in front of everyone in line. Contrary to some of the paranoid on this topic, none of my freedoms are "taken away" all because a security guard or a TSA agent searches me before boarding a plane. Hell, I get manhandled worse trying to go into most night clubs. Plus, I'm sure there will be a lot of embarrassing moments when security guards mistake people's dicks as weapons... although if there was ever a LPSG World Tour there could be slight delays in the line even with all of the new security methods. :biggrin:
     
  13. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    "All this screening and rescreening since 9/11, the taking of lighters, taking off shoes and belts, looking under hats, has uncovered a grand total of zero..."

    Security theater, folks.

    I was happy to play along with the charade while the song and dance didn't invade my person or endanger my health, but that's no longer the case.


    No, everyone doesn't. The existing measures are quite adequate.


    The picture you paint is highly inaccurate. I fly for work at least once per week, often more. Ninety percent of the time, I arrive at the airport within 45 minutes of published departure time. There's a slight speed advantage afforded me at some airports that offer expedited ID/boarding pass checking for business-class travelers, but that usually saves me 5 minutes in a queue at most. The real delay is inefficient use of manpower. I can't tell you how often I've seen half of the available baggage screening machines sitting unused while passengers pile up and a sizable number of TSA blue-shirts just stand around doing nothing...or busying themselves with make-work like collecting empty scanner bins.

    So what's the ticket, you ask? Utilize the full capacity of the existing screening technology stations and personnel. Expand capacity as needed by constructing additional checkpoints. It's really not rocket science.
     
    #13 HazelGod, Nov 17, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2010
  14. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Well, maybe not everyone. That was an obvious exaggeration. But the full body scanners would be a good thing. It provides another level of security as well as speeding up the process of getting through lines faster. And to think, you don't have to take off your shoes either. All I know is that the first time I saw one being set up in Newark, I was all for it.
     
  15. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    No they wouldn't, no they don't, and yes you still do.
     
  16. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,319
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,180
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    But don't you feel safer knowing that everyone is carrying fluids in a 3 ounce maximum container? (Not that someone could immediately upon boarding the plane, go into the bathroom and mix 2 3oz containers together and have SIX ounces of fluid in one container)
     
  17. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Well, the only time I ever seen one of these used was overseas and the person went through without taking off their shoes. I can honestly say with the many places I've traveled in the last few years, the "shoes off" phenomenon seems to be only a big issue in the United States. I didn't have to take them off when I travelled within Brazil, Portugal, Thailand or Cambodia (all recent travel within the last 5 years). I know they've set a full body scanner up in Newark, but I haven't seen it in operation at that location so I can't tell you with any accuracy if they're still making people take their shoes off when they use it.

    And yes, airlines do request you to get to airports up to three hours early for international flights. That's because security lines can be so long (and so slow) that if you don't get there in enough time you could lose your seat. That's happened to me personally on my first trip to Portugal. And I've been in security lines that lasted nearly 90 minutes just to go to Miami, never mind Israel or Jordan.

    Here's an article about the full body scanners being used in the UK... it also provides an actual photo taken by one of them. From the sample provided, I don't think anyone would have the ability to recognize themselves from the pictures it takes. Also quoted from the article itself - "Manchester airport said in the statement: "This latest advance in aviation security has the potential to replace the familiar "pat down" searches including the need to remove coats, jackets, shoes and belts." - http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/uk/airports-launch-full-body-scanners-$1357023.htm

    Again, I don't see the problem with any of this. I'll agree with you that some of the security concerns brought up by the TSA are foolish. The 3oz. rule is beyond pathetic. But the full body scanner, IMO, isn't one of them.
     
    #17 B_VinylBoy, Nov 17, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2010
  18. MichiganRico

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    56
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SW Michigan
    Good Lawd, folks. We've all bought into the American exceptionalism mentality. Buy whatever you want, whether you can afford it or not, so along as your Visa isn't declined. We don't want to be one of those "democratic socialist" European nations with single-payer health care for all. We're the smartest, best educated people on the planet--although the assertion is at wide variance to the facts, etc., etc., etc.

    Now it's we can fly safely without the need for intrusive searches--except for those passengers who look middle-eastern and have Arabic-sounding names, of course. Sorry, but I'm on the side of the TSA. Have any of you ever flown El Al? It has the most stringent security of any airline, complete with background checks. There hasn't been a single terrorist incident aboard one of its planes since adopting its high-security protocols. The Israelis learned from their mistakes...I wish we would, too.

    Unfortunately, we don't know that "Mr. Don't Touch My Junk" or someone like him doesn't intend harm to an aircraft and its passengers for a whole myriad of reasons: mental illness, anti-government fervor, Islamic jihadism, suicide for profit, whatever. We live in a dangerous world and the TSA is attempting to mitigate our risk. If you really can't live with the new procedures, take a bus, train, ship or automobile. It will certainly make me feel a whole lot safer, when I'm in the air, that the TSA prevails in this argument and not "Mr. Don't Touch My Junk." Sadly, however, no security regimen is foolproof, but given the threat level, this is a step in the right direction.
     
    #18 MichiganRico, Nov 17, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2010
  19. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    No, I don't feel "safer." Because I'm a reasonable, thinking being, I understand that air travel is a calculated risk, and its relative safety isn't affected by variables such as the ones focused on by the TSA's latest episodes of security theater.

    Before I had my eyeballs burned, I carried an 8oz bottle of contact lens solution on my travels...but as you yourself pointed out, the stupid rule is easily circumventable by even the most childish of machinations.
     
  20. Kotchanski

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    17,395
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    70
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    England (GB)
    Firstly, I don't do air travel... I have a fear of heights, and an even bigger fear of falling from them!

    I do understand the desire to do everything within ones power to protect those travelling, especially after 9/11, and I understand why they take the route they do, but it strikes me that the harder we make it for people, the more effort they'll put in...

    It's now all over the media about the scanners, the "advanced pat-downs" and so on, so surely anyone wishing to do something they shouldn't will know this and plan accordingly?

    If anything, all they're doing is making a bunch of people feel safer because they're going through the motions, and maybe delay any attacks by a few weeks while they come up with a new plan?

    Yes they should have security in place, yes it should make things harder, but there comes a point where they're really just beefing things up for the sake of making it feel like they're doing something.

    I've never planned to commit a crime, but I'm pretty sure one of the first steps is to make sure you can make it past the security systems put in place...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted