.
Feedback

Sound Off: Should Airport Pat-Downs Be Stopped?

Should the Transportation Security Administration nix pat-downs as part of the screening process or are they necessary to ensure safe travel?

A decade after 9/11, airport security measures are constantly evolving in an effort to keeping our skies safe, while also attempting to keep passengers from losing their minds at the security gate. 

The pat-down, however, has drawn particular scrutiny. So much so that the state of Texas, at a point earlier this year, considered a bill that make it a crime for federal agents to touch a person's anus, genitals, buttocks or breasts without probable cause, according to the Los Angeles Times.

That bill died after the Department of Justice threatened to cancel flights in the state if it passed. 

In September, a New York woman being treated for breast cancer was subjected to a pat-down at Kennedy Airport after a body scanning machine picked up tissue expanders placed in her breast as part of treatment, according to the New York Times.

What's your take? Have you ever been subjected to a pat-down? What was the experience like? Should the Transportation Security Administration nix pat-downs as part of the screening process or are they necessary to ensure safe travel? Vote in the poll below and share your thoughts in the comments. 

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Patchogue Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Al 17 December 13, 2011 at 01:33 pm
On Wednesday, 21 December 1988 Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed by a bomb killing all 243 passengers and 16 crew members.Eleven people in Lockerbie, in southern Scotland, were also killed as large sections of the plane fell in the town and destroyed several houses, bringing total fatalities to 270. As a result, the event is also known as the Lockerbie bombing. I guess that one doesn't count because the plane didn't take off from here, huh? Tell that to the American families of those who lost their loved ones.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 01:52 pm
Vito, You are referring to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Crotch Bomber. He is a mentally disturbed man who never had a chance in hell of detonating a bomb. The scanners and punitive gropefests (not the Orwellian euphemism "enhanced patdown") were conveniently instituted after he was allowed onto a plane due to the negligence of our intelligence agencies.
The scanners, most of which are manufactured by Rapiscan (how appropriate), already existed; they were discussed in the Bush administration, when, irony of ironies, the consensus was that Congress & citizens would never put up with them. Michael Chertoff, the head of DHS under Bush, who went through the revolving door to become a lobbyist for Rapiscan, pushed for their implementation right after the hyped-up Crotch Bomber episode. Quel coincidence. As many security experts have attested, the scanners and gropefests wouldn't have detected Abdulmutallab's so-called bomb, and won't detect PETN. Just one account: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8439285.stm
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 01:55 pm
And to Al 17:
The Lockerbie bombing was from a bomb IN THE CARGO. Not in someone's crotch. You do realize that 60% of the cargo is still going unscreened? Oh, but that's okay, because the TSA is busy doing more important things like sticking its hands down people's pants.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 03:13 pm
As I said, while they're confiscating tweezers and snow globes, stealing money, and groping private parts, cargo is still not being screened:
TSA Under Investigation at MSP International Five Eyewitness News has learned a team of investigators from TSA's Washington office is in the Twin Cities investigating claims that large bags have not been screen [sic] properly, and that some employees have been forced to work in a hostile workplace environment. Workers claim their concerns about how large bags are screened have been ignored by TSA management in the Twin Cities. Five Eyewitness News has obtained e-mails from TSA staff which called the treatment of some employees a "horrible nightmare." http://kstp.com/news/stories/S2409898.shtml?cat=1
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 03:20 pm
You're wrong. Flying IS a right.
Flying is a means of travel, and everyone has a right to travel and to travel by a means of their choice. See Supreme Court case (U.S. v. Guest 383 U.S. 745 (1966)): "In any event, freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution." Another US Supreme Court case, Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) strongly supports the right to travel: "'The constitutional right to travel from one State to another . . . has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized.' United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757 . This constitutional right, which, of course, includes the right of 'entering and abiding in any State in the Union,' Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 39 , is not a mere conditional liberty subject to regulation and control under conventional [394 U.S. 618, 643] due process or equal protection standards. 1 '[T]he right to travel freely from State to State finds constitutional protection that is quite independent of the Fourteenth Amendment.' United States v. Guest, supra, at 760, n. 17. 2 As we made clear in Guest, it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. 3 Like the right of association, NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 , it is a virtually unconditional personal right, 4 guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 03:22 pm
Furthermore, TSA goons in the aptly named VIPR program have already invaded buses, trains, subways, ferries, AND highways.
