# TSA's Groin check? Going too far? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2010, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853 "2010-11-16T14:08:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/1 "2010-11-16T14:08:01Z")
From this [story](http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/14/tsa-ejects-oceanside-man-airport-refusing-security/) about a man who refused to be screened in the new body scanner. They offered him a pat down but informed him his groin would be touched. He refused. They escorted him from the airport and are now threatening him with civil penalties and prosecution for not completing the scan. (there is apparently an appellate court decision re: this) Note: there is at least some indication that the man was setting TSA up for this encounter. So, I’m sure everyone here is for flying free from threats, but are you willing to let some dude touch your johnson to do it? Where is a reasonable line with this? ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/2 "2010-11-16T14:10:05Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > So, I’m sure everyone here is for flying free from threats, but are you willing to let some dude touch your johnson to do it? Where is a reasonable line with this? If they would let me keep my shoes on they can feel me up all they want. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/3 "2010-11-16T14:28:26Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > So, I’m sure everyone here is for flying free from threats, but are you willing to let some dude touch your johnson to do it? Where is a reasonable line with this? Nobody “has” to touch your johnson. There’s a whole technology that’s been invented to detect non-metallic objects concealed on one’s body, and that guy refused that option. In any case, I’ve been frisked several times. It’s really no big deal. What is clearly a big deal is people who conceal explosives on their person, a tactic that’s been around for an awful long time. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/4 "2010-11-16T14:29:20Z")
Well, apparently he had a choice between the pat down or back-scattering scan, though obviously some people will have a problem with both. The pat downs I’ve seen (and had one done, albeit a year or so ago) were pretty non-invasive. They run their hands all the way up the inside of your leg, so I imagine depending on how you were, err, positioned, their might be some incidental junk touching, but they weren’t grouping your crotch or anything. Maybe another doper has a more recent experience and can confirm/deny if the procedure is the same. ---
**Author:** ![Scuba\_Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Scuba\_Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scuba_Ben)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/5 "2010-11-16T14:52:49Z")
There’s a whole bunch of discussion at FlyerTalk on this issue. My attempt at summarizing the factual reports: Whole-Body Imaging (WBI), officially “Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT)” and unofficially “Nude-O-Scope (NOS)” or “poronoscan”, claims to detect items concealed underneath the clothing but not inside the body. Nor does it detect explosives or explosive residue. The “pat-down” involves physical contact with much of the body, more than can be justified by a check for concealed weapons. The invasiveness of the pat-down has gone up dramatically this month. Many reports have been posted of young children being subject to pat-downs that have been claimed to be borderline (or outright or statutory) sexual molestation. This is on top of the pat-downs of adults that reports have claimed are borderline (or outright) sexual molestation. When a traveler is directed to WBI instead of the metal detector, going through WBI is optional; the traveler has the right to opt out and be subjected to the pat-down. If the WBI detects issues that the scan cannot resolve, the traveler will be subjected to the pat-down anyway. That’s the facts of the situation as I understand it, along with the general claims. I can’t hold my own in GD on my opinion, and most of the discussions on FlyerTalk don’t meet the Dope’s standards of debate (Great or MPS). ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/6 "2010-11-16T14:58:14Z")
I am led to believe that there are also some minor concerns with the X-Ray exposure from the scanners, with respect to cancer risks. I could see this being an issue for frequent travelers. As far as over-aggressive pat-downs, in the end I’ll likely submit to whatever is required to board, knowing that it isn’t doing a damn thing to make me safer. And once enough crying kid videos go viral, or a TSA official is arrested for intentionally groping too many high-schoolers (or worse), the policy will be toned back again. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/7 "2010-11-16T15:11:28Z")
Part of the problem with pornoscan, as I see it, is that many of the assurances that were initially made about it have turned out to be untrue. Most importantly, we were initially told that pornoscans would not be stored or distributed outside the scanning station - as it turns out, neither of these promises were true. Quite aside from the invasiveness of the scan itself, the fact that it’s been presented to the public in such an amateurish way, and appear to be run by amateurs, doesn’t do much to legitimize the program. “Let us take nude photos or we’ll grope you” doesn’t really appeal. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/8 "2010-11-16T15:13:46Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > I am led to believe that there are also some minor concerns with the X-Ray exposure from the scanners, with respect to cancer risks. I could see this being an issue for frequent travelers. You are aware that it would take something like 1,000 to 3,000 scans in those machines to equal one chest x-ray, right? And that the radiation received from the cosmos during one transcontinental flight is roughly 500 times greater than a body scan? [Link.](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833083) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/9 "2010-11-16T15:13:58Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > They offered him a pat down but informed him his groin would be touched. He refused. They escorted him from the airport and are now threatening him with civil penalties and prosecution for not completing the scan I read that three times to make sure I was reading that correctly. Then I read the article to see if maybe it was a typo. From the article: > [@](#): > > TSA agents told Tyner on Saturday that he could be fined up to $10,000. “That’s the old fine,” said Aguilar. “It has been increased.” Basically it seems he no longer wanted to fly and they wanted to grope him for the hell of it anyway, and are now threatening a lawsuit because he wouldn’t let them get to third base. What goons. ---
