For what reasons could you be requested to go through the full body scanners?

[maxiesmom]

76, 986 respondents say I am not "twisting the information" to suit my agenda

My comments about slanting an article to support your point of view wasn't meant as a slam against you. I was trying to show how I could take the very same info you posted, and turn it around to mean the exact opposite thing. It is very easy to do.

And as far as the polls go, the only thing they ever show is what a specific bunch of people thought of an issue. Poll different people, but the same number, and you will get different results.

As the polls usually state, they are not scientific in nature.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Well put. For the record, I don't disapprove or approve of the scans OR the pat downs. Do I wish we didn't have to go through them? Sure. Unfortunately that's the world we live in. Do I wish Disney didn't have to do a bag search? Sure. But that's part of the price for wanting to go into the parks. Do the bag searches at WDW make me feel any more safe? Nope. Just like the new scanners don't make me feel any more safe.

As far as the new scans effectiveness... I can see where the new scanners could find weapons/materials the WTMD wouldn't. I can also see where there are "holes" (pardon the pun) in the system. Does that mean the system shouldn't be in place? I don't think so.

People can yell and scream on message boards, blogs, youtube, etc all they want. Maybe they'll succeed in getting things changed. Somehow I doubt it. But, even if they are successful... until things change if you don't want to go through the new screenings... don't fly.

If you want to discuss "feel good, security theater," please start a new thread on WDW bag searches. Oh $#!+, now I sound like a Mod wannabee

 

[sam_gordon]

If you want to discuss "feel good, security theater," please start a new thread on WDW bag searches. Oh $#!+, now I sound like a Mod wannabee

Sorry, wasn't trying to derail (if you derail a derailed thread, does that put it back on the rails?) the thread.

 

[padawans]

Only 7% of the population fly more than once a year. They should poll the people the actually fly. Polling people that don't fly means nothing.

 

[goofy4tink]

This is a pointless debate.


Have a nice Thanksgiving everyone. May all your body screens and pat downs be nice ones.

So true...happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

If you want to discuss "feel good, security theater," please start a new thread on WDW bag searches. Oh $#!+, now I sound like a Mod wannabee

Oh, you didn't go there, did you?? Too funny.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Yes I did claim 15%. That is based on a CBS News Poll that 15% of Americans DISAPPROVE of the full body scans. You can see that poll here: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20022876-503544.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

And respectfully, I didn't claim anything other than that as truth:

Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceLuvsWDW
So far, 15% of the people flying are against the full body scans and/or the enhanced pat down. 15% decrease in travel to an industry that already has very few companies turning a profit. And that's just now, at the beginning of this debate, it will increase as more and more incidents of impropriety are reported.

I'm getting more confused by the day. First you stated, then you didn't state but implied, then you stated... where's that "dizzy" smilie when ya need one!

I read that poll twice, and the source once. Flyers/passengers weren't polled, a random sampling of Americans were. There's nothing in that poll to indicate that the persons polled are, were, or plan to be commercial airline passengers. It therefore can't be claimed or implied (or reasonably inferred) that because 15% of the persons polled are against the backscatter scanners this indicates 15% of those persons won't be flying. There's no way to know if they had plans to fly. There's no proven cause-and-effect, and no way to prove it.

 

[deedeetoo]

This whole controversy amazes me.

I have taken 4 rt fights in the last month or so. I have gone through the scanners several times. Its a scanner. It takes a little longer to go through than the normal metal detector but not hugely so. It does not inconvenience me. I don't believe the radiation is going to kill me. I have no problem with my children going through it. I hope all the nutty people who choose to opt out on November 24 don't mess up my family's holiday travel plans.

 

[padawans]

This whole controversy amazes me.

I have taken 4 rt fights in the last month or so. I have gone through the scanners several times. Its a scanner. It takes a little longer to go through than the normal metal detector but not hugely so. It does not inconvenience me. I don't believe the radiation is going to kill me. I have no problem with my children going through it. I hope all the nutty people who choose to opt out on November 24 don't mess up my family's holiday travel plans.

Maybe your the nutty one for exposing your kids to radiation that has not been proven to be safe. I care about my kids and what not expose them to anything that is not proven to be safe. Some of us would think you are the nut job.

 

[padawans]

I'm getting more confused by the day. First you stated, then you didn't state but implied, then you stated... where's that "dizzy" smilie when ya need one!

I read that poll twice, and the source once. Flyers/passengers weren't polled, a random sampling of Americans were. There's nothing in that poll to indicate that the persons polled are, were, or plan to be commercial airline passengers. It therefore can't be claimed or implied (or reasonably inferred) that because 15% of the persons polled are against the backscatter scanners this indicates 15% of those persons won't be flying. There's no way to know if they had plans to fly. There's no proven cause-and-effect, and no way to prove it.

There is no way of knowing if the 85% that said they would fly would ever fly. More people in this country don't fly than do.

 

[olwyngdh]

Maybe your the nutty one for exposing your kids to radiation that has not been proven to be safe. I care about my kids and what not expose them to anything that is not proven to be safe. Some of us would think you are the nut job.

In my opinion, you just crossed a line. You took it to a personal level. Shame on you.

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

Maybe your the nutty one for exposing your kids to radiation that has not been proven to be safe. I care about my kids and what not expose them to anything that is not proven to be safe. Some of us would think you are the nut job.

You are incredibly insulting. How dare you imply that anyone who sends their kids through a scanner does not care!

EVERY parent cares about the safety of the children and you do not care more just because you are against the scanners.

Most of us worry about real, tangible problems.

 

[deedeetoo]

Maybe your the nutty one for exposing your kids to radiation that has not been proven to be safe. I care about my kids and what not expose them to anything that is not proven to be safe. Some of us would think you are the nut job.

