●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load 500 More Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
byjhoegl ( 638955 ) writes:
"Think of the children" actually gets people to listen.
Not the groping, not the invasion of someone putting their hands on you (think about those that hate being touched, or fear of germs, etc), or 3d images of your body for all to see.
Nope, its fear of pediophilia and children being touched.
We have come far.
bySuperKendall ( 25149 ) writes:
Nope, its fear of pediophilia and children being touched.
We have come far.
We have come far.
But the thing is, people groping children is utterly senseless and, to many people, disgusting. There is no way to defend or condone it.
That is why people are against it, not of some odd pedophile fear but because it's stupid and gross.
byDJRumpy ( 1345787 ) writes:
Considering they use the back of their hands, it wouldn't call it 'groping'. The media likes to incite the locals with such terminology but the pat downs are pretty benign. In this case she simply didn't want to put her child through the scanner. As far as I can tell from TFA, she never even got to the point where they offered to do a pat down instead.
byfrosty_tsm ( 933163 ) writes:
Considering they use the back of their hands, it wouldn't call it 'groping'. The media likes to incite the locals with such terminology but the pat downs are pretty benign. In this case she simply didn't want to put her child through the scanner. As far as I can tell from TFA, she never even got to the point where they offered to do a pat down instead.
Next time you are out in public, touch a woman in a sensitive spot with the back of your hand and see if she cares whether it was the front or back of your hand.
(and don't blame me if you get arrested)
byDJRumpy ( 1345787 ) writes:
Are you implying that these people go to the airport NOT expecting to be scanned or searched? This is hardly the same as walking up to a stranger on the street and they randomly grope you. They go to the airport, stand in line watching the hundreds before them go through the same process. You'd have to live under a rock as well as being blind to not know what was going to happen.
byAnonymous Coward writes:
You are using a logical approach to counter an emotional argument. Sadly, this will not work because the type of people swayed by "think of the children" are not mature enough to be reasoned with in an adult manner.
The fact that they are checking all persons for contraband material does not matter to these people.
The fact that this is a direct response to known attempts to use the elderly, infirm, children, or impersonators of same to get contraband onto airplanes does not matter.
The fact that, at each step
byAnonymous Coward writes:
do you have any evidence at all that an elderly, infirm person or child has ever been known to attempt to get contraband on a plane in any related terrorist attack? or is it more realistically, to use your logic, that you too have yet to reach a particular stage of maturity where you can recognize when you're being lied to by an authority figure.
byerroneus ( 253617 ) writes:
Consider this:
The TSA will allow more than X ounces of fluid untested if it is declared or presumed to be for a young child. So in truth, exceptions for children and even adults with medical conditions are already being made. Sure, that baby's bottle probably does contain milk or apple juice, but if you were a bad person, would you not see the opportunity to bring more than X ounces of dangerous material in the same type of vessel?
Another fun fact:
You can't bring butane or similar fuel containers on a pla
bycetialphav ( 246516 ) writes:
The TSA will allow more than X ounces of fluid untested if it is declared or presumed to be for a young child. So in truth, exceptions for children and even adults with medical conditions are already being made. Sure, that baby's bottle probably does contain milk or apple juice, but if you were a bad person, would you not see the opportunity to bring more than X ounces of dangerous material in the same type of vessel?
Well, my friends with babies tell me that the TSA makes them taste the liquids they are carrying for my kids. They tell me they have even been forced to open sealed jars of baby food and taste them. I don't know whether that is a common procedure or not, but that would definitely mitigate the risks.
There is a bigger loophole than that, though. Pilots and stewardesses are not subject to the same screening as the rest of us. They are only sent through the metal detectors and the TSA agents will not prevent them from carrying liquids. I saw a stewardess go walking through security with a large bottle of water with no questions asked. And they go straight to the front of the security line . And if that is not enough, no one checks their ID. As far as I can see, showing up at the airport in a fake pilot's uniform will get you into the terminal with no questions asked.
This would all worry me when I travel except that, unlike the TSA, I am not afraid of people sneaking a bottle of shampoo onto the plane. The gaps in airport security are stunning when you pay close attention to what is happening at the airport.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byerroneus ( 253617 ) writes:
You have weird information and/or a faulty perception. I can't speak to the liquid limits or exceptions to them except through my own experience as a passenger because those limits were imposed after I left the TSA. I can say that neither I nor my wife were asked to taste anything. If that has become policy, it is new policy. As for exceptions to screening? Doubtful. All airport and airline personnel are supposed to have RFID verified badges. They get screened for all the same things with no exceptio
byryanov ( 193048 ) writes:
I just traveled on two flights this week with a prescription. I called it "medically necessary liquid" and was not asked anything more about it. 1 bottle was 8 oz, the other two were 4 oz. All larger than the allowable size, and all without a word. There could have been anything in there. Now, as I used those liquids on the plane, I'm happy that there is an exception (as I was a couple of years ago when I had a throat issue that meant all I could really deal with was meal replacement shakes, which I also br
byaix tom ( 902140 ) writes:
The thing I never got about screening pilots for security reasons:
Why the hell would a pilot want to try to smuggle a knife on board to force himself in to compliance, or a bomb to blow up the plane, when he can just fly the fracking thing into any building en route anyway without any additional tools?
bycetialphav ( 246516 ) writes:
I can say that neither I nor my wife were asked to taste anything. If that has become policy, it is new policy.
I don't doubt that as I have not seen that either. But this was mentioned to me less than a week ago by two separate families. I have no idea if this is a policy thing or an uppity TSA agent.
As for exceptions to screening? Doubtful. All airport and airline personnel are supposed to have RFID verified badges. They get screened for all the same things with no exceptions which includes water bottles.
This happened right in front of me in RDU airport in May. A pilot and two stewardesses walked straight to the front of the line which was noticeable to me because I was next up. No one looked at their ID. One of the stewardesses had a liter bottle of water and put it in the bin with her shoes and was zipped right o
●r current threshold.
● current threshold.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
-- Roy Santoro
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...