Don't Touch my Junk‎

I've wrote about this before but thought since it's starting to be a big thing I would open the topic up again. I'm sure ya'll seen the guy over the weekend that told the tsa guy not to touch his junk he opt out of the full body scanner cause he didn't want someone seeing his junk. The question is who is right and who is wrong? Is the government going to far for safety? I guess this would be a matter of opinion of each person I can see both sides of this issue and see good points on each side.Now my thoughts on this me I personally don't care either way if I get on a plane then I'll go through the full body scanner and if they want to pat me down they can do that also. See for me I don't have a nudity problem maybe cause I was raised somewhat of nudist and raised open minded that everyone's junk is different and that along with people being different shapes, sizes and colors makes people different and this is a good thing. I think most of the United States was raised as nudity being wrong and nasty and that's why there is an issue with these full body scanners or pat downs. Hell I would go through all security naked as long as I knew I was safe once I was in the air.I know if I'm on a airplane I want to know I'm safe and if that going through a scanner or a pat down then so be it. I want to know the guy sitting next to me is safe also and don't have a bomb stuff up his ass. Now I know when it comes to kids there is a fine line and I know the crazy people that want us Americans dead would use a kid just cause we wouldn't think they would. This is an idea why not have like so many people that see the image maybe have them certified and have them in a room with only them in it so there is no chance that anyone else see's the image. So everyone can walk through the scanner even kids and that may help the problem.I'm thinking this guy that made such a big deal about having his junk touched maybe don't have much junk to touch is why he made such a big deal about it just sayin! For those flying for the Thanksgiving Holidays don't forget about NATIONAL OPT-OUT DAY!

Your Thoughts?
17 Responses
  1. Panhandle Bob Says:

    Ryan, it's a privacy issue not one of our acceptance of nudity. We have certain RIGHTS in this country- one of them being the right to not be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure. These "advanced" scanners can see right through your clothes; they amount to a virtual strip search, which the law of the land says you don't have to be subjected to UNLESS you are suspected of committing a crime.

    Or,in modern times I guess that means "...unless you bought a ticket on an airline," which seems to be the same thing. The TSA's motto evidently is: Every passenger a (potential) terrorist!

    The "opt-out" pat-down is another story. NOBODY is "touching my junk" either. Nobody. And nobody is touching the body of my son (if I had one). These searches are UNREASONABLE invasions of privacy.

    Me, I just refuse to fly on the airlines anymore. I'm done. Screw 'em. I'll drive. Every airline can go out of business for all I care.

    The terrorists have turned us into a nation of scaredy-cats, afraid of our own shadow. Do we REALLY think that someone could smuggle enough explosive in their asscrack to bring down a plane? Really? Impossible.

    But the government wants us all to be paranoid- they want us to be afraid, be very afraid of "Muslim terrorists." If we're in a constant state of fear, they can control us. And they can keep us at war indefinitely.

    We needn't fear that someone is going to "blow up a plane" by smuggling explosives onboard. That's just unbelievably silly.

    What was it Ben Franklin said? Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

    It's an important, sad state of affairs and really, not so trivial that it becomes a joking matter about the size of one man's junk. There are much larger issues here.


  2. Ryan Says:

    Thanks Bob!

    Thats what I want everybody to put there 2 cents in on this topic!

    Most of what you said I agree with that's why I'm kinda in the middle on this topic I see both points on this.

    Wouldn't it be easier if we were all naked all the time? lol j/k


  3. Aaron Says:

    What it comes down to is ... do you want to fly when there's a certain percentage opportunity for you and your fellow passengers will get killed because of some crazy fuck wanting to prove a point?

    It has nothing to do with "privacy" and more to do with "fear."

    Unfortunately when Mr. Bush and his cronies passed the Patriot Act you really don't have much choice. And, as long as our government keeps "fear" in its citizens' minds ... fear about Muslims, fear about terrorists, fear about non-white, non-straight peoples ... we will be prisoners.


  4. I fly a lot, and the biggest problem is that the TSA has dropped the "Informative" ball on this.

    First off, the images of the full body scanning are not anatomically precise. There's fuzziness around facial features and private parts. Also, the people who are looking at the images are not near the person being screened, so they never see the actual person.

    If there's something that they see on the images, they communicate with the TSA agents at the gate, who then go through another screening process.

    No images are kept of each person, and no one other than the remote screeners see the images.

    So, for me, the body scan is more private than a patdown.

    Now, there will always be risks that someone violates TSA rules, and takes a picture with their cell phone of the scan image, but there's no way anyone would be able to say that's a specific person.

