Too far

Matthew Hoy
By Matthew Hoy on November 15, 2010

Late last month the Transportation Security Administration expanded the use of full-body scanning machines and more intrusive pat-downs.

When I write “more intrusive pat-downs” I really mean “sexual assault under color of authority.” You can check out what happened to one traveler who refused to undergo the full body scan and groping just to get on a plane here.

And, because we know how dangerous little girls are, here’s TSA doing to a little girl what would (and should) get most people arrested.

TSA Screener Accosts 3 Year Old Child at Security

My first impulse is to demand that, like Kathleen Sebelius did with showing us all how to cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze, Janet Napolitano show us the proper way of getting groped by TSA – live, on video.

As for the full-body scanning machines, well, once all TSA officials from Napolitano on down have had their full body scans posted online, then I still won’t be wanting to go through those either.

I can deal with metal detectors, having to take off my shoes and having to take out my laptop computer and place it in a separate bin going through the metal detector.

This is too far.

Reason 1: They’re never going to find anything on anyone who intends to bring down a plane. Why is a single second spent screening pilots? Think about that for a second. Does a pilot really need to sneak on explosives in a 1 gallon zip-loc bag (as opposed to the TSA standard 1 quart bag)? They’ve got control of the dang plane! If you can’t trust them going through security then you sure as hell can’t trust them flying a commercial airliner!

Reason 2: As Glenn Reynolds has repeatedly noted: “A pack, not a herd.” 9/11 changed everything – most notably how airline passengers respond to hijacking or other attempts at taking control (or destroying) a plane. The passengers attack. The shoe-bomber, the Christmas-Day bomber… what do they have in common? They were both stopped by passengers. Not the TSA. Has TSA screening over the past 9+ years stopped one attack? No, it hasn’t.

This is unnecessary and a bridge too far. Sadly, there’s been far too little scrutiny of these new procedures by the media. You can bet there’d be more screaming if the occupant of the White House had an “R” after his name.

3 comments on “Too far”

  1. I think the important question that has yet been raised is to what end?

    The Back-scatter scanners cannot see inside a body, but we have Drug Runners with packets of drugs in their bowels to escape drug sniffing dogs. Would the next logical step be back scatter and x-ray scans? What if you refuse at point? A full cavity search? And what if you refused that?

    How far is to far?

    We have consigned more of our freedoms for the illusion of security! And what happens when that illusion is gone, what will be left of our freedoms?

    We have surrendered ourselves to serfdom!

Tags

Perfectly said: “It’s not that the statue had become unworthy of the museum. It’s that the museum had become unworthy of the statue. “ https://www.nysun.com/editorials/theodore-roosevelt-back-to-the-badlands/91960/

Load More...

Calendar

November 2010
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

Archives

Categories

pencil
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram