TSA: Despite objections, all passengers must be screened
By the CNN Wire Staff
November 15, 2010 5:55 p.m. EST
Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- In response to a video of a California man's dispute with airport security officials, the Transportation Security Administration said Monday it tries to be sensitive to individuals, but everyone getting on a flight must be screened.
The video, in which software engineer John Tyner refuses an X-ray scan at the San Diego, California, airport, has sparked a debate over screening procedures.
Tyner told CNN on Sunday that he was surprised to see so many people take an interest in his refusal and the dispute with airport screeners that followed it. But he said he hoped the video will focus attention on what he calls a government invasion of privacy.
"Obviously, everybody has their own perspective about their personal screening," TSA administrator John Pistole told CNN. "The question is, how do we best address those issues ... while providing the best possible security?"
Tyner, 31, said his hunting trip to South Dakota was cut short before it even started Saturday morning -- when TSA agents asked him to go through an X-ray machine.
"I don't think that the government has any business seeing me naked as a condition of traveling about the country," Tyner said.
Pistole said the agency is "trying to be sensitive to individuals issues and concerns," but added, "the bottom line is, everybody who gets on that flight has been properly screened."
The cell phone video Tyner recorded of his arguments with security screeners over the scan and pat-down they proposed had garnered than 200,000 hits on YouTube by Monday afternoon.
Tyner said that after he declined the body scan, a TSA agent told him he could have a pat-down instead. Once the procedure was described, Tyner said he responded, "If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested."
The dispute that followed, Tyner said, included police escorting him from the screening area and a supervisor saying he could face a civil lawsuit for leaving the airport before security had finished screening him.
In fact, Tyner could face a civil penalty as high as $11,000, according to Michael Aguilar, the TSA's federal security director in San Diego, who defended the behavior of his officers during the confrontation.
"He's violated federal law and federal regulations, which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it," he said.
Tyner called the whole incident ridiculous and said he will not fly "until these machines go away."
"Advanced imaging technology screening is optional for all passengers," the TSA said in a statement released Monday. "Passengers who opt out of [advanced imaging] screening will receive alternative screening, including a physical pat-down."
But anyone who refuses to complete the screening process will be denied access to airport secure areas and could be subject to civil penalties, the administration said, citing a federal appeals court ruling in support of the rule.
The ruling, from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, says that "requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11 world. Such a rule would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to penetrate airport security by 'electing not to fly' on the cusp of detection until a vulnerable portal is found."
The TSA's advanced imaging technology machines use two separate means of creating images of passengers -- backscatter X-ray technology and millimeter-wave technology.
At the end of October, 189 backscatter units and 152 millimeter-wave machines were in use in more than 65 airports. The total number of imaging machines is expected to be near 1,000 by the end of 2011, according to the TSA.
The agency has previously said that the new technology is safe and protects passenger privacy.
"Strict privacy safeguards are built into the foundation of TSA's use of advanced imaging technology to protect passenger privacy and ensure anonymity," the agency says in a statement on its website.
Images from the scans cannot be saved or printed, according to the agency. Facial features are blurred. And agents who directly interact with passengers do not see the scans.
But Tyner isn't the only one with concerns about the new security procedures.
Grass-roots groups are urging travelers either not to fly or to protest by opting out of the full-body scanners and undergoing time-consuming pat-downs instead.
Industry leaders are worried about the backlash. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano met with leaders of travel industry groups to discuss the concerns.
"We certainly understand the challenges that DHS confronts, but the question remains, where do we draw the line? Our country desperately needs a long-term vision for aviation security screening, rather than an endless reaction to yesterday's threat," the U.S. Travel Association said in a statement after the meeting. "At the same time, fundamental American values must be protected."
During a press conference in which Napolitano announced the expansion of a security awareness campaign, she also reiterated the need for hand searches should a passenger decline electronic screening.
"If you refuse the [Advanced Imaging Technology] altogether, then you can go to a separate area for a same-gender pat down," she told reporters on Monday. "If there are adjustments we need to make as we move forward, we have an open ear," she said. "We will listen."
CNN's Catherine E. Shoichet, Phil Gast, Marnie Hunter and Greg Morrison contributed to this report.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Cortney Corley
ReplyDelete4th Period
In my opinion, I think that it is a good thing that airport security is there. Without all the machines and equipment, who knows what could be going onto your airplane. The airports just want to make things safe for all the passengers. It's impossible to please every single person, but they're doing the best they can. That man overreacted. It doesn't seem like he understands these procedures are strictly just for safety. If I were at an airport and someone was acting like him, it would seem suspicious to me. But if he was touched inappropriately, thats a different story.
I agree with Courtney, the man was merely overreacting. The government is trying to make sure another nine-eleven, or another terrorist attempt from occurring, and this guy is worried about the officer "touching his junk". People like this guy are causing doubt and uncertainty across America. Have some faith in the government people!
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
ReplyDeletePeople are complaining that the government is trying to make this country safer. With all these new technology, terrorists and people who want to hurt the United States are pretty much terminated after they reach the x-ray scan. But citizens who complain that they cannot bring sports equipments, weapons, or personal tools (razors, lotion, Etc.). But what is the point of bring all of these items if you could just drive or sail to your location? People these days aren't thinking of what they could take onto the airplanes.