It's your TSA propaganda that doesn't fly.
Vito December 13, 2011 at 03:45 pm
Lisa, after reading all your comments I am left wondering what your ideal concept of security for airlines and other forms of public transport would be.
Vito December 13, 2011 at 03:50 pm
Lisa, the underwear guy was probably mentally disturbed, but that alone does not disqualify one from being able to make things go boom. I could provide you a long list of crazy people who caused mayhem. He had the ingredients, perhaps not enough to bring a plane down, but did get them on the plane. I mean no disrespect, but are you suggesting this underwear incident was a ploy by scanner manufacturers to get their equipment into airports?
Ron Bonner December 13, 2011 at 04:19 pm
AL 17 mentions PanAm 103. The explosive device is thought to have been a portable radio (boom box) that was part of the checked baggage/cargo.
Had that flight originated at a US airport and since TSA still does not screen 100% of cargo loaded on commercial passenger aircraft even today, more than 10 years after 9/11, there is no guarantee that such attack would not be successful again. TSA seems more interested in Strip Searching Grannies and feeling up little children than doing what Congress has mandated.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 05:57 pm
Vito, the same security procedures that were in effect before the TSA was created. At the very least before they started groping people en masse. As I said above, planes weren't being blown out of the sky left and right before 9/11, on 9/11, or since 9/11.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 06:05 pm
Brava, Susan Barretta!
But no matter how many times we bring up this fact -- that somebody could blow up a cafe, a garage, the checkpoint itself (where people are crowded together in an easy target), anywhere in the concourse (as in Moscow's Domodedovo), a stadium, a mall, take-your-pick -- the TSA apologists never answer. I've asked this countless times on blogs, at newspapers, of journalists, in person. They never answer. Perhaps they'll only be happy when they have to get scoped and groped every time they leave the house. Then they can preserve their fantasy of 100% Security Everywhere All The Time. (Almost 35,000 traffic fatalities EVERY YEAR in this country. Have they stopped driving? Oops -- there goes the argument that they're concerned about safety.)
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 06:38 pm
"are you suggesting this underwear incident was a ploy by scanner manufacturers to get their equipment into airports?"
Who knows? I don't. I do know when I smell something fishy. And I know that lawyer Kurt Haskell and his wife, on that plane with Abdulmutallab, also smelled -- and saw -- something fishy, as they've said in countless interviews, including interviews with the risk-averse mainstream press (in other words, not on conspiracy-theory sites).
Vito December 13, 2011 at 06:39 pm
Let me ask you Lisa, do you lock your house when you leave? I can throw a cement block through a window and be in your living room in seconds. Do you lock your car when you park? A thief can get past that in seconds. You are right that we can never make the world 100% safe, but taking the precautions we can isn't without merit as you make it seem. I agree wholeheartedly that the airport security system is flawed, but not sure your "pissed off passenger" approach to security is the right approach.
Vito December 13, 2011 at 06:43 pm
I understand your concerns about privacy and such, but the world has changed a great deal since the days you long for. And for what its worth I travel quite a bit, and have not seen this mass groping you write about.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 06:48 pm
Vito, yes, of course I lock my house. I don't get stripped and groped when I walk out the door, though. Not yet anyway. Though with so many people willing to bend over and spread 'em Because The Terrorists Are Everywhere, that day is probably not far off.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 06:50 pm
"And for what its worth I travel quite a bit, and have not seen this mass groping you write about."
TRANSLATION: Because it hasn't happened to me, therefore it doesn't happen. Q.E.D. Again, I refer you to empirical evidence: bit.ly/TravelUndergroundTSAabuses
Jonathan Corbett December 13, 2011 at 06:54 pm
The TSA has presented us with a false choice: let us photogrpah you naked with our nude body scanners, and touch your genitals if we think it's necessary, or air travel will be unsafe.
The fact of the matter is that both the nude body scanners and the pat-down procedure are far from fool-proof. The nude body scanners, for example, will NOT detect a metallic object on your side (metallic objects are shown as black, as is the background -- brilliant), any object hidden under a material with similar density to human skin, any object inside of a body cavity, and any object passing through while a screener is poorly trained or not paying attention. Walk-through metal detectors have none of these issues: they detect metal regardless of where it is, what you cover it, and who's paying attention (they're pretty hard to ignore!). If we bring back the hand-held (the wand) metal detectors, use the explosive trace detection systems (the swab) more often, and train more bomb-sniffing dogs, we will *far* exceed the efficacy of the current scheme while respecting the rights of everyone. It's win-win for all -- except the body scanner manufacturers and the administration who will be embarassed of the way they treated people and wasted money. --Jon
Vito December 13, 2011 at 07:03 pm