    Also, let;s face it. In most cases, even if the screeners could identify who was being scanned, there are a lot more hot people that they'd remember, and a lot more people more out of shape than us that would also be remembered. So, out of 50,000 or more travellers a day, I guarantee, no one will remember my body scan image.

    As for in-person patdowns, again there are procedures in place, and each passenger needs to understand his or her rights so they can make the process as stress free as possible.

    With kids, making sure they are monitored, having a supervisor present, talking calmly about the concerns, asking the agent to explain what is going on, and having someone else - a family member or friend observe is also important.

    To me, the safety and security measures make me feel better about flying. And while I know I am not a terrorist, it is good to know that the TSA is making sure other passengers on my plane are not too!


  5. BTW, it might be interesting to see what would happen if, instead of protesting, people just took off all their clothes to walk through security and their clothes went thru the scanners like our shoes, jackets, laptops.

    I think you should arrange that Ryan.


  6. Ryan Says:

    @aaron and random thinker more good points!


  7. Anonymous Says:

    For those who are so uptite about this and also don't like GW and his Patriot Act, let me tell you something that you have apparently forgotten. The enemy knows no limits and will do ANYTHING and use ANYONE to hurt us, and by that I mean anything to cause us fear. They are as ruthless and without morals as any dictator who ever walked the earth. FDR said it correctly: "we have nothing to fear but fear itself". The Islamist terrorists know this and capitalize on it. Using a kid to carry a bomb? Absolutely, no hesitation whatsoever.
    At the present time, THIS is the technology we have to fight terrorism. If you don't like it (which is just plain stupid) then don't fly on a plane. And if you're not willing to fly on a plane, then why are you bitching about it? It's like people who don't vote bitching about the government.... just plain stupid. Privacy.... pffff. We HAVE no privacy when it comes to security - get over it.
    We live in harrowing times. The government is trying to protect us from terrorists. Terrorists use planes and people to create terror. What part of this don't you understand?
    Good analysis Ryan, btw
    AZ Denny


  8. Bret Says:

    I see both sides of it and I think everyone it hits differently. Having never flown I have never had to do any of this, but I know I would get taken aside now that I have a plate in my foot and would set things off so I would have to already have made up my mind I would get more attention then others.

    I also think the attitude of the one doing the pat downs makes a difference too. Somebody who is being an ass while doing it is going to have a different end result than someone who isnt.

    Just my thoughts.


  9. Panhandle Bob Says:

    I see that AZ Denny has fully bought into the "They're coming to get us!!!" paranoid mentality that the government is shoving their our throats. I will say this with certainty: "advanced" screenings or no, nobody is going to get on a plane with enough explosives in their underwear to do any serious damage. Anyone who thinks so is just hopelessly paranoid.

    Random Thinker: No images are kept of each person, and no one other than the remote screeners see the images.

    How do you know this? I've heard conflicting reports on whether the images are saved or not. I mean, it's a COMPUTER taking the image, right? Why would the images *not* be kept in some cache, to be deleted or emptied at a later date? To say the images are not saved is naive.

    So, for me, the body scan is more private than a patdown.

    It is still a violation of your civil rights. Why is it that people don't seem to care about this? Ohhhh, that's right, because we're so afraid that our seatmate might have a bomb up his butt.

    Or wait! Maybe that woman has a .45 semi-auto stuffed up here vagina!

    It's just so friggin' silly. The American people need to wake up.


  10. naturgesetz Says:

    There is a site I sometimes visit, and one of the regulars calls herself doctork. She travels by air a lot in her work, and she has posted some truly infuriating tales of bad actions by TSA personnel. You can read some of her more recent posts on this page. http://prairiechatter.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=chatterboxers&action=display&thread=927&page=77

    It was bad enough when travelers were having their property stolen while they were being patted down. Now they have a device which in her opinion as a physician has not been properly tested for safety being used by people who have not been trained and certified by medical technicians. It could very well cause cancer for travelers who are susceptible, and produce genetic mutations in the reproductive organs leading to birth defects etc.

    Because of her concerns, she refused to go through one, which she was asked to do because she was wearing a skirt (of all things!). The pat down she got was not a pat down. It was a grope which would have resulted in the perpetrator being labeled a sex offender in any other place.

    You can read what she has to say about how useless the Nude-o-Scope, as she calls it, is, and how its use goes to enrich Michael Chertoff.

    And there are so many other things the terrorists can do. While they're subjecting innocent people to unconstitutional searches with no reason at all to suspect them of criminal activity, much cargo goes unscreened. And has it ever occurred to anybody that a terrorist could detonate his/her bomb when he/she was in line with a massive crowd which is waiting to go through "security?"

