Of clearly defined body scans or being groped by some TSA goon. The body scans emit radiation. For someone who flies often (I don't) this is a cancer risk. What about pregnant women or those already with cancer?  The TSA has been known to hire pedophiles and other sex offending cretins bc they don't do thorough background checks. Who says children won't be felt up for kicks?  This is the first flight I've taken in almost 2 yrs. I only know what I read and as a libertarian this bothers me.  The same thing can be accomplished by a metal detector so what's the point? To see how much shit we will tolerate?

Yes -- that is EXACTLY the point -- to up the ante on how much invasion you will accept and get you used to tugging your forelock to illiterate cretins with a badge.

On that you are correct.

On the metal detector part, though, you are incorrect. There are plenty of horrible things that creatively evil people can bring aboard an aircraft that won't activate a metal detector.

But I won't run around giving the bad guys ideas for free.  LOL

from heart disease, diabetes, an STD, or old age. I doubt the radiation emitted is less than you would get from a dental or chest x-ray.

Since I travel a lot, I'm looking to get through the process in the most efficient and effective way. So with that in mind, I just might look at OSI, ASEI, GE, L3 or SAIC who make these scanners. Might as well try and make a little money from the process. Though I might opt for OSI considering the CEO traveled with Obama to India. Always good to have influential contacts when selling something.

The only other option is whacking the 1.5B Muslims. Since that is not a viable option, I'll opt for anything to get me through the process in less than 10 minutes.

Lives aren't saved if they get cancer. People have a right to know that those scans emit radiation. Is there a disclaimer somewhere that says so? Is it worth being molested or children being molested ? In 5 yrs will it be okay to do cavity searches to get on a goddamn plane? Gimme a break. I don't know which is worse. God and everybody seeing your junk (and the images ARE kept , TSA lied bout that) from the scan, or being groped by some illiterate pervert. I think I'm gonna tape the words "FUCK YOU" in aluminum on my stomach in protest. Will aluminum show up on a body scan? LoL

Something else that's been brought up: disease or infection. TSA agents don't change gloves bw gropings, so they risk spreading things like public lice or ringworm. Even possibly, STDs.  But I guess gross disease, cancer and assault are worth "security".

today alone I will go through three different airports, I am actually at a Avianca VIP lounge in Bogota, Colombia typing this post. I will go through screening at least a dozen times just in this week alone.

In all this travel, I have never been "groped" by a TSA agent. The scanners are a PITA, but not particularly intrusive to be honest about it.

Yes, there has got to be a better way to get us through security and on about our business more effeciently, but most of this Chicken Little,the Sky is falling shit posted by SJ etal sounds more like the ramblings of TJloonytunes, and not much like anything penned by someone who actually spends much time in airports.

but now that you mention it, are you sure "whacking the 1.5B muslims" isn't a viable option? At times it doesn't sound like such a bad idea to me lol

I happen to actually be on a plane at this very minute, and while I don't like the crap I have to put up with any better than anyone else, I can state categorically that many of your statements are overblown, and are indeed reminiscent of TJloonytunes.

well, I am about to descend below ten thousand feet so I guess Gogo wireless is going to shut me up. lol

You're right, GG. Who cares if the TSA hires sex offenders. Did you know they have actually planted coke or something that looked like it, as "practical jokes" on passengers? That the scanned images ARE saved? That these scanner DO emit radiation? That the pat downs CAN spread body lice? No, the sky isn't falling, that's fucking FACTS.  These scanners have actually been banned in some countries bc of the potential cancer causing potential and the other things mentioned.   I don't appreciate your tone, and like most ppl are willing to sacrifice your own health to submit to bullshit that doesn't even do anything to protect us anyway.

I understand the need for increased security but I think there are a few not so small things that need to be worked out or improved.

I'm flying next week and if I'm selected for an enhanced pat down I am going to ask he put on a clean pair of gloves first.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=232457

And I can categorically state that you can stick your head in the sand all you want. That's what the internet exists for. Google TSAs conduct and hiring practices if you doubt me. Nothing I said was untrue. And respect goes both ways. I don't have to give a FUCK whether you like what I say or not. But bc YOU see it as overblown doesn't make it untrue. Facts are facts. Sorry if that bothers you.

Deleted, not worth effort

-- Modified on 11/28/2010 9:57:36 AM

In order to properly answer your question an FMEA would need to be performed on each situation (TSA pat down vs. BBBJ). FMEA stands for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis. It attempts to analyze any given system for risk. Generally the analysis is broken down into three metrics. For tes situations they could be expressed as follows:

1) Severity of infection if it occurs.
2) Length or duration of exposure
3) Probability of becoming infected during a single exposure

Each of the three categories is objectively rank 0 to 1 with 0 having no effect or or zero exposure or no possibility etc. and of course an assignment of 1 would indicate maximum effect (death) or continuous exposure or certainty of infection etc.

The three numbers are then multiplied resulting in a total risk of 0 to 1.

For example if a given system were ranked 50% in all three cases the total risk is 0.5 X 0.5 X 0.5 for a total of  0.125 or 12.5%

To be more accurate the analysis should be performed for each type of possible infection, but an overall analysis could be done as well.

During a TSA pat down I wouldn’t expect to contract anything of a deadly nature so the numerical assignment for #1 is fairly low. But what bothers me is the seemingly high numbers required for #2 and #3 (compared to a BBBJ).

The old adage is that when you sleep with someone you are actually sleeping with everyone your partner (and their partners) has slept with. With a TSA pat down you are being exposed to the germs of the literally thousands of travelers that preceded you. Your chances of catching something might be quite high, but you may only catch a cold.