(above) Ground crews swing into action as Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-5H4 N510SW comes to a halt at Buffalo Niagara International Airport, New York before continuing on to Kansas City International Airport, Missouri. The author's passage through new security measures was considerably faster than even Southwest's renowned turnaround times.
_________________________
Now there’s a headline that you will almost certainly never see in a newspaper, on the internet or on television. At least not in today’s world of agenda-driven media.
However, believe it or not, it happened. True story. Not the headline but the experience and it happened at a time when the media was playing the ‘privacy’ debate for all it was worth.
The last time that this writer had occasion to fly on an airliner the Transportation Security Administration had just instituted three new measures intended to further reduce the possibility of ‘bad guys’ getting onto commercial aircraft – Secure Flight, full body scans and pat-down inspections.
The Secure Flight program requires that the passenger’s name be submitted when the ticket is purchased. If you are not on the watch list, your ticket transaction will be completed. Straightforward and worry-free – if you’re not a ‘bad guy’. I’ve had many background security checks conducted over the last 30 years so it was not a big deal.
The full body scanner is the latest generation of devices that began with metal detectors and hand-held wands in the 1970s and progressed to the Explosive Trace Portal, or ‘puffer’ which first appeared in 2004. They were first used at selected American airports in 2008 and produce a head-to-toe image reminiscent of x-rays but without most skeletal features. It will, however, display denser materials used for weapons or to cover up same. Stepping onto the pattern footprints, the whole experience was over in much less than a minute.
While waiting for clearance from the geographically-separated viewer of the images, I was subjected to a pat-down. Why? Because the pockets of my cargo pants required closer scrutiny. It was explained to me and the pat-down was quickly completed. By the time that was done, the OK was given and I was on my way.
The procedures were the same at both airports and in both cases TSA personnel, whether at the ID check station, the x-ray inspection machines or the scanner/pat-down area, were courteous and professional. The lines moved quickly and, among the passengers, there were no grumblings, complaints or even discussion concerning the new procedures. Maybe that had to do with their very personal interest in the safe completion of their flights.
There were certainly no incidents of idiots assaulting – verbally or physically – TSA employees or disrobing down to statement-making skimpy bathing suits and underwear. Such displays, making the 24-hour news in painfully endless reruns, seemingly for weeks, were doubtlessly staged by those seeking their fifteen minutes of fame.
Complaints, led by so-called civil rights ‘experts’ and groups, have focused on the passenger’s right to privacy. The product of the full body scanner can hardly be considered detailed enough to display the physical attributes, fine or otherwise, of a passenger. In fact, the image more closely resembles a negative – if the reader remembers the days of black and white photography – of an actor in a bodysuit portraying a hairless humanoid in a 1960s sci-fi movie or a blurry ‘bigfoot’ on the cover of the ever-trustworthy ‘news’ magazines found at local supermarket checkouts.
The scanning results are looked at by someone in a room without a view to the outside world. The images are, as far as I know, not connected to any official documentation (passport or other government-issued paperwork) which identifies a particular individual. It would seem very unlikely, too, that with hundreds or thousands of people passing through the scanner in a single work shift, the viewer has either the time or inclination to study the almost featureless outlines of passenger scans.
A trampling of one’s rights? I hardly think so. I am not, by trade, a lawyer but any study of the United States Constitution by me has so far failed to turn up a right to fly on a commercial aircraft. I have had to pass through security at theme parks, museums and before attending sports events. If one doesn’t like it, don’t go. Why should commercial flying be any different?
Air piracy (hijacking) and, more recently, the desire to destroy airliners purely in an effort to kill as many people as possible, have led to the current security measures. If someone has a problem with them, my suggestion is not to fly. Walk, bike, drive or, if transoceanic travel is your ‘thing’, rent a rowboat. None of these conveyances require scanners or pat-downs but they do offer plenty of time to ponder the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
If you want to lessen the pressure of security checks and keep the line moving, then as the motto of a well-known young lads’ organization goes, be prepared.
Minimize pocket contents, including cell phones, for swift transfer to the plastic inspection bins. For guys with belts, remove it before you get to the security area. If you can, remove your shoes ahead of time (see pocket contents). The floors are most likely carpeted. Be prepared to open your laptop case and, if required, camera bag. Speak up if there is something the screener should know, i.e. known item or condition that may trigger an alarm. Follow instructions.
Don’t clutter things up with a cup of coffee in hand. You can get one later. Don’t joke about terrorist activities and don’t abuse screeners or launch an on-scene constitutional challenge for you may very well end up with a one-way trip to a small room for a little chat. That's when concern about your rights should really begin.