Mayur Patel
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
The airports have these security machines and X-ray machines for a reason. They are for our safety and if they weren't there, there could be many more breaking news and a lot more problems and disputes. This man didn't have to argue because he wasn't the only one they did the screening on. People like him are the ones that make it on the news because of a stupid thing like this.
3rd period
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion people who worry about stuff like this usually have something to hide. I am not a fan of the strict airport securtiy process but I understand that they are needed to prevent another 911. This man was clearly either oversensative or had something he didn't want seen. I applaude the government for looking into something that is actually of minor importance to this country.
Kaylah Moore 2nd
ReplyDeleteI agree; the machines are there for our safety. I looked up pictures taken from those machines, and they're not that revealing. It really just shows the definite outline of your body. I mean you have to go to the doctor for check ups, right? If you feel that uncomfortable, then move for more trained professionals; don't act out in public.
Ranaill Davis
ReplyDelete5th Period
I have never been on a plane but if I do fly I would go through the machine and would want everybody to do the same. It's for the safety of the passengers and if you weren't hiding anything I don't see the problem. It's not like they make everybody strip naked, it's just a x-ray. If you have a personal problem with this don't fly choose other travel options because I doubt it's going to go away.
Danielle Sherman
ReplyDelete4th Period
I agree that it is all for security. That man overreacted, as Cortney said I would also find it suspicious if he made that big of a deal. Everyone else goes through the same thing. It's just not that serious. Get the screening, get on your plane, and that's the end of it.
I can see why people are concerned, I definitely am. I'm not all that comfortable with this. But there is nothing you can do, you can kick and scream and they'll do "alternative screening". Basically they'll grope you. But I have to disagree with you Kaylah, I also looked up the images and they are pretty revealing. It shows an outline of everything. it's sad that planes are our main form of transportation around the country. What we really need is a national public rail system. Sure, people will will still try to blow stuff up, but a train explosion would kill less people. And I understand it will be slower, but it will be more practical, fuel-wise, if they are electric. But this is just something we're gonna have to live with.
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
ReplyDeleteI can definitely agree with the rest of you, he did overreact a bit. But in his defense, airport security is pretty hectic. Even without the scanners, the whole process of having to take off shoes, jackets, hats and other articles of clothing, having to empty your pockets, and the limitation of the toiletries and other necessities you need (not to mention all of this takes place in an extremely public place through which thousands come through every day) is still something that I don't like going through. The scanners help in detecting hidden items in someone's possession. The pictures are not exactly high-def as to showing people naked, but the definitely is some detail, and in some of the photos I saw some features that people most definitely would not want to be exposed just for the sake of travel. The next option is not much betters as to personal privacy. To be blunt about, I wouldn't be that comfortable to have another man feeling on me, also for the sake of travel. But this is for the sake of safety of the American people, and we do not want any disasters to happen aboard the planes. Like they said, they need a "long-term vision of aviation security".
Charlene Sigua
ReplyDelete4th Period
I agree, the man overreacted. The machines at airports are for the safety of the passengers. What if we didn't have those machines in the airports and someone brings in a dangerous weapon? And how he reacted would have been suspicious if I witnessed it.
I think this is really funny. We have all watched those movies about totalitarian governments and such but why doesn't this spark any thoughts about whats really going on? I would rather be free than safe, because freedom involves some responsibility and the ones who cannot live the life under the an overprotective government. Plus, when I went to the airport last, I could not stop comparing it to some dystopian police state. The police state atmosphere was complete with the intercom constantly reminding me of all the ways I can get arrested and dudes in uniforms walking around with guns.
ReplyDeleteJay Shah
ReplyDelete6th Period
11/16/10
I know I probably am the first one to say this, but this is ridiculous. I mean, the government can't make you want to get scanned. It really doesn't have much to do with terrorists as they probably won't be on a public airport. I mean, the probably would use some secret measure of transportation. So all this is doing is making the citizens of the USA do something they don't want to. But I do think that the protests are going a little to far, as it is much better to be scanned than patted. Also I don't think people should give up vacations so they will have a feeling of "protesting" within them.
I completely agree with Kayla. It's not like they want to see all your business, if you know what I mean, but they do it, for our safety. I mean, he didn't need to react so sensitively to the scanner. It also seems like this man, to me, is crying out for attention. Come on people, he got his five minutes, lets all just simmer down. People have argued that this is a violation of their privacy, many times. He's just another one of those people.
ReplyDeleteShelby Hendon
Period 4
I personally HATE the airport security system. It’s one of the many reasons I dislike to fly. The process takes too long and is annoying, I see why they have them but I think a new process needs to be proposed. I believe that Tyner had something to hide; I mean why else would he put up such a huge ruckus about such a small dilemma. People these days make such a big issue over nothing and it makes things harder for others. Let’s use some sense guys.
ReplyDeleteKiah R.
3 period
Alvin Mei
ReplyDelete2nd Period
I think it is unnecessary to scan a person's body; it's an invasion of privacy. Even though it is new technology, they could have still invented someone that will not create an inappropriate image. I could see why people are quiet nervous when going through this procedure, especially girls. I would probably stick to the pat down, and not have my whole body being exposed to someone I don't even know.
Tyler Morris
ReplyDelete4th period
I believe that it is a safe procedure to be searched so our country can remain safe as well. However there is a point when the government invades privacy way too much. This is similar to the argument of putting a bug on someone’s car. I believe that the search should be adequate, but not so much as to invade the personal bubble of space people have to themselves.