So what would it take to prove to you that its safe? That 's the problem here. They have data that shows its safe but you don't accept it (and I suspect you aren't a scientist that is quibbling with the calculations). I guess there is no amount of evidence that will convince you. I do care about my kids, but I accept the scientific data as proof that it is safe and haven't heard anything convincing otherwise.

 

[aubriee]

This whole controversy amazes me.

I have taken 4 rt fights in the last month or so. I have gone through the scanners several times. Its a scanner. It takes a little longer to go through than the normal metal detector but not hugely so. It does not inconvenience me. I don't believe the radiation is going to kill me. I have no problem with my children going through it. I hope all the nutty people who choose to opt out on November 24 don't mess up my family's holiday travel plans.

I agree! I can't believe the uproar over what to me is a nonissue. I'm flying to MCO in two weeks and have no problem with either the scanner or the possiblity of a pat down. I also have airline tickets for another trip in May. I was talking about this the other day with my daughter in laws. They both laughed and agreed it was a nonissue and neither have a problem with their kids going through the scanners or the pat down if required. They said their only issue would be if some TSA agent tried to take one of their kids out of their sight. I jokingly asked if even with the new screening could I take one of my grandkids to Florida with me when I go in May and at the exact same time, both D-I-L's asked, "Which one do you want? Take them all.".

 

[aubriee]

oops! Duplicate!

 

[maxiesmom]

So what would it take to prove to you that its safe? That 's the problem here. They have data that shows its safe but you don't accept it (and I suspect you aren't a scientist that is quibbling with the calculations). I guess there is no amount of evidence that will convince you. I do care about my kids, but I accept the scientific data as proof that it is safe and haven't heard anything convincing otherwise.

I agree. I don't think padawans will change their point of view, no matter what evidence is shown that proves the scans are safe.

I also think that once you stoop to calling people names to prove your point, that shows how little actual evidence you have to support your point. Shame on you!

 

[goofy4tink]

Maybe your the nutty one for exposing your kids to radiation that has not been proven to be safe. I care about my kids and what not expose them to anything that is not proven to be safe. Some of us would think you are the nut job.

I am not deleting this post..I could but I'm not. Why??? So that everyone cans see exactly the type of post that isn't acceptable here. You can not insult others here. You may disagree with them but that's about it. The scanners have been proven to be safe. If you choose to believe otherwise, so be it. The VAST majority of fliers are having no issue with these scanners. Now...if I start to glow in 20 years, I'll come back here and admit I was wrong. But I just don't think that is going to happen. The traveler that travels a few times a week isn't going to be affected..at least that's what we are told by the vast majority of agencies..both security and scientific. You choose to believe otherwise.
It's one thing to say 'all those nutty people' is a wee bit different than calling someone a 'nut job'. Anyone, one person or a group, that actively tries to affect other's flying security wait times is going to be called 'nutty'...sorry, but no one has the right to make others face longer lines and possibly miss their flights. Because of those people that feel it's okay to clog up the security lines, everyone that is flying has now been told to arrive at the airports about 3 hrs early vs the normal 2 hrs. And you think this is okay??? It won't change anything, it will only serve to irritate people and make then angry. And angry travelers and TSA people are not going to be a good mix.

Very soon all these threads will be closed down..simply because some can not post with manners. It's not much to ask. And that goes for everyone. From this point on, any post that contains anything rude, nasty, or has some form of attack will be deleted, no reasons given.

 

[CPT Tripss]

snip

The scanners have been proven to be safe. If you choose to believe otherwise, so be it. The VAST majority of fliers are having no issue with these scanners. Now...if I start to glow in 20 years, I'll come back here and admit I was wrong. But I just don't think that is going to happen. The traveler that travels a few times a week isn't going to be affected..at least that's what we are told by the vast majority of agencies..both security and scientific. You choose to believe otherwise.

snip

...but no one has the right to make others face longer lines and possibly miss their flights. Because of those people that feel it's okay to clog up the security lines, everyone that is flying has now been told to arrive at the airports about 3 hrs early vs the normal 2 hrs.

snip.

May I request that you not mix your personal opinion on topics under discussion with appropriate Mod Squad announcements and actions?

As far as safety of the scans, the jury is still out. Reputable scientests question both the standards against which these machines have been tested as well as the tests themselves. I just saw in the news today that Darvon is now off the market due to safety concerns . . . for years it was "safe," now . . . not. You may chose to undergo increased exposure, that's fine.

Even before the "opt out" protest got publicized, airport and TSA officials were saying that the new procedure would add time. I will not sacrifice my health so that someone else can get through an airport line more quickly.

 

[Jetsong]

i always have to be patted down because of a metal knee...if I went through the scanner would I still have to be patted down....dont want to do both if I dont have too.

 

[GraceLuvsWDW]

It is quite clear on this thread that if you share the OPINION (not fact) of the mods you may say what you want, if you don't then you can't.

First it was said not to "paint the entire TSA in a negative manner" now we are being told that it's ok to cast aspersions on people (in general) who do not want the scans but you cannot cast aspersion on ONE person who wants the scan.

Then the people who slant and cast aspersion on the posts of those who don't like the scan are taken in stride while the "gang" here that like the scans complains about every post from the other side.

Very tacky. Very clear what kind of America people who are willing to to take the scans in stride are striving for. For everyone who doesn't like the scans, I welcome you to go to flywithdignity.org and join others in the protest.

 

[kaytieeldr]

There is no way of knowing if the 85% that said they would fly would ever fly. More people in this country don't fly than do.

The question had NOTHING to do with "would you fly", which is why I don't understand how the quoted poster determined her statistics.

"Do you approve of the scanners?"* 81% yes, 15% no, 4% don't know/other

Nothing about flying.

*paraphrased