    Security can never be perfect. Every day we take risks. Obviously, we should also take reasonable precautions. But we don't drive around in tanks to keep from being killed if a drunk driver runs into our car.

    The terrorists keep coming up with ways of getting around the security measures in place. They don't have to strike planes. They can strike anywhere.

    We Americans tend to overreact, and when it comes to security, we have overreacted badly; and in the process, we are throwing away our Fourth Amendment Rights, which are part of what our soldiers fought and gave their lives to protect. And in return, we are getting the illusion of security, not true security.


  11. A Lewis Says:

    You can touch my junk any day you want to.


  12. jimm Says:

    Seems to me, some time ago, all it took was some nuts with box-cutters to bring down a few planes, not to mention killing a few thousand people. So, what's to fear?

    Hmmm... jus wondering... what if ya have a boner when ya hit that scanner?


  13. Martin Says:

    Panhandle Bob has gotten it exactly right--it's not a matter of whether you're comfortable with being seen nude OR being groped by a stranger. It's a clear violation of the right to privacy and an illegal search. And no one can say what the long-term health effects might be from exposure to the x-ray radiation these machines emit, since it is such a new technology.

    Furthermore, the images can be saved, stored, transmitted and even printed. TSA documents specify that the machines must have the ability to store & transmit the images.

    Here are some links to stories that back this up:
    Body scanners can store, send images, group say:
    http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/01/11/body.scanners/index.html

    Flashback: Feds saved over 35,000 nude scans from just one Florida courthouse:
    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/flashback-feds-saved-35000-nude-scans-florida-courthouse/

    Bollywood Star Shah Rukh Kahn- Naked Body Scanner Images Printed & Circulated at Heathrow:
    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2684287/bollywood_star_shah_rukh_kahn_naked.html

    Ralph Nader and EPIC Take On Full-Body Airport Scanners:
    http://www.fastcompany.com/1700811/ralph-nader-and-epic-take-on-full-body-airport-scanners

    Also, former Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff , who promoted the use of the scanners, has a consulting agency, one of whose clients, manufactures the machines.
    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/01/02/group_slams_chertoff_on_scanner_promotion/

    I've never been on a plane, and probably never will be, mainly because I can't afford the airfare. But I definitely wouldn't fly if it means being scanned or groped by some stranger. Guess I'll stick with the bus, which so far, hasn't resorted to such so-called "security" measures. Hmmm...you think maybe that's because they don't care if us "poor" bus riders get blown up by terrorists?


  14. Martin Says:
    This comment has been removed by the author.

  15. Anonymous Says:

    Panhandle Bob and the others who see this as such an big deal? I have only one thing to say to you..... ignorance is bliss....

    America was so safe and secure before 9/11, right? Wrong, we were ignorant. Try telling those who died on that day that it can't happen, that airport security is not necessary, that it will never happen.... yeah right.

    I don't think we should have gone into Iraq after Sadam because I knew for sure that it would someday result in a 9/11 tragedy... and sure enough, it came true. These Islamist terrorists will NEVER, EVER stop - they can't, they interpret their religion as telling them they must kill us all because we are infidels! What part of that don't you understand? That's why airport security is necessary and your arguments don't hold water...... at all.

    AZ Denny


  16. naturgesetz Says:

    @ AZ Denny — Nobody said airport security isn't necessary. So your comment entirely misses the point.


  17. Panhandle Bob Says:

    AZ Denny, you don't counter hate with more hate. We were not "safe" prior to 9/11. That's one of the problems of living in a free society. I happen to like that- even if it comes with certain risks. I don't want to live in Nazi Germany or even modern-day Israel for that matter.

    Nor did George Bush *prevent* any further attacks afterward. Al Qaeda proved their point, and look what they've turned us into! That would be: People who are scared of their own shadow and see "terrorists" hiding around every corner.

    Not all Muslims seek the death of all Christians. There are Muslim extremists who do, but we will NEVER destroy them with our military. The solution in fact cannot be a military one.

    Me, I have faith in the goodness of man. I'm not so pessimistic as to think we're on the verge of a holy war. And I'm not yet ready to throw out the Constitution simply because we're afraid some lunatic might stuff a "bomb" down his pants. So far, no white people have tried to do that.

    By definition, a "war" on "terror" will not work. War is terrifying enough. The terrorists will just find some other way of causing mayhem. So far, they've done a pretty good job of terrorizing us without even attacking us on our own soil again.