Esteban Palacios
ReplyDelete6th period
Forgive me for saying this but this is stupid. Who would want anyone to just take an X-Ray without your approval? I know I wouldn't like that. And how do we know they won't do any thing with those X-Ray's. I mean the security could be corrupt or a thief.
Period 5
ReplyDeleteI believe that it is right to have those scanners. We all get violated at one point in our lives. My doctor had to look down my pants. It's just part of the process. It's all for our good. What is we just ignored it for privacy? We all get blown up there will be nothing to be private about. People should be mature enough to understand what is good and what is bad. The scanners are obviously a good idea and they don't even take that long. The scanners are a super duper smart idea. :)
Ajeet Baath
ReplyDelete6th
I also think Tyner is overreacting. This is merely procedure, and he should see that random screenings are necessary. Screening is necessary for the safety of everyone on the flight. I do agree that one should have his/her own privacy to a certain degree. One might think that it’s offensive to be picked out of everyone else, but that’s just how airport security does it. I’m perfectly fine with anything they have to do, to a certain extent. As long as I get where I need to go.
Samantha P.
ReplyDelete6th period
I believe that many people are overreacting to this situation. These body scans may be a matter between life and death. This is a question to all my classmates: Would you rather have someone touch you in your private areas or would you rather go through the ordeal of dying in a plane so high in the sky? (Please be serious about this)
Jerry George
ReplyDelete3rd Period
To see various views on such controversial topics is great, knowing that there are good reasons on both sides of this conflict. Just as I am an American citizen, I do demand that my rights are not violated whenever and wherever I go. But, I will give up my privacy only if my actions can ensure a safer world for everyone else. To choose which idea is better, either being safe or causing a pandemic by my stubbornness, I would rather go for the choice that does not make me look like a self-conscious idiot. And to add another point into this discussion, I realized that this year there are many situations that are drawing attention on our rights being violated by certain laws. Sure, we should have probably gotten these laws taken care of to prevent these problems in the first place, but at least our society has awareness for the things that can affect our lives in the long run.
To answer Samantha's question, I would rather not choose both, but this is life and I made the decision to rather go through the process of boarding a plane in order to reach my objectives, whatever they might be. Just as I said above, I rather not cause anymore trouble I want to cause for everyone else who wants to go to wherever they want to be at. Too bad I couldn't teleport myself anywhere I wanted to be right now, which would solve this dilemma in the first place. Oh well, something will fix this issue sooner or later, be it teleportation or some law that changes the security protocols.
Abels Koshy
ReplyDeletePeriod: 6
In my opinion, I think that it is a good thing that airport security is always alert. Who knows what could be taken inside planes, wihtout the security any one could sneak in anything. It doesn't matter for one person's feelings, these procedures are built to secure safety across the world. As long as the security is there everything is going to be in perfect harmony while flying from place to place.
I think that this man overreacted. If he had nothing to hide then why would he make such a big deal out of something that is fairly simple? Although these x-ray images may be a bit more revealing than a person would want, they are for our own safety. Therefore, we should just deal with them. Besides, what actions could a person take against them anyway? At some point a person will need to fly somewhere.
ReplyDeleteThis man definitely overreacted. He probably thought it was cool that he was being interviewed and just said random stuff. I appreciate the fact that Airports are trying to keep us safe. Would you rather die on a business trip because a lack of procedure or make it there safely and back home with your family? They do that procedure because they care about a customer( their money) and that keeps their business going.
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I think it is good that we have come out with a different way to check people than a full body search. Nothing is more humiliating then having to strip your clothes in front of many people, or having a person search every inch of your body. I think that the government should do whatever they think is necessary to keep this country safe.
ReplyDeleteSean Nelson
ReplyDelete3rd Period
I think it is a good thing that the government is trying to take more precautions in making air tavel safe. But I think that they need to find a better way to do it that doing making people strip their clothes. They want to travel not join a strip club.
Jenny Chang
ReplyDeletePeriod 5
I think it's necessary to go through all these procedures to ensure our safety on airplanes. It's only a scan of body not taking off your clothes in front of people. Haven't we always gone through X-ray door in airport? I think this is the quickest and safest way. If this man wish not to get scanned then he should not ride airplane.
Wow! This man has some serious issues! All the airports are trying to do is make the flying experience for all passengers safe. I think what they are doing is necessary especially after 9/11. People like this man are obviously blind to the things that could happen if extra safety measures like this one aren't taken! I think that it is a good thing that full body scans are being used now because it could save thousands of lives. I'm pretty sure the airport officials are more interested in keeping passengers safe rather than touching "his junk!" Some people these days have no sense!
ReplyDeleteNeethu George
ReplyDelete3rd period
I think that there's nothing wrong in the new body scanners. Yes it might be a little revealing, but it's better than someone patting you down. It is for our own safety, so I would say just deal with it. This is how it's going to be and the country would be safer.