**Author:** ![Scuba\_Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Scuba\_Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scuba_Ben)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/10 "2010-11-16T15:16:07Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > You are aware that it would take something like 1,000 to 3,000 scans in those machines to equal one chest x-ray, right? > > And that the radiation received from the cosmos during one transcontinental flight is roughly 500 times greater than a body scan? > > [Link.](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833083) AND that the exposure from the X-ray WBI is concentrated in the skin, while the exposure from a chest X-ray or from in-flight cosmic radiation is distributed over a wider area and varying kinds of tissue, such that exposure is not comparable? ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/11 "2010-11-16T15:21:04Z")
A very funny [article](http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/10/for-the-first-time-the-tsa-meets-resistance/65390/) from the Atlantic about the new pat-down - essentially, yes, they grope your balls. Which is stupid, because everybody knows if you want to smuggle something somewhere you shove it up your ass. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/12 "2010-11-16T15:25:06Z")
If, coincidental to a pat-down, I ejaculate. . . well? ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/13 "2010-11-16T15:25:43Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > A very funny [article](http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/10/for-the-first-time-the-tsa-meets-resistance/65390/) from the Atlantic about the new pat-down - essentially, yes, they grope your balls. Which is stupid, because everybody knows if you want to smuggle something somewhere you shove it up your ass. Well, they do wear surgical gloves. Maybe the “finger wave” isn’t too far off. ---
**Author:** ![YamatoTwinkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/cc9497/32.png) [@YamatoTwinkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YamatoTwinkie)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/14 "2010-11-16T15:27:48Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Basically it seems he no longer wanted to fly and they wanted to grope him for the hell of it anyway, and are now threatening a lawsuit because he wouldn’t let them get to third base. What goons. There’s a (soemewhat) valid reason for that fine. The typical scenario is a terrorist with an explosive device carefully hidden on his person who goes through the usual security check, and if he ends up getting flagged for a more intrusive scan/search, declines and walks away. There needs to be something preventing this from occuring, or else the same person could just keep trying to get on a different flight. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/15 "2010-11-16T15:33:32Z")
How is this not an illiegal search? Is buying a plane ticket probable cause? I’m sure this has been asked by people smarter than me, but I don’t see how laying hands on me is legal. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/16 "2010-11-16T15:34:21Z")
I’ll pay good money to have my balls groped. Provided the groper is a hot female blonde, preferable in bikini – or without if she prefers it that way. By a fat dude in blue overalls, not so much. The solution to the scanner problem, is to make it entirely up to the airlines weather they want to employ it on their flights. Then the passengers can elect to buy tickets to the flights with their preferred check methods, with or with-out body scanners. ---
**Author:** ![Scuba\_Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Scuba\_Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scuba_Ben)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/17 "2010-11-16T15:37:32Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > How is this not an illiegal search? Is buying a plane ticket probable cause? I’m sure this has been asked by people smarter than me, but I don’t see how laying hands on me is legal. Short answer: It’s an administrative search as part of air travel. Air travel has always been subject to an administrative search of passengers, carry-ons, and checked baggage. TSA is simply increasing the scope / intensity / invasiveness of their searches. Longer answer: This has not been tested in court yet. People are indeed asking those questions: Is WBI a permissible administrative search? Are the various enhanced pat-downs permissible administrative searches? ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/18 "2010-11-16T15:39:30Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > I’ll pay good money to have my balls groped. Provided the groper is a hot female blonde, preferable in bikini – or without if she prefers it that way. By a fat dude in blue overalls, not so much. The solution to the scanner problem, is to make it entirely up to the airlines weather they want to employ it on their flights. Then the passengers can elect to buy tickets to the flights with their preferred check methods, with or with-out body scanners. Can I elect not to be in the building that the planes get run into when they get hijacked by terrorists? ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/19 "2010-11-16T15:40:22Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > And once enough crying kid videos go viral, or a TSA official is arrested for intentionally groping too many high-schoolers (or worse), the policy will be toned back again. Does the TSA get punished for things people complain about? I’ve heard an awful lot of complaints against the TSA, and very little about agents being disciplined. Yeah, there was that idiot that got fired for planting white powder on a traveler. I don’t think things like [this](http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/tsa-screener-terrorizes-3-year-old-girl) are going to slow the process. They’ve pretty much shown that they can get away with whatever they want in the name of security, and the only response seems to be ‘if you don’t like it you don’t have to fly’. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853/20 "2010-11-16T15:42:05Z")
[Moderating] > [@Rune](#): > > The solution to the scanner problem, is to make it entirely up to the airlines weather they want to employ it on their flights. Then the passengers can elect to buy tickets to the flights with their preferred check methods, with or with-out body scanners. This thread is already very similar to [this one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=585215), so I might merge them or close one if the conversations become parallel. [/Moderating] Someone else just suggested this in the other thread, so I’ll ask you the same question: how do you deal with the risks this creates for people who aren’t on the plane? [D’oh, **Simplicio** just asked the same thing.] [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tsas-groin-check-going-too-far/560853.md?page=2)