Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch
What I would like is for everyone to acknowledge that allowing children/nuns/breast cancer survivors/bladder cancer survivors/rape victims/etc. to board planes without invasive screening procedures employed with everyone else involves some risk. We all balance risk differently (as noted by the 90% of people who say they have no prob with the new TSA protocols) so the only truly stupid thing one can say about all this mess is "They should use their judgment and not pat down the _______ people because the ________ people aren't the ones bringing bombs onto planes." I mean, come the fuck on -- do we think our enemies are stupid? That they're above putting C4 on a toddler? The only stupid thing one can say is "I want maximum security but I want 0.05% of the population not to be inconvenienced by these searches because it makes me feel gross to see them get frisked." That kind of thinking will eventually mean everybody's exempted OR everybody but the Muslims are exempted and in either case the security effectiveness goes to zero.
I traveled with a seven month old in December 2001. Did I freak out about the fact he was treated like a potential terrorist like the rest of us? Fuck no, because in spite of some of the things I have posted on these boards I am not a solipsistic moron.
|
Acknowledged, and I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't go through screening. But the non-thinking DMV-like TSA workers are not exactly masters of finesse or decorum. They are often times unthinking drones.
I don't fly much, probably 2x in the last 5 years. Both times, I went through the medal detector thingy and passed, but was subject to one of the "random" searches. The search was handled professionally, but it was invasive and I was mildly pissed off about it. I would certainly not suggest changing the procedure as a result. However, having a young child subject to a random search is a bit much for me.
Threaded Mode