Who does this guy, Tyner, think he is? The airport security is only trying to help ensure the safety of the people on board the airplanes. They are only trying to stop another 9/11 like situation from happening. We have to appreciate the fact these people care for our safety and are willing to “have an open ear” to listen to problems one might have and compromise with the situation. Honestly, I think people are just freaking out. Would THEY want to be blown up by a bomb? Would THEY want to crash into a building? Would THEY want to be held hostage with guns to their foreheads? I don’t think so. These “privacy invading procedures” are to only help ensure the safety of passengers and people need to think about what would happen if these precautions weren’t there. People just have to stop freaking out and give thoughts to other people as well.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that the airports are trying to keep everyone safe. I do believe it is a good idea to check people than to have a full body search in front of everyone. The government is trying to do everything to keep us safe so that we don't get hurt on trips. If something is to happen on an airplane, there is no way of helping the passengers as quick as if it were happening somewhere else.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the TSA is taking the appropriate actions. If the man has nothing to hide he shouldn't be so private. The machine only takes an x-ray and I mean doctors look at your privates. Everyone needs to be safe, so one should go along with it because it's better than the idea of picking out the suspicious "looking" people.
ReplyDeleteI am uncomfortable with the screening and pat-down. It invades everybody's privacy or people end up touching you. I think that the airport security officials should find some other way to find out if people are carrying harmful items.
ReplyDeleteBailey Banks
ReplyDelete6th Period
Going to the Airport these days are not as simple as just going to the airport, especially when you have to take most of what you are wearing off and then put them back on. Airport security is very important, why not be screened if you have nothing to hide? The lives of many depend on our airport security and if that's the best way to keep air travel safe, then we shall just let it be. John Tyler did over react, it's not like the airport security is trying to invade his privacy, airport security is simply for the benefit of the people. After all going through these X-ray machines is way better than risking you’re life, or the lives of others. It’s more than worth it.
Lillian Cancino
ReplyDelete3RD Period
I think that safety is really important. I think that the government is doing their part in trying to keep us safe. The question in my mind that was asked from the story was where do we draw the line? I honestly don't know where to draw the line. We need to find a way to keep everyone safe and keep everything under control, but we need to do so without invading anyone's privasy or personnel space. I think that the country should let the citizens vote on how they would like to be searched. I know that everyone has a different opinion and I think that we should go with the one that is mostly voted for, like we say... we are a DEMOCRACY.
This is completely wrong. You guys compare it to going to the doctor's office, but when you do that, it is because you choose to. This body scanning policy is forced upon us and the airports know they can do this because planes are the fastest ways to get across the country or world. Yes, this is to protect us from a terrorist attack, but like Lloyd, I would much rather be free than to be safe if it means that my privacy will be violated. This is very reminiscent of dystopian governments we have read about in books or seen in real life.
ReplyDeleteKaitlyn Trei
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I think that this man is overreacting a little because the airport security is just trying to make the airports more safe with it's new technology. But the man have rights and if he does not want to have a full body screening then there should be other options for him to choose. He shouldn't be complaining to much because after the 9/11 attack the United States airports just want to make sure that nothing like that happens again.
Marcus Levine
ReplyDelete4th period
Honestly, I never noticed. This is a good reason to strike up concern, but at the same time, there has to be a way to know if someone is carrying a bomb or not, most likely no but one can never be too sure. I can't take sides, because again, I never noticed. I always saw this as a normal procedure that people have to go through all the time.
Marcus Levine (revised)
ReplyDelete4th period
Honestly, I never noticed. There is good reason to strike up concern, but at the same time, there has to be a way to know if someone is carrying a bomb or not. Most likely no, but one can ever be too sure. Maybe people should have a choice. There are those who do not like the thought of the radiation from technology and thee are some people feel violated when touched in this way. The government can say whatever, but the public does not always know what is true for our so called protection. I always saw this as a normal procedure that people have to go through all the time. I can't take sides at this time, because I have not flown recently. Maybe I should go somewhere to see if I get to choose or not
Sarah Raines
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I think it’s good that they are making our airports more secure with advancement in technology. However the system they have created has sparked many complaints. X-rays admit extensive amounts of radiation which is very harmful to our health. They have acknowledged this and decided that pilots do not need to perform the screening every day because of the health hazard. But they seem to be forgetting about the people who travel every week. It is simply not a safe form of safetry.
Those scanners need to be disposed of. The old x-ray machines worked fine so I do not see a need for these scanners. It is an invasion of privacy that is completely unnecessary. It is important to keep airline passengers safe, but not when it comes at the expense of American dignity.
ReplyDeleteAzim Hemdani
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I agree with Tyner but also believe we should have screenings. Tyner is right about what he is saying but the other people and the directors are right about what they are saying. Screenings can possibly violate someone’s privacy but it is for the persons own good. I agree we should have screenings for our bags and stuff but maybe the screening Tyner is concerned about may be something to think about. He shouldn’t stop traveling until they remove the machines but if everyone decides not to travel then it will become concerning. Also I think that passengers should be allowed to decide if they want to do the screening (the one Tyner was talking about). Well it will stop all of this commotion.
I can understand why people are getting mad and it's because they have nothing to hide. On the other hand their are people who are trying to smuggle thongs onto planes and I would rather they be stopped then not have to go through security. Think of it this way, would you rather have an uncomfortable situation for a few minutes or have to sit through a whole plane flight not knowing what the other passengers are holding?
ReplyDeleteAmber Tunstall--4th
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tayner. I think it is wrong to have our privacy invaded like that. I wouldn't let those people touch me. Even if it is for the safety of everyone, they shouldn't be allowed to do that kind of stuff. If they want to make the airports safe, they should find ways to do it WHILE preserving our privacy.
