[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Refusing a backscatter scan by TSA? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/5/2011 3:57:23 PM EDT
| Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? |
|
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? To be molested by a gay high school drop out in an attempt to shame/sicken you in to submitting to being unnecessarily radiated next time around. |
| I was selected for special treatment a couple of weeks ago. The guy in front of me objected and the TSA goof rather loudly announced "We've got a refusal here". While they were fussing with him, I was shepherded off through the regular metal detector and went on to my gate. |
|
Quoted:
Just a pat down. Sorry to break it to everyone but nothing special really. this... I passed on the back scanner when my son and I traveled through SFO... no freakouts or excessive pat downs by TSA, nuts were not handled... nothing... just a simple pat down. |
|
I went through it week before last for the first time, I didn't see anyone opt out. I did see a woman get frisked in Switzerland when she set off the metal detector and the female Swiss guard put her hands between the other woman's breasts and kind of gave them a professional little bounce, which was hot. Flying back into DC there was one backscatter thing and you could just line up in a different line and avoid it. Fucking rocket scientists. They were randonmly checking people in line to see if anyone's hadns had traces of gun powder residue. Of course standing there in vertyx pants with a shirt that said 'AR15.COM" with a multicam kifaru pack on I was not checked and some granny behind me was. I guess I should have written "I HAVE FUCKING GUNPOWDER BWAH HA HA" on my forehead with a Sharpie. Oh after you step through the backscatter thing apparently the read out is seen by someone out of view but in radio contact with the TSA moron at the machine. He tells you to stand on two yellow footprints on a black carpet. Of course I didn't stand on the footprints but sort of stood off to the side at an angle, which through him off. I figured out he was getting a message by radio and they must have you stand on the foot prints so when the guy reading it says "check his left front pocket" the other idiot doesn't have to calculate which is your left side if you are not directly in front of him. He obviously got the all clear while I was standing off to the side being a penis, so he then demanded 'STAND ON THE FOOTPRINTS" Not wanting to put my wife through any drama caused by my being a jerk I stepped on them to have him immediately say "Go ahead." Fucking idiots, we are doomed if we are really depending on these people. Oh no taking off belts or shoes in Switzerland but some of the Swiss cops in the airport had some kind of HK submachinegun with a wire stock. I decided to not try to take a picture of the airport cops, amazing restraint on my part. |
|
In Vegas, they will scan you AND grope you
Quoted:
They just yell opt out and pull you to the side. Then the TSA guy gropes you as much as he can to try to convince you never to opt out again. Oh, and they have "no jokes" signs everywhere. So you can't joke as you're getting molested. |
|
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Edit: Heck, living with 50 miles of a coal plant for a year results in more radiation than a backscatter. If you don't like them for privacy reasons, that's fine. Just don't kid yourself that you're doing anything for your health. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Not according to the research I have done, the FAA refuses to have anyone examine, test or certify the backscanners for radiation output, shielding and safety and they have acknowledged that the scanners put out 14 times the radiation the originally estimated (and they won't release that number either). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Not according to the research I have done, the FAA refuses to have anyone examine, test or certify the backscanners for radiation output, shielding and safety and they have acknowledged that the scanners put out 14 times the radiation the originally estimated (and they won't release that number either). Site for the number? |
|
Quoted: They were randonmly checking people in line to see if anyone's hadns had traces of gun powder residue. Of course standing there in vertyx pants with a shirt that said 'AR15.COM" with a multicam kifaru pack on I was not checked and some granny behind me was. I guess I should have written "I HAVE FUCKING GUNPOWDER BWAH HA HA" on my forehead with a Sharpie. They must suspect me because I look too normal. I get pulled out and groped or wiped or scanned nearly every time. I'm going to wear a gun t-shirt next time, or maybe something about how explosions like company, anything to throw them off. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Not according to the research I have done, the FAA refuses to have anyone examine, test or certify the backscanners for radiation output, shielding and safety and they have acknowledged that the scanners put out 14 times the radiation the originally estimated (and they won't release that number either). Site for the number? It was the TSA not FAA and it was 10 times not 14, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-03-11-tsa-scans_N.htm |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Not according to the research I have done, the FAA refuses to have anyone examine, test or certify the backscanners for radiation output, shielding and safety and they have acknowledged that the scanners put out 14 times the radiation the originally estimated (and they won't release that number either). Site for the number? It was the TSA not FAA and it was 10 times not 14, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-03-11-tsa-scans_N.htm I was afraid you were going to link to that kind of story. The error was with the testing, not the machines themselves. Better article Rapiscan technicians in the field are required to test radiation levels 10 times in a row, and divide by 10 to produce an average radiation measurement. Often, the testers failed to divide results by 10, Horowitz said.
