It's Not Trivial

[paft.livejournal.com]

The other day someone asked me, after I’d made some passing comment about the whole TSA get-photographed-naked/be groped issue, why anyone would bother with this when there are so many other more important issues, like world poverty. “Why waste your time talking about something so trivial?” I was asked.

After thinking about it, I decided it’s not a minor issue.

This latest hamhanded policy – and its timing -- amounts to a referendum on how much intrusion officials can inflict on Americans. It’s no accident that this came up not long before the holiday rush. They’re counting on most of us being too preoccupied with getting from point A to point B to complain. After a few weeks, they hope, we’ll get used to it and accept it as the norm.



That’s really what it’s about.

So what’s next? Because rest assured, the envelope will be pushed a little further once they’ve established that we will put up with either being effectively photographed nude or strangers groping our genitals. It always is. Every time such authorities make an incursion into our privacy, it’s with solemn assurances that it will not be abused and – honest to God! – this is as far as they’ll go. Really! Cross their hearts and hope to die!

Don’t for one minute assume that wealthy and influential travelers are going to be subjected to this policy. Once it becomes established, opting out of it will become just one more cozy perk enjoyed by high end business fliers, one more little chip at the dignity of the rest of us.

No, it’s not on quite the same scale as world poverty, the nuclear arms race, unemployment, or torture. But it’s still important. It impacts us all. It forces us to confront how much of our personal privacy we’re willing to relinquish in the name of security.

At what point do we draw the line?

Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

Comments

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

First, the radiation was already addressed when the scanners were first disclosed.

Second, I'm all in favor of mitigating image control and prevention from being saved...but that is something that can be done.

I hear people arguing against the scans, without giving an alternative that can prevent planes from being blown out of the air...

All the outrage is about "being groped", but little discussion about what ELSE can be advocated in the short time before the holiday season goes into full swing.

It's not enough for people to simply complain -- you need to advocate an alternative as well, and that's something I'm not hearing in these discussions.

Until an alternative is given, then my preference is to a pat down rather than hundreds of dead....

so give me an alternative....

[bikinisquad3000.livejournal.com]

Come now, most people wouldn't be able to answer this because most people are not experts on the nature, properties and detection of explosives. The only methods you and I could know for sure are possible are this type, the ones that focus on ways people can hide them on their person and not what they are. Demand an alternative from an expert by all means, but I don't think it's going to make much of a point if you can't get one from a bunch of people on LJ.

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

Everyone seems to be an expert when they scream about how intusive this is -- so surely they must have an idea of what else we can do to protect travellers in the skies, right?

As I said before it's easy to complain...but what's the alternative.

TSA is in a completely unenviable position. If they DONT do something, people blame them for negligence. If they DO do something, people complain that they dont like it...

Well ok then! What ELSE can TSA do in this short window to try to keep people safe? Seriously!! What else??

They have to try to do **something**.....so what else can be suggested.
Otherwise, I appreciate them trying to keep me alive when I'm in the air.

Give me an alternative and I'll probably side with you if it's feasible. But simultaneously arguing al-Qaida is changing tactics and we need to respond, yet complaining about the response without a "plan B" to point to?

Well....as I said before....give me an alternative.

Can't copy-paste to quote, yay iPhone

[bikinisquad3000.livejournal.com]

1st paragraph -- Well no, that doesn't follow. To put what I said another way, it's not my job to think of an alternative and I'm sure as hell not qualified. Luckily one needs no expertise to figure out whether or not they're comfortable with this brand of pat-down (unluckily, it seems many are not).

3rd paragraph -- Sounds about right, and here's Exhibit A. Unfortunately the perception being detrimental to the TSA doesn't automatically make it false. The fact is, people don't like this, and some to a strong enough degree that they'd rather go without it than have the added safety that results. Getting this added safety another way may be possible and it may not, and that may be crucial to have it or it may not. We're not the experts, the TSA is. All the people complaining know is, they don't like it. If there's a Plan B, in other words, now's the time. If getting rid of this type of search while maintaining a reasonable level of security is truly an impossible demand, then the TSA should have no problem providing a convincing explanation as to how.

5th paragraph -- Yeah, but you're acting like there are no other security measures at all, or that getting rid of this one removes the rest with it. Obviously that's not true. They already do **something.**

6th and 7th -- As I said before I don't have an alternative. I don't know dick about detecting explosives using anything other than the five senses. I do know that can't possibly be the only way in 2010, so if you really need an answer from me it would be a very vague "bomb-detecting technology" or something. Or, I dunno, provide an option where you check all lighters, matches and electronics and then get to bypass this. As far as I know it would be extremely difficult to set something off without one of those.