People are complaining that the government is trying to make this country safer. With all these new technology, terrorists and people who want to hurt the United States are pretty much terminated after they reach the x-ray scan. But citizens who complain that they cannot bring sports equipments, weapons, or personal tools (razors, lotion, Etc.). But what is the point of bring all of these items if you could just drive or sail to your location? People these days aren't thinking of what they could take onto the airplanes.
ReplyDeleteI think that there's something wrong in the new body scanners. True it might be a little awkward, but it's better than someone running their palm down your body. It is not only for our own safety, it also protects the up growing young citizens of our nation. If this is how they are going to this security check, then I probably would stay home or travel by a ship.
ReplyDeleteErica Barrera
ReplyDelete5th period
Okay so I don’t think that Tyner was overreacting. If that was me I would totally make a scene about the scanners. I would not have them scan my body for anything. I rather have them do a pat down and I would not care if that took time from other people. This is my body and I will not have them scan it.
Jade Martin
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I think that what they are doing is ok because they are trying to keep everyone safe. They are not seeing you naked because it's an x-ray machine. If you don't have any weapons on you then you shouldn't have anything to worry about. The government is just trying to prevent another September 11th.
NINA TAMES
ReplyDelete3RD PERIOD
I think it's a good idea that the airport is doing a full body scan. Like many people said before, it might be embarrassing, but it's worth it to keep our country safe. If they didn't do this, and someone snuck in a weapon on the plane, there will be no way to save it. You know? So yeah, I beleive it's a good idea.
Carolyne Lu
ReplyDeletePeriod 3
I think this guy Tyner is pretty much out of his mind. I understand that he may feel violated but that is no reason to refuse to take safety precautions. I agree with Neethu; I think it's better than the pat down. The whole purpose for this body scanner is solely for the safety of everyone. They're not touching you or anything, it's just to make sure there's nothing on you that's dangerous. Having this body scanner is just a way for the government to tell us that they actually are determined to keep us safe. We should take advantage of this act and use it to its limit so that there will be NO more problems like 9/11 again.
Dylan Allotta
ReplyDelete5th Period
I find it obnoxious people like Tyner. They would rather hold up all of airports security and have a physical pat down rather then go through a body scan only for the purpose of security. It's not like security agents are going to laugh about your body and post pictures all over the internet of you. I mean, really it's time to grow up. "If you touch my junk"... Maybe he was just having a bad day and didn't want to deal with anything but common now. Personally I find it comforting to know that everybody on a plane flight I'm on has been scanned. It is a comforting feeling to know you are safe, and to me, a body scan is fine to ensure that.
Ervin Ricasio
ReplyDeletePeriod 5
I agree with Cortney Corley that the man was over-reacting. Airports are one of the most high-secured places you can find or go to, because it deals with the public. The new technology that the airports have can catch anything even if it is slipped in somewhere. Many security officers in the airports have really good sense of smell and they could possibly find someone handling drugs. The man was very sensitive and was very suspicious. Security officers have the right to check anywhere in one’s body if they don’t pass the x-ray test for the sake of safety. They would have to check and clear the person manually. It’s their job, it’s not like they want to touch ones “down there.” There are many terrorists and drug dealers in the world, and these officers are here to prevent them from getting on the plane and making sure they got to jail immediately and to make sure we have a safe ride to the destination.
Samantha Twardowski
ReplyDelete3rd Period
I believe that the airports will be a whole lot better if the follow through with this system. I think that the body scanners are a great idea and it is not inappropriate or anything in that manner. I believe that if the government is putting effort in making the airports safer then it is great. The safer the airports are then more people will feel secure when they got on the plane. This is a wonderful idea and it will help with airports magnificently.
Nico Alba
ReplyDeleteperiod 2
I personally HATE the airport security system. It’s one of the many reasons I dislike to fly. The process takes too long and is annoying, I see why they have them but I think a new process needs to be proposed. I believe that Tyner had something to hide; I mean why else would he put up such a huge ruckus about such a small dilemma. People these days make such a big issue over nothing and it makes things harder for others. Let’s use some sense guys.
Abin Joes
ReplyDeletePeriod 2I completely agree with Kayla. It's not like they want to see all your business, if you know what I mean, but they do it, for our safety. I mean, he didn't need to react so sensitively to the scanner. It also seems like this man, to me, is crying out for attention. Come on people, he got his five minutes, lets all just simmer down. People have argued that this is a violation of their privacy, many times. He's just another one of those peopl
Airport safety saves lifes. Without it who knows what could be brought onto an airplane. I think this man is just overreacting. Yeah, they see you naked but it's not like they're going to sit there and laugh at you in your face. I don't even think they would even try to look 'there', all they care about is if you have harmful items or not. If this guy doesn't like the screening then he should just drive. I, personally, would rather be checked than get on a plane with the possibility of some wrong happening.
ReplyDeleteMelvin Valimattathil
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I think this man was over reacting. They only scanned him to make sure he did not have any weapons. They were also keeping the other passengers safe by doing this.
Logan Gloster
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I think people really shouldn't complain about airport security. If they really don't want to go through security then they might as well not fly. The government has procedures for security for airplanes because no one wants another 9/11. They just want to make sure everyone is safe and can get from A to B with no problems.
