Should we be searched before boarding airplanes?

[Beelzebud]

Ok, I was just told I was "an apologist for the 3rd Reich", "An apologist for our currnet police state", and "A Good German" for saying we should be searched before boarding airplanes.

So... Should we be searched before boarding an airplane? By search I mean the way it is currently done.

Not a personal strip search. Just a search of your luggage by xray. And walking through a metal detector.

[MemphisTiger]

1. I don't see a problem with metal detectors, but search is a

broad term. Do you mean cavity search? Ewwww.

[uppityperson]

2. Define "searched"

Minimal: running through the magic door, putting bags through the magic x-ray device
More: removing shoes, wanding around body
More: randomly (ha) pulling aside for more intense bag searches
More: strip search everyone, let them fly nude but provide free drinks for all

[Beelzebud]

3. Ok cool. done.

By search I mean as in the current system. No personal searches beyond metal detection.

[uppityperson]

8. I've no problem with metal detector and x-ray bags

seems reasonable way to keep heavy weaponry out and many countries do this before entering museums, other public places like that.

[obxhead]

9. do you fly???

Ummmm... They use much more than metal detectors in the airports I've been through recently.

[MadHound]

16. Trouble is friend, the current system is waaaay beyong metal detection

Take off the shoes, get the pat down, have everything you are carrying opened up and thrown out, if you have wrapped presents, they will have the wrapping ripped off and opened up. Stop trying to put the lipstick on the pig friend, the "current system" is highly invasive. Just ask the many hundreds and thousands of women who've been felt up this year alone under the guise of "security".

[slaveplanet]

25. and that's even an understatement

They are installing the "backscatter" machines. These are in reality virtual stripsearch technology...With it they can examine your girlfriend/boyfriend , husband/wife, 80 year old grey haired granny and even your 5 year old daughter in stunning detail. It can see directly through multiple layers of clothing , even leather, And image, every mole, even your pores. It is superman xray vision and all saved on harddisk for every letch, upskirter and pedophile in that security service to drool over...the whole time the public is none the wiser. They have no Idea they just been undressed and violated.

http://tinyurl.com/wlex

It shows nipples , it shows genitalia in full detail...

now be a good German and enjoy your Rape-i-Scan.
http://www.rapiscansystems.com/sec1000.html

or step on over to the groping area...don't ever let them tell you we don't give you choices...

[Bill McBlueState]

4. your question is too broad

But I do think that if reasonable people came together (without being under the influence of politics) to determine what is needed to protect airline passengers, the procedures they would recommend would be far less invasive than the sort of stuff going on these days.

oops-- I'm referring to your question before you made the edit.

[skylarmae]

5. how 'bout - FUCK NO

Haven't flown since 9/11 and unless an extreme emergency, will not. It's my boycott.

[Ezlivin]

24. If you're in a wheelchair, it's almost an autopsy

I haven't flown and refuse to fly unless it's a life-or-death situation.

Fuck that. I'd rather load up my van with CDs and hit the highway, alone with my thoughts and my heavy luggage.

[Poll_Blind]

6. I have no problem being searched before boarding an airplane. But...

...what I think is imporatant, and what changes the flavor of this issue for everyone, is how they react to what they find. That's the key, in my opinion. I mean if they're going to arrest me and disallow me to board the flight because I have a copy of Bush's Brain then of course I'd be against searches- but it's not really searches, again, it's how they react to what they find. I would really be suprised if the people who voted against searches did so because they believe that all searches, nomatter where you are going or what you are boarding are wrong. I think they, like me, really fear getting in trouble for harmless, Constituionally-protected items that are found on their person ro luggage.

PB

[Tesha]

14. *THAT*, of course, was the actual crux of the debate.

> how they react to what they find.

*THAT*, of course, was the actual crux of the debate that inspired
the poster to post his poll. A few of us think he's being a bit too
cavalier in giving away *OUR* rights.

See:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=67052&mesg_id=67052

Tesha

[YOY]

7. Most of us are "searched" one form or another

I have made know my feeling about the taking off of one's shoes very vocally in line.

"One twitchy freak tries to light his gasoline soaked shoes on a plane and now the rest of us have to waste our time..." I mean did you see a picture of the "shoe bomber"??? Did he look right in the head??? Do you think the fact that his shoes both looked and smelled (not in the normal way) funny might have had something to do with it???

You want to search this freak? Go right ahead?



