My issues with scanners:
1. it takes twice as long to go through a scanner line vs. the traditional metal detector. That's because the passenger in the scanner has to assume a specific position and they have to turn at least once as part of the scanning process. Then, you have to wait for the image screener to convey to the TSA agent at the scanner that the passenger is cleared (or not cleared). I say twice as long - honestly at one airport, I counted and 10 people went through the metal detector to the 1 person going through a scanner. At least most airports now have decent instructions (see blog http://janicestalmcneilly.blogspot.com/2010/05/airport-security-almost-always-story.html)
,2. You're being told that you have a choice...scanner or "pat down". That is really not true. While scanners are becoming more common they are still not in place at many (most?) airports. Case in point: my home airport is small and I doubt they will ever install a scanner. Last week, Reagan airport in Washington DC - no scanner for the American Airline's security area (I still find this rather surprising). Last week, two airports had scanners, but they were not working at the time I was going through security, so again, no choice.
3. There are assurances that the near- naked images from the scanners are "wiped" from the computer's memory. However, the people monitoring the scanner images are in a private area. Am I the only person who suspects that they have the opportunity to use a camera phone IF they see an image they feel inclined to save/share? Trust me, I have no concern that they would want to save my image, but when I hear young/attractive (enhanced?) flight attendants say they suspect they are targeted for scanning, I sympathize. Note: the image below is from a body scanner. Its one of the more graphic examples I've seen online, more graphic than the ones they display in the airport instructions and more graphic than the images they've been sharing this week.
4. While I'm not concerned about this "virtual strip search", I am concerned about the radiation exposure. I have zero confidence in anything the FDA says. After all, this is the government agency that told Americans decades ago that margarine was healthier than butter, only to find out years later that the trans fats in margarine is a significant health risk (think heart attacks). It was the FDA in 1973 that repealed a law that required the food industry to use the word "imitation" on food packaging for any food where chemical substances are used to create something that looks like natural products - and they did this because of pressure from the food industry. (lobbying dollars at work). If they are so susceptible to the pressure from the food industry, should we not expect the same regarding these scanners?
Case in point - Michael Chertoff. He was the head of Homeland Security from Feb 2005 to January 2009. When he left this position, he formed the "Chertoff Group" and was immediately hired by the Rapiscan company to provide "security advice". He's been on a number of talk shows promoting the body scanners. He is their paid spokesman and is making, I'd guess, millions of dollars doing so. Rapiscan is one of two manufactures that supply scanners to the TSA. Kind of like the food industry's lobbyist saying "trust us, all those chemicals we put in your food are safe".
Radiation exposure: since the body scanners at airports do not penetrate the skin, the "experts" assure us there is no radiation concern. My concern is they don't know. If you do a little research, you will find several references to a concern about this type of radiation that bounces off the skin. Can it damage the skin or tissue just under the skin (like breast and testicles - that are more prone to cancer)? From what I read, we just don't know.
So for me, who flies so often, the repeated exposure to the radiation from the full body scanners is a concern. That is the reason, when given the choice, I "opt out" of the body scanner line and choose to go through the regular metal detector which then, invariably, results in an enhanced pat down. Only in a few instances have they tried to talk me into the scanner. I ALWAYS say "no thank you".
The "enhanced pat down"
1. There are some recent web postings and articles that tell "horror stories" about TSA agents of the opposite sex conducting these pat downs. I have never seen this happen. Everytime I need a pat down, they call for a "female assist" and I wait for one to show up. I've never felt like the agent was deriving any pleasure from this process. Most of the time, they seem almost apologetic. Sometimes other passengers watch, but I assume they're either curious about the process or they are wondering what about me resulted in the pat down.
2. Privacy - everytime I go through the "pat down", I am offered private screening. I've never requested privacy so I have no idea where exactly they would take me for that.