Airport security is created solely for safety, and though the pictures are very detailed as Joshua mentioned, it is only used to make sure nothing that is not supposed to be on the plane is on it. I would rather go through a few seconds of being uncomfortable then maybe losing my life on a plane because we don't want to be looked at in an x-ray. In cases like this, you must look at the bigger picture, it is for safety and the man just overreacted.
ReplyDeletePrerna Kamnani
ReplyDelete4th Period
There is a reason for the technology in the airport. It is for our safety and protection. The government has only put the technology for our safety, so it is not a bad thing. The government is just taking extra precautionary measures to ensure our safety and to prevent another 9/11. In my opinion, the guy that felt these machines were invading privacy was just over reacting. The new technology is a great way to increase safety in our country.
I understand they are trying to keep the passengers safe; however the way they are going about it, is not acceptable. They should not be allowed to violate a persons’ personal space. They should modernize the technology for the current metal detector systems, to be less invasive, yet more accurate In conclusion airports should step down one notch in how secure they are. I fully understand they are trying to protect us against having another terrorist attack, by training the TSA employees how to read a persons body language and verbal queues, instead of invasively searching everyone. If they are too aggressive for in choosing who to search then this could further hurt the already bad economy because more and more people will either choose not to travel at all, or chose alternate methods like driving instead of being legally raped by the government agencies.
ReplyDeleteChris Bready
ReplyDelete6th period
We need to keep our airports safe. That is very important to do. We need to have strict policies so that no one can sneak a gun and or another type of weapon into the airport. This way we can stop terrorist attacks and we can protect our U.S. citizens.
5th period
ReplyDeleteI think that this man overreacted. It should be that big of a deal unless he is hiding something. These x-ray images are for everyone’s safety, not to an invasion of your privacy. Without these x-ray machine somebody could got a plane with a boom or a gun. These machines are to protect us and help us. If there were no machines you could get on the plane and be blown up for all they know. There are some crazy people out there and these machines protect us from them.
This guy is crazy! If he's innocent then why is he making a big deal if the security scanning him? I think this is an excellent way of searching for threats at the airport. I mean the security is just doing their job and trying to keep the people safe from harm.
ReplyDeleteMishi Jain
ReplyDelete2nd period
I understand where Tyner is coming from and I completely agree. Screening is an invasion of total privacy where it's just wrong to do something like that. We already have to go through the pain of taking everything that is metal off of us including our shoes and then walking through a scanner. Then put everything back on. Also they check the bags taking many things out and throwing them away. Plus they have hand scanners too, but going through screening or pat-downs is very uncomfortable for people.
Okay. My turn.
ReplyDeleteSo anyways, I honestly think this Tyner guy either wants fame, or has O.C.D. over people hovering metal detectors over his private areas. If he doesn't want anyone hovering a metal detector over his private areas, then he shouldn't go to airports. We need the security, we need the protection, we don't want 9/11 to happen again. And this guy seems like he doesn't care over the safety of our passengers, he just cares about his privates. Yes, I know everybody wants to protect them, but not as much as this guy. I mean, you don't see people complaining about metal detectors hovering over the wrong area. He shouldn't start another fiasco.
It's one thing to protect the people from another terrorist attack, but it's another thing to be able to see civilians private parts. I think that your life is more important than how your body looks, therefore I'm all for this X-ray scanning.
ReplyDelete4th period
ReplyDeleteI agree with the first couple of people who commented, that it is all for safety, and if you feel uncomfortable with it just get the pat-down. But would you rather not have the screenings and risk being endangered on the plane? I like the fact that your face gets blurred, and the people you see aren't seeing the image, so they don't know what you look like naked, and the other people don't either (because your face is blurred) So what's his problem?
Period 3
ReplyDeleteHaving security is a good thing in airports. If there were no guards, there would be more incidents in airports involving terrorists. Just like the "underwear bomber", terrorists would attempt terrorism even more frequently than today. Even though the x-ray scans might be embarrassing it won’t matter how embarrassing it is when the plane you're on is being terrorized.
Why are so many of you so quick to judge? Some comments on this blog say that Tyner “overreacted” and had “some serious issues,” but, honestly, Tyner was just trying to protect constitutional right to privacy. The fourth amendment of the Constitution reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” The TSA gave Tyner two options: to have a full body screening that basically shows his naked body; or to have a full body pat-down which includes a TSA officer groping his “junk.” Both of these options directly go against the Bill of Rights. Also, Tyner was not overreacting. I saw the video to which the beginning of the article refers on YouTube, and Tyner remains reasonable and calm. Tyner starts out in the metal detector line, when a TSA officer pulls him out of the line and puts him in the line for the full body scanner. He informs the TSA officer that he does not want to be scanned by the Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT), so he is taken to an area where another TSA officer describes a thoroughly inappropriate pat-down procedure. Tyner refuses and never raises his voice. After at least three more officers become involved, Tyner is told that he must either receive the pat-down or leave the airport. On his way out, however, he is told by yet another TSA officer that he will be charged with a fine for leaving the airport! They told him to leave, and when he did leave, they told him not to! One would have to be insane not to get frustrated at the situation. Going off of what some of you said, this increased security is Orwellian in nature. One of the TSA officers that Tyner encountered said to him, “Upon buying the ticket [for your flight], you gave up a lot of your rights.” I find it highly irritating that a government official can get away with saying that. If I lose my rights for buying a plane ticket, then I am driving from now on. First they take away our privacy. What will they take next? Our freedom of speech? Our religion? This is America. I thought we were the land of the free. If this deprivation of rights continues, soon enough, we will have no freedom. Benjamin Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” John Tyner refused to give up his liberty; he represents what America is and should be and has been until now: the land of the free and the home of the brave.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that the technology is good because it prevents terrorist from sneaking into our country and attacking us. So if people are freaking out about this then it's your choice thousands of deaths or a simple screening your choice not our.