Your translation wasn't necessary. I stand by what I said. I have spent countless hours in and around airport security lines and I haven't seen what you describe. One would think "en masse" anything would be a bit more evident. I don't have any doubt that abuses are occurring, but I think your characterization of them as "en masse" is just your attempt to add some icing to your cake.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 07:10 pm
It's my attempt to speak the truth. Bolstered by empirical evidence. A truth that millions of Americans don't want hear. Because it's all okay, "as long as it doesn't happen to me."
That's okay. We have a saying at Travel Underground: 'One grope at a time. One grope at a time.'
Vito December 13, 2011 at 07:17 pm
I see you are intent on distorting what I say and taking it to its absurd extreme. My point was rather clear. You still lock your house knowing it isn't foolproof and won't assure you of 100% safety. That is the answer to the question you said no one ever answered. See, your trolling into this site wasn't a total waste of your time!
I am actually not a TSA apologist, nor do I think the present TSA policies are effective or wise, so I am not against all of what what you say, I just think the answer lies somewhere in the middle of what we have now and some of the extremes you put forth.
Lisa Simeone December 13, 2011 at 07:28 pm
I haven't put forth any extremes. It's the TSA who has.
I've been researching and writing on this topic for several years now, because I think civil liberties are important, and I think fighting for them is important. That's why I speak out publicly, using my real name, not a phony internet moniker, and that's why I continue to fight this battle on many fronts, using empirical evidence, statistical analysis, risk assessment, historical fact, logic. So your calling me a "troll" is especially charming. And telling.
Fred Stewart December 13, 2011 at 07:33 pm
vito, you lose...
Vito December 13, 2011 at 07:39 pm
I said you were trolling, not a troll, (see how different words have different meanings there) because I see you are not a local person on this (somewhat) local site having a discussion with neighbors. You came here just for this issue. This is your crusade and agenda, so yes, you are trolling for places to set out your views as a fisherman would set out his hooks behind a boat to stir up interest from the fish. I was one of the fish today and enjoyed the discussion. I will read up on the links you posted. I truly respect your devotion to this issue, I just don't agree with everything you say. Good luck to you.
Vito December 13, 2011 at 10:09 pm
Comments like this just make things get nasty. Nothing more productive to add? Why do I lose? Do you feel relying on "pissed-off passengers" for security is the best approach. Again, I don't disagree with Lisa in saying there are problems, but the answer to too far one way isn't necessarily too far in the opposite direction.
Bill Fisher December 14, 2011 at 02:24 am
DHS and TSA have only been effective in stripping us of our liberties and invading the privacy of countless millions of Americans. They humiliate and traumatize our fellow citizens and claim it as a success.
This has culminated in TSA digitally strip searching and molesting children and adults with impunity. After a cost of over sixty billion dollars, all that they have done is harass and humiliate passengers in a ruse intended to portray airport security. Incredibly, in less than a year TSA has managed to convince millions of Americans that it is acceptable to digitally strip search and fondle the privates of their children as a condition of air travel. No one would have believed this last year and yet here we are, forced to submit our bodies to the hands of a government clerk because spineless politicians have been bullied into allowing this by power hungry bureaucrats only interested in furthering their own fortunes. There have been 62 TSA screeners arrested this year ranging from rape and child molesting to assault and theft. Despite all of this harassment, there have been 57 security breaches in the same period. No wonder TSA complaints are up 240% over last year. Under Pistole’s perverse policies, TSA has become the most despised agency in Government and he has proven incompetent. This version of security is unacceptable and those responsible must be held accountable.
Lisa Simeone December 14, 2011 at 08:05 pm
The GAO found that 17 known terrorists traveled on 24 different occasions through security at eight airports where TSA operated its Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program, and in not a single instance did TSA agents stop the terrorists from boarding a plane.
Meanwhile, passengers are getting bullied, threatened, stripped, and groped, their money confiscated, their medication taken away, detained without cause, and forced to miss their flights. And I'm the one who's "extreme."
Vito December 14, 2011 at 09:13 pm
The fact you, and a couple of others who posted in this thread, comb the internet looking to argue your points when and wherever they are mentioned suggests that yes, you are extreme. I looked up some of your links as I said I would and found one board where you had made 1600 posts on that one forum on this subject in the span of a few months. That seems rather extreme to me!
Lisa Simeone December 14, 2011 at 09:23 pm
Yes, arming oneself with knowledge. So extreme.
John D December 15, 2011 at 11:01 pm
Should Airport Pat-downs be stopped? One Answer-
Only if you want another 9-11 to happen. Terrorists waited 8 years from the first Twin Tower bombing until 9/11/01. They have the patience to wait until something like this happens. If we let up on our guard, they will seize the opportunity we give them.
Lisa Simeone December 16, 2011 at 11:00 am
John Dirr,
You obviously haven't read any of the information in this thread.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something