Saturday, September 20, 2014
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Their findings (in brief):
Which is to say, the effective dose (akin to an overall radiation dose) is quite small and is, indeed (as TSA and Rapiscan said), well below the safety standards that were already in place for medical radiation exposure. It is also well below the threshold of what has been advanced for acceptable levels of non-medical radiation exposure - specifically for the purpose of security screening, commissioned by the FDA post-9/11 - which largely draws on the medical standards. However, it is not as if there is a quantifiable individual health costs vs health benefits that can be made for mandatory screening as a condition of air travel. Of course, such a calculation can statistically be made in medicine, the cost/benefit analysis can be presented to the patient by a doctor, and medical scans are voluntary. I'm not saying it's unsafe, rather that it ought to be up to the individual to weigh the risks with benefits without having to forfeit such fundamental rights such as freedom of movement and freedom of contract.ANSI and the HPS have issued a standard (ANSI/HPS N43.17 2009) that “applies to the manufacture and operation of security screening systems that are intended to expose humans to primary beam x-rays, gamma radiation, or both.” Our measurements indicate that the effective dose from a single screening exam is well below the screening limit of 0.25 μSv per screening for a general use, full-body scanner.5 The standard also states that the effective dose (computational adult model) shall not exceed 250 μSv over a 12-month period. For our stimated effective dose of 11.1 nSv to a standard man from a single screening, an individual would need to go through more than 22,500 screenings in a year to reach this limit.
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
...Despite being shown the two Certificates, the TSA operative took the box, broke its seal and tipped the contents on to a metal table. Some of the ashes fell onto the floor. The TSAO then took a sample away for testing. He repeated this twice. He grinned at the passenger's obvious distress. A supervisor was called: he, too, thought that the situation was amusing. Both refused to give their names. The passenger (who is not able to stand for longer than about a minute) was also forced to undergo a thorough pat-down....
Monday, July 28, 2014
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
I have not flown since 2010. I have anxiety over 1) the possibility of being touched by strangers, and 2) putting my children through an experience where they are treated like a criminal.So, now you know!
The last time I flew was an ordeal, as I had a baby with me. Try getting through security with a just-barely walking baby: get your luggage on the x-ray belt, including hiking your stroller up there. Get your jacket and shoes off. Get your child's jacket and shoes off. Carry child through metal detector after fruitlessly trying to get her to walk through alone. Unpack snack bag (which includes milk and ice packs, because children have small stomachs and eat constantly and with security, you're traveling all day) to be tested for who knows what. Now, repack your snacks. Get all of your luggage off the x-ray belt. Dress your baby. Dress yourself.
No thank you. I have been traveling by train with my children - quite relaxing and enjoyable. Tickets are not bad for long-distances. Sleeper cars are expensive, but worth it for an overnight trip. Station locations and schedules can be a bit inconvenient for some destinations. There are several options for eating, moving around, socializing, etc... When I arrive at the station, I just go right for a red cap now, so it is super easy, but when I traveled lighter, it was a breeze getting onto the train and much less stressful than an airport.
PS I used to fly about twice a year before quitting. Pre-9/11 was so easy - I actually flew about 10 times in 2000 - such a huge difference in 10 years!
Saturday, June 7, 2014
This story from last year highlights the absurdity of security theater, courtesy if the TSA. Nevermind that creating several social media accounts, let alone creating false ones, is incredibly easy: The TSA may consider a Facebook account an alternative form of identification. So...are they ready to admit that the whole "Papers, please!" routine is just about getting people to jump through hoops for no purpose? Is the traveling public ready to admit that?
H/T to Ian M.
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
"The controversial airport screening machines that angered privacy advocates and members of Congress for its revealing images are finding new homes in state and local prisons across the country, according to the Transportation Security Administration."
Monday, May 12, 2014
The survey described in this article, "Is The TSA Becoming More Tolerable?," is discouraging. But the author makes the wrong conclusion. That people don't hate the TSA as much is a sign that people become complacent and adjust, even under objectionable conditions. It is not a sign that the a abusive bureaucracy is doing a better job of being nice.
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
To follow up last week's column filled with positive comments about pre-check and how pleasant it is to fly now, the NY times has a new column praising - get this! - naked scanners and how well the TSA treats people with metal implants.
The author, and the people he quoted, are missing the forest for the trees: What if disabled people neither had to be seen naked, nor had to be groped? In other words, what if security at airports was humane and customer focused?
To praise body scanners because it avoids a pat-down (aka, full-body custody search, without the formal declaration of arrest) for people with certain (personal, private) medical conditions is like saying slavery is okay as long as no one is whipped. Both the naked scanner and the pre-custody search are morally offensive!
Friday, May 2, 2014
I hope so!
From an article summarizing a recent GAO report (which was negative about aspects of the naked scanners), we learn that there is criticism from Congress. And it may affect the bottom line:
"Since TSA has failed to analyze and utilize AIT false alarm rates, we have no idea how many passengers are being subjected to pat-downs due to technological failures," House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson, D-Miss., said. "TSA should not spend a single dollar on additional AIT machines until all of the deficiencies identified in this report are resolved.”
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
I am against Pre-Check (formerly, Trusted Traveler; always 'Papers, Please!') as a long-term solution to airport security, as I've written about here before. However, the expansion of the program may be a promising sign that public opinion can, and has, affect airport security policy. That is a point also noted in this NY Times editorial about the Pre-Check program.
I do worry that this is an effective ploy to appease enough of the traveling public to allow the TSA to continue to shed our rights. Hopefully, I'm wrong.