Taking one's shoes off is a waste of time. A magnetic detector is just fine by me as is security keeping an eye open for suspicious (of all colors please) characters. Searching a granny's purse so they can confiscate and destroy nail clippers is a waste of everybodys' time, energy, and money (and reminiscent of a fascist state...)

[DBoon]

10. I voted yes

because those of us with the patience to undergo a search would be rewarded with half-empyt planes!

The fewer people who fly, the more leg room!

[Tesha]

11. Actually, you said much more than you've admitted to.

> Ok, I was just told I was "an apologist for the 3rd Reich",
> "An apologist for our currnet police state", and "A Good
> German" for saying we should be searched before boarding
> airplanes.

Actually, you said much more than you've just admitted to, but
I have no problem with letting everyone read what you wrote and
then drawing their own conclusions. The interested may see:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=67052&mesg_id=67052

Tesha

[William769]

12. I will probably be flamed for this , but oh well

Flying on a plane is not a right it's a privilege. :hide:

[benburch]

18. Not a flame, but a comment.

I paid for the privilege when I bought the ticket. The question here is; "Should Americans have the freedom to travel without inspection of their papers and effects by an agent of the Federal Government?"

Freedom of travel is a quite different thing is this day and age. In the time of the founders, if you wanted to travel you had to walk or ride your horse. Now you have to use a mechanical means of conveyance that few can purchase for themselves. Should freedom to travel be restricted to those wealthy enough to own an aircraft or an automobile?

[William769]

21. I own a car

I bought & paid for it. That does not give me the right to travel freely while I drive it drive it Laws have to be obeyed).

"Should freedom to travel be restricted to those wealthy enough to own an aircraft or an automobile?" I don't understand what this has to do with the topic.

You do have the freedom of travel when you walk since you do bring that up.

Edited to fix a sentence.

[benburch]

23. Try walking from Chicago to Washington DC...

And you DO have the freedom to travel in your own car or aircraft when those are controlled by a licensed operator, which does not have to be YOU, if you cannot be licensed. I do not qualify to fly an aircraft for medical reasons, but I could still own one and employ a pilot, and my freedom to travel is intact. Ditto with a car, you can hire a driver. In neither case do you have to submit to an internal checkpoint.

[benburch]

13. Nope!

People flew on airliners for like 50 years before metal detectors and x-rays.

And yes, there were a few hijackings, but an armed flight crew and/or sky marshals are sufficient to prevent that from happening without creating an "internal checkpoint" for Free Americans.

So what if a few people would bring a weapon onto a plane? Heck, had anybody other than the hijackers on the doomed 9/11 planes had weapons, I doubt that they would have succeeded in their evil deeds.

[Zynx]

15. Since airlines are private institutions they can really do as they please

in order to provide for the security of their property and employees. When someone buys a ticket they know what they are subjecting themselves to.

[Tesha]

17. It's a bit ambiguous...

> Since airlines are private institutions they can really do as they please

Generally speaking, this would be true but in the specific case
of airport searches, it's not so clear-cut. You're not being
searched by the airline (even though it was them to whom you
gave your implied permission); you're being searched by an
arm of the United States government and subject to a wide
range of criminal prosecutions for things they may find in
your luggage or on your person that have *NOTHING* to do with
airline terrorism.

This really hasn't been litigated out yet.

Tesha

[Beelzebud]

19. Thats how I see it.

But I guess that makes me a Good German.

The whole reason I bring this up is the story about the girl that got busted with condoms filled with flour. She spent 3 weeks in jail because she didn't bail herself out, and is now sueing the state.

[rd_kent]

20. Yes or No is too broad!

It needs to be diefined a little better. Fir example, I think a security search (X-ray of bag and a walk through the metal detector) is ok. But I should not have to identify myself and go through a strip search because I might be on a "list".

[Tesha]

22. The problem is *ALWAYS*...

> But I should not have to identify myself and go through a
> strip search because I might be on a "list".

The problem is *ALWAYS* that if we knew that the searchers were
truly well-motivated, we might agree to a lot more intrusive
searches. But we *KNOW* from experience (both collective and
personal) that the searchers are:

o At best, a bunch of Keystone Cops

o At worst, a corrupt government carrying out grudges
and personal vendettas against political enemies

So how can anyone, in good faith and good conscience, agree
to the sorts of unlimited searches that are now being conducted
in America?

Tesha

[AZBlue]

26. Absof*ckinglutely!

Or else I'm never flying again.

[Silverhair]

27. This is an excellent and serious question, part of a far larger question.

How much of our cherished right to privacy to we surrender for security, and when?

In fact, it is worth a complete thread of it's own.