... “Oftentimes, the FSE will bypass the step of dividing by 10. While the resulting entry, at a pragmatic level, is understandable on its face and usable for monitoring purposes, the value, if read literally by persons unfamiliar with our system and the survey process, would imply energy outputs that are unachievable by the Secure 1000 Single Pose,” (PDF) Rapiscan wrote. The machines output a miniscule amount of radiation, especially compared to flying. Edit: Even if the scan results in 10 times the exposure, you're still getting the equivalent of eating 2 bananas... |
|
Quoted: Suppose I refuse the backscatter and the pat down. What then? I thought that that AND an attempt to leave would garner the 'crime/fine'? I would guess they'd just tell you you can't fly and kick you out of the airport unless they had some reason to suspect you had a pipe bomb up your ass, or something besides just being porky about it |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Edit: Heck, living with 50 miles of a coal plant for a year results in more radiation than a backscatter. If you don't like them for privacy reasons, that's fine. Just don't kid yourself that you're doing anything for your health. like to see the proof to back that up. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Not according to the research I have done, the FAA refuses to have anyone examine, test or certify the backscanners for radiation output, shielding and safety and they have acknowledged that the scanners put out 14 times the radiation the originally estimated (and they won't release that number either). Site for the number? It was the TSA not FAA and it was 10 times not 14, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-03-11-tsa-scans_N.htm I was afraid you were going to link to that kind of story. The error was with the testing, not the machines themselves. Better article Rapiscan technicians in the field are required to test radiation levels 10 times in a row, and divide by 10 to produce an average radiation measurement. Often, the testers failed to divide results by 10, Horowitz said.
... “Oftentimes, the FSE will bypass the step of dividing by 10. While the resulting entry, at a pragmatic level, is understandable on its face and usable for monitoring purposes, the value, if read literally by persons unfamiliar with our system and the survey process, would imply energy outputs that are unachievable by the Secure 1000 Single Pose,” (PDF) Rapiscan wrote. The machines output a miniscule amount of radiation, especially compared to flying. They say it is a paper work error, I say it is a coverup, the beauty of America is that we can both have an opinion. I have a few friends in nuclear medicine, when they tell me there is no way those machines can enough penetration to map the body like that and be less then "a single cross country flight" I tend to listen to them, they have no reason to lie and (usually) know what they are talking about. Basically I trust the guys and girls with PHD's in nuclear medicine over some spokes hole dweeb from the TSA. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Edit: Heck, living with 50 miles of a coal plant for a year results in more radiation than a backscatter. If you don't like them for privacy reasons, that's fine. Just don't kid yourself that you're doing anything for your health. like to see the proof to back that up. See the article linked above for the backscatter doses. I used this XKCD chart as a very rough estimate of the flight, banana and coal plant radiation. |
| I opt out 3x a month. I flew out of Richmond, VA yesterday. During my pat down I started laughing and asked the agent if he got the irony of me being treated like a crinimal on Independence day. He was not amused. I hope all the TSA agents who pat down citizens without PC get cancer from operating the machines. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Not according to the research I have done, the FAA refuses to have anyone examine, test or certify the backscanners for radiation output, shielding and safety and they have acknowledged that the scanners put out 14 times the radiation the originally estimated (and they won't release that number either). Site for the number? It was the TSA not FAA and it was 10 times not 14, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-03-11-tsa-scans_N.htm I was afraid you were going to link to that kind of story. The error was with the testing, not the machines themselves. Better article Rapiscan technicians in the field are required to test radiation levels 10 times in a row, and divide by 10 to produce an average radiation measurement. Often, the testers failed to divide results by 10, Horowitz said.
