Akiina wrote:
These scanner things are being put into major, busy, huge airports. Right now DFW airport has them in the international terminals. We're supposed to be getting more but the number is not being disclosed. The security at these kinds of airports is played up a lot more compared to their middle sized or small airports around the country.
I've flown several times since 9/11, but I will admit they were all on this continent. The first time I flew since 9/11 was the very next summer. I remember a metal detector, a bag scanner, and then once I was called to board I was taken aside and they re-scanned all my carry-on baggage-- including my pillow. Down is dangerous, I guess.
The next time I flew was after they added the liquid rule. I flew from the midwest into DFW because my grandmother had died while I was visiting a friend. The security there was just a metal detector and a bag scan. I took a bottle of lotion with me in my bag onto the plane on my way to DFW. Now, when I went BACK to the midwest after the funeral and departed from DFW, the DFW TSA people decided that the lotion I had flown down with was not safe for me to fly back with. I also had to do the shoe nonsense, and since they found lotion in my bag they then decided to unpack ALL of my shit in front of me.
What I'm trying to say is, security is going to vary greatly from airport to airport. If I were a terrorist, it seems to me like I would just leave from some piece of shit airport and connect at a larger airport and just avoid all this expensive scanning equipment entirely. I mean if you're some John Smith flying from Kansas to Chicago to New York, you're not getting stopped and checked anywhere except your departure city (unless you're randomly wanded down as you board a connecting flight). Thinking about that makes the whole concept of all this expensive, controversial scanning equipment pretty fucking useless.
If this legislation does not pass, we as people with rights are in for trouble.