6 year old patdown by TSA

[davjohns 1]

Fox has been making a big deal of this. Not sure why. I've been the police officer who found the gun in the infant's blanket. If I was going to sneak something through security, a child is exactly the kind of mule I would want. I go through the security procedures in uniform with government orders and ID in my hand. Why is a six year old exempt?

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[shropshire 0]

Come 1, come All

No one is exempt ... No one.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Fox has been making a big deal of this. Not sure why. I've been the police officer who found the gun in the infant's blanket. If I was going to sneak something through security, a child is exactly the kind of mule I would want. I go through the security procedures in uniform with government orders and ID in my hand. Why is a six year old exempt?

This story has some things in it that make me wonder

Like some of the things the TSA person was saying to her during the pat down

going on the story only as i am sure there is more to come

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[sandi 0]

Quote

Fox has been making a big deal of this. Not sure why. I've been the police officer who found the gun in the infant's blanket. If I was going to sneak something through security, a child is exactly the kind of mule I would want. I go through the security procedures in uniform with government orders and ID in my hand. Why is a six year old exempt?

Last time I checked there's a big difference between and adult and a 6 year-old.

But I'm sure she could have been hiding all kinds of stuff in the leggings and t-shirt she was wearing. Hmmm, a 6 year-old wearing tight fitting clothes. Certainly warrants a thorough patdown in addition to a body scan.

[billvon 2,379]

>Last time I checked there's a big difference between and adult and a 6 year-old.

True. It's a lot easier to tell a six year old "keep this in your pants and don't tell the man! It's a game."

If security is going to work, you can't leave holes that people can use. Unfortunately, there are people who can learn what those holes are - and will use them when they need to.

[sandi 0]

The little girl was wearing leggings, there was no place to hide anything.

[jtnesbitt 0]

Never underestimate how fucked in the head some people are....esp people that are trying to kill innocents. I mean we are talking about preventing people from blowing up aircraft or crashing them right?

"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

[billvon 2,379]

>The little girl was wearing leggings, there was no place to hide anything.

Which is what they verified.

Either security is important or it isn't. If it's not, then let anyone with an excuse through. A 27 year old Arab guy with tight pants? Can't hide anything in there. A 20 year old overweight women? Hey, she's embarrassed. A 2 year old in a car seat? She doesn't like to get out of the seat or she'll scream, so don't check the seat.

If it is important than check everyone.

[sandi 0]

You're right. She should have had a cavity search too.

[sandi 0]

Quote

>The little girl was wearing leggings, there was no place to hide anything.

Which is what they verified.

Either security is important or it isn't. If it's not, then let anyone with an excuse through. A 27 year old Arab guy with tight pants? Can't hide anything in there. A 20 year old overweight women? Hey, she's embarrassed. A 2 year old in a car seat? She doesn't like to get out of the seat or she'll scream, so don't check the seat.

If it is important than check everyone.

Ok, then they should be patting down everyone, not just a small percentage of people.

[jtnesbitt 0]

Thanks for reminding me why i try not to post in SC anymore. People only want to hear facts when they agree with them.

Seeya.

(PS my statement could have meant a number of things, you are the one that took it where you did. Just for the record, a blade can be concealed very easily in hair or almost any type of clothing...including...get this...leggings.)

"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

[devildog 0]

Quote

Fox has been making a big deal of this. Not sure why. I've been the police officer who found the gun in the infant's blanket. If I was going to sneak something through security, a child is exactly the kind of mule I would want. I go through the security procedures in uniform with government orders and ID in my hand. Why is a six year old exempt?

There's something called the 4th amendment, that's why people have a problem with it. (Not even getting into the fact the TSA can't stop a damn thing. Internal tests have let slip 50-90% of "weapons" past screening).

Seriously, if we as a people don't have a problem with a baseless fondling of a 6 year old, then there's no logic to stopping the govt from searching you anytime and anywhere they please. The bus stop. The grocery. Walking down the side walk where there are lots of other people in public. After all, it's for your own safety, and surely you don't have something to hide, do you?

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[sandi 0]

I just think a little common sense is in order.

Seriously, is this really the best security measure this country can come up with.

By the way, I flew a couple weeks ago with no body scan or patdown. I couldn't believe it.

[billvon 2,379]

>Ok, then they should be patting down everyone, not just a small percentage of people.

In places where they use millimeter and X-ray backscatter scanners, they do. You have the choice of a scanner or a patdown, but "neither one, thanks" isn't an option.

[sandi 0]

I don't think they turned down the body scan. The article I read said the whole family went through the body scanner and the little girl was selected to get a pat down too.

Anyway, if everyone is onboard with TSA and thinks they are doing a great job then I'll keep my complaining to myself. I can choose not to fly.

[CarrieByTheSea 0]

Quote

Anyway, if everyone is onboard with TSA and thinks they are doing a great job then I'll keep my complaining to myself. I can choose not to fly.

I understand both yours and Bill's points. It is different when you imagine_your_6-year-old daughter. I would have a hard time with that and agree with the position that if they all went through the scanner, it would be unnecessary to also pat down the little girl.

"Nature is cruel, but we don't have to be." ~ Temple Grandin

[billvon 2,379]

>The article I read said the whole family went through the body scanner and the little
>girl was selected to get a pat down too.

Hmm, they may well have seen something on the scanner that required a patdown, then.

>Anyway, if everyone is onboard with TSA and thinks they are doing a great job
>then I'll keep my complaining to myself.

Personally, I think they are doing a lousy job. But the solution to that is not "force them to do a worse one."

Imagine what would happen if you came out with something that said "children 13 or younger are exempt from pat-downs and X-ray scanners." Who do you think terrorists would target if they wanted to get explosives onto an airplane? Do you really want your kids to be that target?

[sandi 0]

I don't want them to do a worse job. I just think the whole security system now sucks and as you said they're doing a lousy job. I certainly don't feel any safer. There has to be a better way.

Personally I think airport security should be a job that requires education and intelligence and significant training. Fewer people who are highly skilled rather than an abundance of morons.

[nigel99 143]

Quote

>Last time I checked there's a big difference between and adult and a 6 year-old.

True. It's a lot easier to tell a six year old "keep this in your pants and don't tell the man! It's a game."

If security is going to work, you can't leave holes that people can use. Unfortunately, there are people who can learn what those holes are - and will use them when they need to.

Aircrew are exempt.

I don't have a problem with a 6 year old being selected. The guys on the front line have instructions to follow. The TSA staff could easily turn it into a game for younger kids that they have to do (training could help). Parents could grow up and instead of blaming the TSA for their kid starting to cry they should think about how they as adults handled the situation.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[wmw999 2,114]

Quote

Hmm, they may well have seen something on the scanner that required a patdown, then.

I know that I get a waist patdown whenever I go through the scanner, no matter what I'm wearing. I haven't tried elastic-waist pants yet, but I'm not talking about pants with studs all over them, either.

I don't have any metal installed in me, and pass through the metal detector with no trouble.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)