ReplyDeleteVictoria Hackney
ReplyDelete2nd Period
The scans might be annoying (not might, they are annoying) but they are there for a reason. The airlines need to keep it safe if they want for people to continue to use airlines as a form of transportation. Not everyone is going to be happy with they method they are using which is why there is an alternative. If someone is not happy with it then they need to either just deal with it, or they can find a different form of transportation. The airlines need to continue to keep people safe, and this guy just got way to dramatic about it.
Yes, I agree that it is annoying and tedious but it is something we are going to have to deal with until there is a faster just as effective (or better) way of screening people.
Dane Gantt
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Well, firstly I'd like to say that most guys would respond to a physical pat-down the same way that this man did. Airports are just trying to prevent something like 9/11 or maybe even worse, from happening. These new machine are just another safety precaution and people should not overreact to what security personnel will be able to see once you walk through the scanner. Does it really matter? Will you ever see the person who screens your pictures? I don't think so.
I believe that the search should be much less invasive. This is because I much understand the reasons that they are doing for is for passengers to be as safe as possible, but, they should not be as touchy because they could be multiple negative effects of this. Also, this very easily could be avoided by allowing the agents to do the normal security machine. But, if you either do not except to do that or get denied by the machine then you’re forced to be search. The x-rays machines much like Joshua said show way too much. Also, I believe the pat downs are invades way too much of a person’s personal space. Why the T.S.A can’t devolve a more advanced system based on what they currently have? This would make some much more sense then what they started doing recently. Also, with the new method they actually can harm the economy because people would see it is invading their space and decide to drive. This possible can harm the jobs of the pilots and attendants working for the major companies.
ReplyDelete2nd Period
ReplyDeleteI don't see the problem in having security and all the x-ray machines. Like others said, they have a purpose. They're trying to keep EVERYONE safe. I'm sure with past possible experiences they have a reason to do all these kinds of checks. This man is overreacting on the whole situation.
John Tyner over reacted, it was unnecessary for him to 'throw a fit'. The airport security is just trying to ensure the safety of each and everyone that gets on a plane. As with going through the scanners, you will very quickly get an x-ray image done of you, which no person can "save, or print", as said in the article above. I find that this is not an invasion of privacy. It is merely an x-ray image of yourself, it is not someone looking at you naked. Tyner should have realized that he was being immature, and should have just gone through the scanners, and when he didn't and was offered the choice of getting a pat-down, his comment was uncalled for.
ReplyDeleteSarah Raines
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I think it’s good that they are making our airports more secure with advancement in technology. However the system they have created has sparked many complaints. X-rays admit extensive amounts of radiation which is very harmful to our health. They have acknowledged this and decided that pilots do not need to perform the screening every day because of the health hazard. But they seem to be forgetting about the people who travel every week. It is simply not a safe form of safety.
When it comes to privacy, people sure are quick to point fingers and throw fits of indignant rage. First off, these scanners are not there to deliberately invade your privacy, they are there to protect other people from potential threats. And after the Christmas bombing attempt the airports need to increase their security. People fail to understand the severity of these attacks. Not only are they against our country they are also against innocent people. This is a terrifying idea; someone is targeting people because of their warped beliefs. So to answer Samantha’s question, yes, I do agree with the scanners.
ReplyDeleteTravis Crissman
ReplyDelete2nd period
I believe that the man in the article is just overreacting. He could have allowed the x-ray scan and avoided the pat down. These measures are just a matter of safety to keep all passengers and airline crew members safe. I think that airport security has every right to take a passenger off a plane if they refuse to comply with security measures. The airports are even providing extra precautions to travelers like blurring their faces in the scans to avoid unnecessary embarrassment
Aileen Nguyen
ReplyDeletePeriod 3
The full-body screenings could help reduce any tragic incidents on flights. However, I agree with certain aspects from Tyner, as well as the government. I somewhat agree with Tyner and his opinion on this topic. Even if the passenger becomes unidentifiable, just the thought of having an image taken like that makes certain people feel violated. Tyner did, though, overact about the screenings.
I also think that the government has a good reason for the screenings; without them, people would be able to sneak bombs or illegal drugs on the plane, which in turn could result in critical issues affecting many people.
I believe that people are hypocritical when it comes to most government issues. People criticize the government when a terrorist blows up a plane, but then secure security procedures are criticized because they violate some of your privacy. The images shown are not clear at all and do not show inappropriate things. People want a perfect system that doesn't violate any privacy but catches all the terrorists. People need to make the decision between privacy and security. If you do not want to undergo this process then do not fly. In my opinion, I think it is better for TSA agents to look at vague outlines of private parts then to actually pat them down. Even if the pictures are leaked on the internet then people would not be able to see much at all. I think the country is blowing the security measure out of proportion and need to ask themselves which is more important: privacy or their lives.