... “Oftentimes, the FSE will bypass the step of dividing by 10. While the resulting entry, at a pragmatic level, is understandable on its face and usable for monitoring purposes, the value, if read literally by persons unfamiliar with our system and the survey process, would imply energy outputs that are unachievable by the Secure 1000 Single Pose,” (PDF) Rapiscan wrote. The machines output a miniscule amount of radiation, especially compared to flying. They say it is a paper work error, I say it is a coverup, the beauty of America is that we can both have an opinion. I have a few friends in nuclear medicine, when they tell me there is no way those machines can enough penetration to map the body like that and be less then "a single cross country flight" I tend to listen to them, they have no reason to lie and (usually) know what they are talking about. Ah, the great coverup theory. Sounds fun, has no proof. Let's assume it's a coverup and the scanners actually do expose you to 10 times the normal radiation. That's still far less than flying. It's the equivalent of eating ~2 bananas. |
|
I did it in Chicago in May.
Fuckers wanted do a primary inspection via backscatter and I refused. They tried to make me walk 30 yards or so without shoes and I refused, they pissed and moaned, then a supervisor said it was OK for me to have my shoes. Two men, one older man who reeked of failure and a younger inbred looking fellow with a cold sore led me to a tiny room. They wrote my name on a list, and then explained what they were going to do. I told them they were pathetic losers. I also gave them my planned speech on how I was allowing them to touch my ballsack on behalf of my company. They said nothing. They then did the patdown which includes sack touching and butt crack fondling. My only wish was that I had dined on large quantities of Taco Bell's finest the night before. |
|
Quoted:
I opt out 3x a month. I flew out of Richmond, VA yesterday. During my pat down I started laughing and asked the agent if he got the irony of me being treated like a crinimal on Independence day. He was not amused. I hope all the TSA agents who pat down citizens without PC get cancer from operating the machines. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Suppose I refuse the backscatter and the pat down. What then? I thought that that AND an attempt to leave would garner the 'crime/fine'? I would guess they'd just tell you you can't fly and kick you out of the airport unless they had some reason to suspect you had a pipe bomb up your ass, or something besides just being porky about it The "Don't Touch My Junk" guy was escorted BY security out of the screening area and then they tried to fine him $10,000. They also threatened criminal charges for leaving the security area, even though they are the ones who escorted him out. Once you enter the security area your choices are the Rapiscan, the molestation, or an $11,000 fine (the fine was increased). |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Suppose I refuse the backscatter and the pat down. What then? I thought that that AND an attempt to leave would garner the 'crime/fine'? I would guess they'd just tell you you can't fly and kick you out of the airport unless they had some reason to suspect you had a pipe bomb up your ass, or something besides just being porky about it The "Don't Touch My Junk" guy was escorted BY security out of the screening area and then they tried to fine him $10,000. They also threatened criminal charges for leaving the security area, even though they are the ones who escorted him out. Once you enter the security area your choices are the Rapiscan, the molestation, or an $11,000 fine (the fine was increased). Wow. That fine doesn't even make sense. They steal enough stuff from our luggage, they don't need to supplement it with a fine of that size too. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Edit: Heck, living with 50 miles of a coal plant for a year results in more radiation than a backscatter. If you don't like them for privacy reasons, that's fine. Just don't kid yourself that you're doing anything for your health. Should we have a discussion about energy levels between the backscatter x-ray and the cosmic rays? |
|
Quoted: Out of the last dozen times I've flown across the country, twice I was asked to go to the back scatter machine. Both times I opted out. The most 'invasive' part of it is when they run a finger around your waist band (seriously, WTF are they looking for?) Cash or drugs. Which are both clearly under the jurisdiction of the TSA...  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone refused a TSA backscatter scan at the airport? I have some travel planned and do not want any more unnecessary radiological exposure. What can I expect? If you want to avoid unnecessary radiation, don't fly. You'll receive many times more radiation from simply being at a 30,000 feet than from the backscatter. Edit: Heck, living with 50 miles of a coal plant for a year results in more radiation than a backscatter. If you don't like them for privacy reasons, that's fine. Just don't kid yourself that you're doing anything for your health. Should we have a discussion about energy levels between the backscatter x-ray and the cosmic rays? The numbers I am using are measured in Sieverts, which quantifies the effects of radiation on the body. I'm not talking grays here. |
|
I always opt out.
I always eat a big meal at my favorite Mexican restaurant before I head to the airport. I always give the TSA monkey a warning about excessive flatulance. I always let one rip right before they go to touch me below the waist. I have never had my nut sack touched.
I am always very uncomfortable during the flight, especially when the bathroom is occupied. 
|
