TSA Begins Rolling Out Less-Invasive "Gingerbread Man" Body Scanners to U.S. Airports - Polidicks

[QUOTE=GunFox;31790050]Less than you would think actually. The ports capable of servicing the massive container ships are quite few. They require connections to major railways and freeways. They also need a lot of special equipment to unload the volume of materials required. I took a class about three years ago on national security, and scuttling container ships in ports ranks among probably the top five threats. The US only has about a 2 week supply of goods at any given time. So even if you disrupt the chain for a week, there will be a period where a huge portion of the United States sees shortages of products on the shelves. It sounds stupid as hell, but it is one thing to see people die on TV, but when a huge swath of the country is now having shortages as stupid as poptarts and toilet paper, you wind up with problems. A smart terrorist knows that killing people is only a means to an end. The goal is to have a nation eat itself politically, not win a ground war. So when several states in the midwest suddenly start voting hardcore in favor of things that violate our amendments because someone managed to shut down the port of Houston, it is a huge boon to whatever assbags want us dead. ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Houston[/url]) [editline]17th August 2011[/editline] Look at the little graph. Those are our major ports. That is pretty much all of them. You only need to cripple one important one for there to be serious problems. Certain supplies arrive at certain ports. Ports operate pretty close to capacity, so diverting shipments is going to create a very, very, long line.[/QUOTE]Good way to think about it... I'll agree with you there. Still, railway attacks are easier. Right? One would think... You don't even need a bomb. Just go after it gets dark, and take off a section of track in the middle of nowhere. Amtrak trains do 135MPH+ between DC and NYC. That'd be a disaster, and all they would need is a sledge hammer, and maybe something to leverage the track off of the ground to loosen it.

[QUOTE=faze;31790144]Good way to think about it... I'll agree with you there. Still, railway attacks are easier. Right? One would think... You don't even need a bomb. Just go after it gets dark, and take off a section of track in the middle of nowhere. Amtrak trains do 135MPH+ between DC and NYC. That'd be a disaster, and all they would need is a sledge hammer, and maybe something to leverage the track off of the ground to loosen it.[/QUOTE] Oh yeah, definitely. To sink a container ship you would need a massive bomb. It wouldn't need to be complicated, but the sheer size would be difficult to manage. Derailing a train is considerably more straightforward. Hell, with your plan you might actually do some serious damage across the US if you were persistent enough. Rather than passenger trains, if you were targeting random cargo tracks, you might manage to cripple the economy pretty damn effectively. Can you imagine the damage that multiple derailed large cargo trains could have? EDIT: That is actually such a good idea that I kind of want to delete the post on the off chance that someone actually tries it.

[QUOTE=GunFox;31790213]Oh yeah, definitely. To sink a container ship you would need a massive bomb. It wouldn't need to be complicated, but the sheer size would be difficult to manage. Derailing a train is considerably more straightforward. Hell, with your plan you might actually do some serious damage across the US if you were persistent enough. Rather than passenger trains, if you were targeting random cargo tracks, you might manage to cripple the economy pretty damn effectively. Can you imagine the damage that multiple derailed large cargo trains could have? EDIT: That is actually such a good idea that I kind of want to delete the post on the off chance that someone actually tries it.[/QUOTE]Yeah, and trains still carry coal too. Imagine the fire that would ensue with coal if they did something to set it on fire after the accident...Holy fuck. I'm never riding a train again.

I'm still wondering when we decided to throw the fourth amendment out the window (self answer: 1973), and whose bright idea it was to do it int he first place (self answer: neocons). The last time I took a flight from Detroit to Texas, which was in 2009, we didn't have these fancy screeny gadget mabobbers yet. I got to skip the whole see-my-balls machine and the whole involuntary-groped-by-a-man-in-a-suit phase. But I find it disgusting that we take such extreme measures. This is proof that the terrorists won. They got what they wanted- they terrified us, and now we voluntarily expose ourselves to strangers for our safety, and give up our fourth amendment right. I'm glad that they've turned down the invasiveness with this new machine, now, at least. I can handle that. But as long as they still have the full-body xray screen things, I plan on wearing [url=http://cargocollective.com/4thamendment]this shirt[/url] through them.

[QUOTE=ART1E117;31781894]Why are people so insecure about this shit. As a frequent traveler I don't care if a TSA employee sees my nads, as long as some asshole with a bomb doesn't get on the plane with me.[/QUOTE] As a guy I couldn't care less, but when it's a woman I don't think they'd like to be seen naked by some random people.

[QUOTE=ART1E117;31781894]Why are people so insecure about this shit. As a frequent traveler I don't care if a TSA employee sees my nads, as long as some asshole with a bomb doesn't get on the plane with me.[/QUOTE] I imagine rape victims aren't too keen on the idea

[QUOTE=Agent_Wesker;31785553]TSA is totally useless, you are trading freedom for security but as someone said before they are not effective in stopping terrorists from getting through.[/QUOTE] I don't think terrorists are going to take down a plane with some planer blades. I don't see why people are so up tight about this. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about, the scanners may not detect everything, but at least they detect most stuff and that will keep us a lot safer.

[QUOTE=sk8rboi;31791495]If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about.[/QUOTE] This is the most common, giving, revealing phrase of a fool and an ignorant sap. I'm sorry that you have no problem sacrificing your rights and privacy.

