Yes, we do. It’s called an election, and it’s about what this country stands for- freedom to choose. We can choose lawmakers that will devise reasonable procedures for these searches, not bullying by petty tyrants in screener uniforms.
There is no reason to throw human dignity aside for the convenience of security.
*freedom to choose Bush or Kerry != real choice
Kerry vs. Bush is not the only election.
What you think matters exactly as much as what I think: not at all.
Well, every woman did agree to the possibility of having their breasts examined when they bought the ticket, and, in so doing, agreed to the terms and conditions of purchase, of which searching is one. Possibility turned into actuality for one woman, who got mad about it and wanted then to not honor the terms of her contract. She didn’t have to honor those terms, and did not honor those terms. But that doesn’t mean that the airline is still obligated to meet its terms, that is, provision of service. So it did not. Both parties, in essence, walked away from a breached contract. Problem is, the woman wanted to have her cake and eat it too.
Whether the search was reasonable and/or arbitrary is up for debate now, but, unfortunately for the woman, was not up for debate at the point in time at which she was required to submit to the search. When she was required to submit to it, it was neither unreasonable nor arbitrary. She chose not to submit to it (which she was free to do) and the consequences of her refusal to be searched was the airline’s refusal of service to her.
I agree with you one hundred percent. In fact, there are other ways we get to choose what’s reasonable and/or arbitrary- in civil rights litigation. And if this woman was wronged, I say again (and I’m sure you read this part of my post as well) that I support her right to sue and I hope she does. And I also support her right to to vote for whichever candidate promises her that such a thing will never happen again.
But the time to do that is at election time or in court. Not on line, AFTER you have already agreed to be searched.
She had a contract with the airline. She wanted to hold the airline to the obligations into which it freely entered- and she wanted to be released from her obligations, into which she freely entered. She found out that it just doesn’t work like that.
She is free to seek redress, and present evidence in order to prove that she was wronged and is entitled to justice. But there is a forum for that, and the airport ain’t it.
Unless I read the article wrong, the “breast exam” is just part of the patting down process. She had not been patted down yet, at least, not completely. The fact that she thought the search was done and the breast part was a new search is irrelevant.
If you want to say they shouldn’t pat someone down at all, that’s a fine argument. To suggest that they should skip women’s breasts when doing a search is just silly, and defeats the purpose of the search entirely.
If it were me, and a woman was conducting the search, no problem.
A man, no way.
And this may cause a bit of an embarassing problem the next time they search a lady who has survived breast cancer. Not all fake boobies are bombs.
I’ve been “patted down” in that fashion before and it really is just a quickie…no pun intended…and I was ok with it, not that I agree with all of the security measures, but I realize they are what they are right now and the place to object, IMO, is not at the gate of a flight when you knew damn well what to expect to happen there. And if you were not prepared you could have been by reading your particular airport’s security page.
We do tend to oversexualize our boobies and forget, ya know, there is a lot of storage capcity given our bras and underwires and such. On some occasions I end up carrying 2 cell phones at work. One day I had no pockets on my outfit and when I went to different meetings within the hospital (sans purse) I just stuck one phone under each bra strap…right at the top, not inside the cup. I had on a blouse, not a t-shirt, and you really could not tell I had the contraband cell phones…in fact, I even forgot until I undressed when I got home from work and thought, what the hey? when they both fell out.
More like breasts of mass distraction
I’ve been trying to work out a breasts of something suction.
Anyone feel free to pick up the ball.
I’m glad I’m never going to be flying to, or boarding a plane in, the US. You people are all fucking crazy
But in terms of “safety” why do you Americans focus on “aircraft safety” and less on other, more tangable, terrorist threats? Why the whole focus on airplanes? A bomb on an airplane can only kill ~300 people (including unlucky people on the ground). Has the government brainwashed the American public so much that you think aircraft terrorism is a huge danger?
A 9/11 disaster is no longer possible (passengers wouldn’t allow it). What is a danger is a rental truck, a barrel of gas and some plant fertilizer nitrate. Why didn’t the government go ape shit over the Oklahoma city bombing in the same way 9/11 caused passengers to be molested just to fly? Why would terrorists bother with bombing an aircraft when 6 vans packed with home made bombs could kill 10X as many as any aircraft (including 9/11). Americans aren’t safe because you have some security measures in place (that don’t do shit). You’re safe because most Americans don’t want to kill other Americans.
I’m glad flights to Cuba/Dominca aren’t as harshly screened as flights to the US are (Europe has moderate screening according to my GF). I know I would no longer fly if I had to have my nuts checked for fucking explosives. And all those guards with MP5s really make me feel safe. You know how many terrorists openly attack airports in Canada.
Sheesh.
I’ve been trying to work out a JOKE.
Shheeesh, somedays you just can’t type.
The government did go ape shit over that. You can really see the effects in DC, where they placed big honking planters everywhere to force traffic back from buildings, but the effects are obvious in more local places as well.
Also, I think one question that should be asked more is what would have happened if the first attack on the WTC back in 1993, which did involve a truck bomb, had worked. We’re talking about something just as bad or worse than 9/11 but in 1993 instead of 8 years later.