3. A man recently complained that they screwed up the seal of his urinary ostomy bag. That's a tough situation as I'm sure the TSA agent felt the bag when he patted down the passenger and therefore had to determine what it was. They cannot accept the passenger's word about what it is...no different than they can't accept a card from my physician saying I have titanium in my leg. They have to check. I doubt they intended to dislodge the seal on that bag.
Here's my issue - I think the TSA agents need to have a pleasant disposition. I'm not saying they have to smile and be chatty. Just don't be a grouch. I would get into some specific details but I could be accused of profiling, so I won't. Suffice it to say I have encountered a handful of female agents who were almost belligerant. In a couple of instances, I simply said "please get your supervisor".
I cooperate fully with these pat downs, but I don't need rudeness or someone acting like a drill sargent. For example, prior to the new "enhanced pat down" process, the old process required the passenger to sit down so the agent could check to make sure you weren't carrying anything on the bottom of your foot. You had to lift your leg up - usually to the level of the seat. However, one female agent at the Miami airport yelled at me a couple of times to "lift it higher". It was her attitude more than the impossible position she was requesting that resulted in me putting my foot down (literally) and requesting her supervisor. My complaint - my tax dollars pay her salary. I don't need verbal or physical abuse to be adequately screened.
So TSA agents, cheer up! Be nice. Be understanding. In return, I think most passengers will return the courtesy. If they don't, think like a Disney employee - you're getting paid to do your job. You had to know going in to it that you'd be encountering some testy passengers. (hey, I'm a nurse - I knew going into that job that I'd be dealing with some unpleasant body parts, odors, fluids etc (ok, think poop, pee, blood - HIV exposure) - I was never rude to a patient about any of those.
Airport floors - what are we exposed to? What concerns me more than the pat downs is the lack of cleanliness on the floors. You're required to take off your shoes. If you're barefoot (ie in sandals), you're walking on a floor that hundreds (thousands?) of other people are walking on. That is creepy! I've been through a couple of airports that provide little footies (the kind they often provide when you're walking on new carpet at an open house). I won't suggest airports provide those because no doubt it would cost billions of tax dollars to provide those. But I sure do wonder how often they clean the floors. I carry my own footies - if you're flying in sandals, you might want to consider doing that as well.
A couple of unanswered questions:
1. why did it take 10 months for them to implement a new "enhanced" pat down process, following the December 2009 underwear bomber?
2. are we finding anything as a result of the new enhanced pat down and body scanners? So far, government reps on recent news shows can only cite "prohibited substances" or "illegal" substances. I assume that's a fancy way of saying "drugs".
3. Is the cargo being carried by passenger planes being screen adequately? Could that pose more of a risk than the actual passengers? Given the more aggressive screening of passengers, is it not safe to assume terrorists will be targeting packages?
Some people are suggesting bomb sniffing dogs as the best solution - less invasive, cheaper, no radiation exposure.
If you're flying, know your rights
(Note: There are many more rights, so if you want the entire list - check online):
-private screening if you have to have a pat down
-same sex TSA agent doing the "pat down"
-maintaining visual control of your personal items (that's all the stuff in the security bins - your purse, your computer etc). Watch the agents - they like to stack your second bin on top of the one that contains your laptop. Not sure its good for the laptop but I'm not the only person who has walked away from security forgetting the laptop because it was hiding under the top bin - not visible. Just ask them to not stack your bins. I say maintain visual control NOT that I think TSA agents might steal your stuff. I think passengers might accidently pick up something that belongs to you. Example - on a flight a few months ago, a flight attendant came on the intercom and said "if you own a Dell laptop, please get it out of the case and make sure it is your's. If it isn't, ring your call light". Sure enough, someone finds a Dell laptop that isn't their's...and amazing to me, the person with the other Dell was on the same flight so they were able to switch (this is a flight out of Ohare airport - what are the odds these guys would both be on the same flight?). By the way, another little tip, tape your business card to the top of your laptop - that would likely prevent this type of incident.
Fly safe!
_underway_port_side_aerial.jpg)
Posts