ReplyDelete9-11 has caused the airport security to overreact. Yes, no one will be able to forget it and all the deaths that occured. But, that's no reason to be invading personal space. Now there's a possible that there will be a ton of perverted guys that work at airports now.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Thai
Period 5
Malcolm Berry
ReplyDeletePeriod 5
I strongly agree that these new machines are needed in todays airports because a simple mater of security. Even if Tyner never flies again it isn't going to absolutely ruin the flying business he's just one customer to an industry that receives many new costumers everyday. I believe that if people do not want to be screened at airport or manually checked they shouldn't fly. They shouldn't be able to put our security at risk because of their lack of comfort.
Amita Batra
ReplyDelete3rd Period
Personally, I know how annoying it can be to go through those security checks at the airport. Those few moments of leaving my valuables makes me a little bit nervous. However, this annoying security check is for the safety of passengers themselves. The world does not need a repeat of 9-11, or the London attacks of terrorism. I feel that if going through this little irritating check helps us stay safe. We should appreciate it rather than ridicule the ways of airport security. Honestly, one would only need to mind these checks if they needed to get past the security without a scan, such as a terrorist. However, airport security can be random and a little bit judgmental at times. My dad is an Indian man, who is obviously not a terrorist. However, they always stop and look through his bag thoroughly by hand when they don't look at other people's that way. Do terrorists always have to be dark skinned? A terrorist is not defined by race or ethnicity. A terrorist is simply a person who spreads terror and fret among people. This terrorist does not have to be Indian or Pakistani, but can also be a Caucasian person. Therefore, I believe that security checks are for our safety, but every passenger should be treated equally.
Grace Bonojo
ReplyDelete4th Period
I think it's ridiculous that airport officials search people with those X-ray machines because it seriously is an invasion of privacy. I agree with this man's actions to refuse the X-ray and pat-down, but the law to penalize people for refusing both forms of searching is idiotic. Of course I understand why they do these searches but it's unintelligible why they have to do it this way. Suppose an employee decided he wants to keep those pictures for whatever reason not only would the employee face trouble but so will the person who decided to be subjected to that search. What happens then?
Dude I got some stories about airport "safety". So this one time my sister is getting her bag checked and guess what she brings, a glass bottle of sparkling water. So the guy says "ma what is this"'and she replies "a work of art because how many times are you going to get a chance to keep this european water bottle". Like any normal person the guards bust out laughing till they drop and know what they do they let my sister actually keep the "work of art". Do you think people that let European glass bottles of water on planes be our last and first line of defense against terrorism? No I'm just kidding but that story is true but those guys already have a hard time just screening the people think of how much a hassle your causing if you resist. It not their fault it's just protocol. Probally after all this terrorism is done and is only found in the history book are we going to slack on screenings.
ReplyDeleteEmily Panozzo
ReplyDelete4th Period
Citizens of the United States owe it to their country to go through the inspection. If others who are suspicious are required to go through it, then the whole nation shall go through it. If those undergoing the procedure don't have anything to hide, then offense should not be taken. Airport officials are not going to be thinking about someone's privates when checking for anything suspicious. They are more than likely just focusing on what could be hidden. I think those who are offended by the “pat downs” should just have to get over the personal violation and think of it as a contribution to fellow citizens of the U.S. As more forms of weaponry are developed and the world has increased risks of danger, extra precautions are necessary. These changes are fundamental to the maintenance of the free and safe country that we live in today.
People who have something to hide from the police are the ones who are worried about the security checking. I do not like the security checking as it takes a lot of time but if it protects the nation and its members then I will not oppose it. This man was lucidly hyperactive and definitely had something to hide from the officials as to what I have seen after careful observation. I appreciate the government’s efforts to secure the land that we live on and air that we travel through.
ReplyDeleteI think it is great that we have new innovative technologies to keep up with the safety of this growing population. To be honest, we should of had this years ago. This will ensure the safety of the American people and speed of security. Now, they can scan us faster instead of touching us. I travel every year to England to visit my family and I don't know about you guys, but I get tired of waiting in the line to be checked when I'm hungry and trying to get to the other side to buy a cheeseburger. They scan people to slow. With this scanner, I will be able to go through airport security faster. They can do the same with my bags. Now all we need to do is invest money in some here in Texas in around the United States.
ReplyDelete- Justin Johnson
6 period
Merin Mathew
ReplyDeleteperiod 6
Body screening will reduce the risk of danger in and out of U.S. Tyner need to realize that 9-11 could happen again if they don't do searches. Does he not remember 9-11? At least they do it to everyone and not focusing on a race. I wouldn't like it, but it is whatever to make this place safe. I seen it on the news and I don't think it is revealing. I like seeing different views on this topic because it has both way argument and it is interesting.
I think the government should tighten the security as more and more illegal items are found to be slipping through airport security checking. One has the right to express his/her views but when it comes to an aggregate security issue certain rights may be have to be kept silent.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I have no problem with the body scanners in airports. They provide safety to all passengers and ensure safety while traveling. With all the recent bomb scares, I think it is neccessary to take these precautions. I do though have a problem with the pat downs. It invades on personal space and makes eveyone including the security uncomfortable. I wouldn't want a stranger touching where they aren't supposed to. I think everyone needs to go through the body scanners without any complaints because if everyone refused the scanner, it would hold up lines. Then the flyers would be mad because they missed their flights due to long lines. If everyone just goes through the scanner we would have safer flights and a secure country.
ReplyDelete