[QUOTE=sk8rboi;31791495]I don't think terrorists are going to take down a plane with some planer blades. I don't see why people are so up tight about this. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about, the scanners may not detect everything, but at least they detect most stuff and that will keep us a lot safer.[/QUOTE] You have no business living in the United States.

Good job TSA. You are going to use something completely new and revolutionary, even though it's been in Amsterdam's Schiphol for years. We never had any problem with them, so why wouldn't they have switched over a long time ago?

[QUOTE=GunFox;31791620]You have no business living in the United States.[/QUOTE]Dammit, you beat me to it.

TSA and all the people who work for and support it can go burn in hell for all I care.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;31781915]I don't appreciate random people looking at my nads. And I'm sure there are a lot of others who do not as well. And I seriously doubt women want to be seen so intimately either.[/QUOTE] Huh, I don't care if someone sees my nads, then again I'm Finnish and the sauna is my second home.

[QUOTE=ART1E117;31781894]Why are people so insecure about this shit. As a frequent traveler I don't care if a TSA employee sees my nads, as long as some asshole with a bomb doesn't get on the plane with me.[/QUOTE] i gotta be on the same boat as this guy. i've gladly been inside of a full body scan. I just don't care.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31791593']This is the most common, giving, revealing phrase of a fool and an ignorant sap. I'm sorry that you have no problem sacrificing your rights and privacy.[/QUOTE] In his defence, with the amount of fear spread by the media it's understandable that people would support the TSA.

[QUOTE=sk8rboi;31791495]I don't think terrorists are going to take down a plane with some planer blades. I don't see why people are so up tight about this. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about, the scanners may not detect everything, but at least they detect most stuff and that will keep us a lot safer.[/QUOTE] alright let me just search your house once a day, put a GPS on your car and start tracking your every move. no? if you're innocent you have nothing to hide what are you some kind of criminal

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31792071]In his defence, with the amount of fear spread by the media it's understandable that people would support the TSA.[/QUOTE] It's simple enough to think independently from the media, though.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31792222']It's simple enough to think independently from the media, though.[/QUOTE] Yeah but you have to admit, when you hear all the stories about people going on planes with bombs it is pretty frightening for most people, it's understandable that they'd be willing to give up a bit of privacy for a bit of protection.

[QUOTE=ART1E117;31781894]Why are people so insecure about this shit. As a frequent traveler I don't care if a TSA employee sees my nads, as long as some asshole with a bomb doesn't get on the plane with me.[/QUOTE] I don't give a damn if somebody wants to see my cock and balls. I'll spread eagle for them. But the fact of the matter is that the TSA is a [I]government agency[/I] blatantly [I]shitting[/I] on the [I]4th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States[/I]. If the airliner companies want to set up their own scanners, that's their problem. We shouldn't have to pay taxes to support these constitution-shitter-on-ers.

[QUOTE=sk8rboi;31791495]I don't think terrorists are going to take down a plane with some planer blades. I don't see why people are so up tight about this. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about, the scanners may not detect everything, but at least they detect most stuff and that will keep us a lot safer.[/QUOTE] I don't have anything to hide but I still have to get my crotch frisked by an old man every time I want to go on vacation. [editline]17th August 2011[/editline] I'm starting to come up with witty things to say like "was that good for you too?" or something along those lines.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31792246]Yeah but you have to admit, when you hear all the stories about people going on planes with bombs it is pretty frightening for most people, it's understandable that they'd be willing to give up a bit of privacy for a bit of protection.[/QUOTE] Again, we come back to the fact that it's easy to think for yourself, and that people who do not and simply accept what they are spoon fed by a biased and fear-mongering media are often times simply ignorant. And it is that ignorance that allows for the removal of liberties and rights by people who can play on that fear. So I'm not going to simply accept that defense when it allows what it does.

The last one I went through actually pulled my waist band and felt around it which was pretty damn invasive if you ask me.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31792246]Yeah but you have to admit, when you hear all the stories about people going on planes with bombs it is pretty frightening for most people, it's understandable that they'd be willing to give up a bit of privacy for a bit of protection.[/QUOTE] and that's pretty much the entire point of a well-executed terrorist attack.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyAlt;31792377]and that's pretty much the entire point of a well-executed terrorist attack.[/QUOTE]Yep. That it is. They've won.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyAlt;31792377]and that's pretty much the entire point of a well-executed terrorist attack.[/QUOTE] But would ignoring the possibility of another terrorist threat be a better solution?

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31792684]But would ignoring the possibility of another terrorist threat be a better solution?[/QUOTE] Yes. Let me elaborate: the chances of a successful terrorist attack are slim even without the TSA. That will always be a possibility. There's also a possibility that we can all develop skin cancer. That doesn't mean we should ban the bloody sun. Also, every terrorist attack against the US on US soil or in US airspace post 9/11 has either not been caught by the TSA, or has not been on a plane.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31792699']Yes.[/QUOTE] But wouldn't that just lead them to enact another terrorist attack?

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31792720]But wouldn't that just lead them to enact another terrorist attack?[/QUOTE] They're going to enact it either way. This is not stopping terrorists. They haven't stopped a single one.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31792751']They're going to enact it either way. This is not stopping terrorists. They haven't stopped a single one.[/QUOTE] What about the great big plane bombing conspiracy that was foiled?

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31792781]What about the great big plane bombing conspiracy that was foiled?[/QUOTE] Now which one is that?