Does the airline make it clear that ‘your breasts are subject to feeling up’ when a ticket is purchased?
And when people stop flying because the TSA is a bunch of morons with cool badges that let them do anything in the name of security what will happen.
Another bailout of the Airline industry?
Great!
Well, it’s all nice and good the government took steps to protect government buildings. That’s very nice of them. Of course the WTC weren’t government buildings so the US government didn’t do shit all to protect anyone at this point except it’s own people (who, as we all like to bitch about, do less work and get paid more than the general population)
See, I’m sure this fact is just not mentioned so much because, in truth, there is no defense against it. Even “protected” underground parking spaces could be penetrated without much trouble. An explosive packed van under any building would be a huge disaster. The WTC survived one van-bomb. What would have happened if they used 2? Or 5? Or 10? There no reason why they couldn’t have rented more vans with different names.
I love how the government basically likes to spread fear in order to maintain control. Even people in this thread think the current “security measures” actually mean something. So how many terrorist boobs have you guys found anyhow? In fact, has the TSA even interdicted drugs with these types of body searches?
Bullshit, and a shitty analogy to boot. A fucking bag does not equal a breast.
I don’t have shit to hide, and (surprise) I still don’t want my cock felt at a security checkpoint.
The rest of my point was made more eloquently than I could’ve said by Johnny LA, on the previous page. Just because you don’t mind an intrusive search doesn’t mean everyone else should be expected to have the same standards. I beleive that’s a cornerstone of any civilization.
Squeeze me? among women in the middle eastern community I hung with in uni, women were just as frank among themselves as the euros. We waxed each other, did hair and nails, did henna-mhendi on all sorts of body parts. The prohibition is against displaying yourself to nonfamily/nonhusband. Women among themselves were just as open as we are. The idea of going to a private room for a pat down would not bother them as long as they were absolutely private with nomen around.
Sheesh, you think the all female baths that are gone to for cleanliness arent group gossip opportunities and everybody hides in a little private room? Friends of mine report the all male baths are just like a nongay turkish bath in the US…
Somewhere around here, there’s a pit thread where I felt the same way you do here. There were some good, patient dopers in that thread that dissected my arguement to kingdom come.
Needless to say I don’t feel the same. You should read the thread, it’s great. Something about cops and searching, good luck.
:eek:
<insane giggle> I might point out that I have seen/felt the texture of c4, and might also mention that a mass of it enough to do serious damage when removed, formed and a detonater inserted could be carried in an average vaginal cavity. I know for a fact that I could comfortably carry a mass entirely inside the pubic arch of at least the size of a stick of butter though to be rather blunt about it an average woman could probably manage a mass the size of a fist, or someting on the order of 2 sticks of butter [to put it into household terms] When I got internalled prior to a procedure to remove a noninvolved tumor, I know that more than one doctors entire hand was inside rummaging around. [dont understand why they didnt find my referring to it as tag team spelunking and the most action i had gotten since my husband left to go on a northern run more amusing, but what do you want from a bunch of navy doctors=]
That last one is only done for space travel.
Actually, it’s a perfect analogy. They’re both THINGS that need to be examined.
I don’t want my cock felt at a security checkpoint either. I’ve never said that I WANT it. But I grudgingly ACCEPT it as the price I have to pay to fly. If you, on the other hand, refuse to accept it as the price you have to pay to fly, either don’t fly or lobby/sue to have the laws changed.
I don’t expect anyone else to have my standards. I am not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I am saying that I am willing to submit to a certain degree of intrusion in order to have a certain level of safety in air travel.
Troy, you and I and everyone else have choices. You can NOT fly, you can try to make change, or you can compete.
If getting searched is a condition of flight, don’t fly.
If you want to be able to fly without getting searched, file suit. Present evidence. Win your suit, have the laws changed to accommodate your (and, if successful, the Constitution’s/American majority’s) position on searches.
Patronize “no-search” airlines. Cast your ballot economically. Although I’m sure that No-Search Air would quickly become the choice of terrorists and smugglers worldwide, don’t you think?
And, for the love of God, stop with the “feeling up” stuff. That’s the “shitty analogy” right there. It’s a momentary gloved brush by the back of the hand of a same-sex security officer in a private environment. The only people who are less violated than that are agoraphobes.
A certain standard has to be maintained in order to assume a minimum standard of safety. The majority finds the current standard palatable. Therefore, that’s the standard that exists.
Change it if you want to. You have the power. But whining about “violation” and getting snarky with me because I don’t think one person’s hypersensitivity warrants a sea change in national air-travel policy is a poor way to begin, honestly.
This woman signed a contract. Then she wanted to renege on her part and expected the airline to hold up its part. That is hypocritical.
“But I didn’t know what I signed.” Too bad. Purchasing the ticket is affirming knowledge and consent of the terms.
“But it shouldn’t be that way.” Maybe it shouldn’t, but that’s the way it is. And you’re not going to change it on line, after you already signed a document that said you were fine with it. Either make sure you have the terms YOU want, or make other arrangements.