TSA vs. The World
So everyone is getting their proverbial undergarments in an unfortunately uncomfortable position over the somewhat new ruling that every person flying into, out of, within, or over the U.S. must submit to either a backscatter (full body x-ray-like scan) or a "pat down" of the entire body (including genital region). Apparently this is completely unacceptable to most Americans.
People always want what they can't have. They want security and assurance that they will not be put in harm's way by choosing to fly on an airplane, yet they want such lax laws that sneaking a bomb onto a plane would hardly require any actual sneaking.
What would you prefer in the most extreme of examples, A) To allow a professional airport employee a clear view of your genitals (and "clear" is hardly the picture the backscatter gives) followed by catching a bomb-toting terrorist who was set to sit next to you on your flight, or B) To secure genital privacy followed by being blown up due to the bomb-toting terrorist not being caught? Is that really a tough question that needs a pros vs. cons list?
I get it...the system isn't perfect. In fact, the TSA is often playing catch-up (e.g. We only have to take our shoes off after a shoe-bomb is used); but that's hardly reason to scoff at a security upgrade like the one recently imposed.
If anything, the complaint should be that despite added security so much still gets through. I was on my way to film a wedding a while back and had a backpack brimming with film equipment. Cables, wires, batteries, chargers, and tons of electronics were practically spilling from every pocket. I was stopped, as I expected, and asked, "Sir, is there anything in this bag that could harm me." I actually laughed a little, which was apparently the wrong response. He repeated his question and I tried to put on a serious face and replied, "Um...no?" He opened my bag and took out a wheeled dolly. He spun one of the wheels in a circle and then called over to the x-ray technician, "It was just a wheel." A few minutes later as I was heading to my gate I couldn't help but wonder why nail clippers aren't allowed through when this TSA agent just sent me by without so much as a glance at my metal, telescoping mono-pod, or my jumble of wires/batteries/electronics.
In the end, this cry of "foul play" is so unnecessary as to be comical and sad at the same time. And as a parting thought, here is an actual quote from a TSA agent who was questioned about whether he/she liked the new regulations:
“Molester, pervert, disgusting, an embarrassment, creep. These are all words I have heard today at work describing me, said in my presence as I patted passengers down. These comments are painful and demoralizing, one day is bad enough, but I have to come back tomorrow, the next day and the day after that to keep hearing these comments. If something doesn’t change in the next two weeks I don’t know how much longer I can withstand this taunting. I go home and I cry. I am serving my country, I should not have to go home and cry after a day of honorably serving my country.”
P.S. If anyone still actually reads this thing, I'd love to hear your opinion. What do you think the uproar is actually about? My only guess is that people are body-conscious and do not want anyone seeing them undressed. Because...um...what else could this be about?
2 comments:
Grant! Blogging is amazing. I'm glad that you blogged.
I don't have particularly strong feelings about the body-scan thing, and I haven't had to go through it yet, but I can see both sides of the issue. People want to travel with a minimum amount of hassle, and they also don't want to be treated like criminals. Also, if we're going to start installing these in airports, how long before we start putting them in train stations or shopping malls, etc. etc. I don't totally understand why security is so much more of an issue at the airport compared to everywhere else.
On the other hand, if this is actually effective in stopping people from blowing up airplanes (and, as your story about the camera equipment demonstrated, I'm not really sure that it is), then I'm willing to undergo that extra inconvenience.
Now all that said, I think that TSA is awful. With a few blessed exceptions, their employees are unpleasant, unhelpful and most of them really seem to hate their jobs. I don't totally blame them -- I wouldn't want to work in an airport either -- but all of my border crossings in Australia have been far more pleasant, even when I've had to be searched and patted down. Hmmm... don't take this to mean I had a "pleasant pat-down" ... I'm just trying to say that TSA it doesn't HAVE to be as bad as it is.
In my experience, border security staff in the USA and Canada fall far below the standards set by some of the other countries I've visited.
I'm right there with you, Aro. I think that it's a slippery slope once you install something like this at airports. The percentage of deaths due to terrorist attacks on an airplane are insanely minute when compared to something as simple as driving your car to work. So I'm just as confused as you by the extreme security at airports.
But people want safety, and hey...I'm not too opposed to not getting blown up...so a little extra inconvenience doesn't seem like too big a deal to me.
As for the TSA, yeah, they're not exactly a smiley, happy group that I enjoy contact with. But I blame that partially (if not mostly) on the kinds of people they deal with. I've only been working HR in the insurance industry for a little over a year and I'm already catching myself saying REALLY mean things about certain types of people. I deal with so much stupidity that I have to take a step back sometimes and realize that the person who just sent me an e-mail might be a really nice guy who is just a little confused and not a conniving, selfish manipulator. Not that TSA employee hostility (or mine for that matter) is justified by that, I'm just saying that there's a reason certain groups (e.g. the DMV) are harder to deal with than others.
But you are totally right, the TSA does not have to be as bad as it is.
Post a Comment