Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Because of the failed attempt on Christmas Day to blow up a plane with chemicals in his underpants, all flyers might be subject to the new technology of the x-ray machines that reveal genitals to the TSA.

Florida and Maryland now require that anybody applying for a drivers license or even an address change will need their ORIGIONAL birth certificate.

They've been dying to get those X-Ray machines in airports for years now, I'm sure this is the pretext they have been praying for.

only for where there is reasonable cause to suspect that a passenger is carrying contraband (the constitution is still in effect, especially that "not subject to unwarranted search" clause) :P

Once they start, everyone will do it, that keeps them from being un-PC and 'profiling' anyone.  If the 4th Amendment was really in force, they could not search my bag, or ask me about where I'm going and why.  No matter what, I always tell them I'm on my way to shoot a porn movie.  If they ask the title, I tell them "Sluts in Uniform Volume 8, Did you see Volume 7, lot of people really liked it."  They never ask anything else. 

i like that, Tekla, can i use a modified version???... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Everything about the TSA bothers me, so I take the train, until they start that crap up there, in which case I might just have to go back to driving again.

On the other hand... a major Muslim spokesperson said a true Muslim would never stand for such a scanning and would refuse to pass through it.  So, problem solved pretty much.

We need to get those high speed trains up and running.  It's getting to the point where it's just not worth it to fly anymore.  It's getting too expensive, and it's getting to be too much of a hastle with all of the security measures you have to go through, just so you can be cooped up in a tiny plane, and kept on the tarmac for hours on end without much explanation.

Air travel in this country really sucks.

As for the birth certificate thing, they do that here as well I think, so I have to keep my court order that shows my name change for whenever I go to get my driver's license.  Otherwise there's no real way to verify all of that.  I actually have a friend who is not transgender, but who for a variety of reasons got cought in some kind of weird beaurocratic no-man's land where she couldn't get a driver's license.

It's one thing you'd think Republicans would actually fight for, privacy.  But they don't.  They're worse than the dems when it comes to making you go through a ton of loops just to get something simple done.

Go to the CNN homepage and they have a picture of what TSA screeners could see. There is a person who's penis is clearly visable. If you are pre-op, I would find the prospect of flying extremely irritating. In my case, I am post-op. However, I get stiff after sitting too long (arthritis) and I have to pee a lot. Sorry. If these rules hold, I will not be able to fly overseas again and the airlines lose business. Southwest assures me that this stuff doesn't apply to short domestic flights (so far).

Quote from: xsocialworker on December 30, 2009, 08:40:50 AM
Go to the CNN homepage and they have a picture of what TSA screeners could see. There is a person who's penis is clearly visable. If you are pre-op, I would find the prospect of flying extremely irritating. In my case, I am post-op. However, I get stiff after sitting too long (arthritis) and I have to pee a lot. Sorry. If these rules hold, I will not be able to fly overseas again and the airlines lose business. Southwest assures me that this stuff doesn't apply to short domestic flights (so far).

The reality is that we non-ops were open to these sorts of issues even before this rule change -- states with antiquated Driver's License gender marker requirements, if selected for random searches etc.  So meh.  I'm flying in 2010 and figure there's nothing I can do about it.  It sucks but what can you do.  I'll likely bring a carry letter and documentation on my driver's license gender marker change.

We need to get those high speed trains up and running.

Not very likely unless the states can do it.  Cal/Nevada might (might) get one someday from LA to Vegas, but any such train is at least a decade and a half off.  In the meantime, China just put a new maglev train online that averages 217 miles an hour, and Denver, which used to have ski train up to Winter Park can't seem to end the fight about who is going to run it, and may not even have this this year.  The French, who built the first maglev system claim they can hit 356 MPH with it, but it does not normally operate that fast.

Pretty station in China too.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091226/wl_asia_afp/chinatransportrail (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091226/wl_asia_afp/chinatransportrail)

In life there are consequences for everything.  You don't want surgery?  You 'chose' to be a non-op?  Fine! deal with the consequences then.

Quote from: Yvonne on December 31, 2009, 04:43:35 AM
In life there are consequences for everything.  You don't want surgery?  You 'chose' to be a non-op?  Fine! deal with the consequences then.

That comment was not called for. Have you ever considered their are many non ops who CAN NOT HAVE SURGERY DO TO HEALTH PROBLEMS. Please be more considerate and think before you post

There are many reasons people don't have surgery, they could include finances, existing medical issues (a big one), not passing psych tests, and just not wanting surgery. 

But yes each of us then have to accept the issues that come with that reality, including having something seen in the "full body" screening.  I do not feel full body screening is needed or will solve the issue of tracking terrorists.

Sarah L.

I would add that we should all be careful using the word "choice" around here.
Many outsiders would disparage our transitions as "merely a choice" or worse, "a lifestyle choice".

Technically speaking, everything we do is a "choice" even if the only alternative is death.

So many times those around us take the view that we can just simply 'choose' to be or not be trans. I did not choose to be who/what I am-at least if I did choose before I was born I can't recall it now. Even if I did choose this life I do not enjoy it sometimes-especially when I must deal with my wife-who I love dearly and want to stay with. She just won't get that I can't just choose to not be trans.

As for the airlines and all that-today I can choose not to fly.  The masses will always catch the flack from the actions of a few. If a situation arises that forces me to be far, far away quickly I will be forced to deal with it on their terms-but not until then. If I were operating an airline I must admit that I would sacrifice privacy for having tighter security any day.

Quote from: Yvonne on December 31, 2009, 04:43:35 AM
In life there are consequences for everything.  You don't want surgery?  You 'chose' to be a non-op?  Fine! deal with the consequences then.

Yes, there are consequences for everything we do in life, however this sounds similar to blaming women who are raped for wearing mini skirts. Or trans people for being murdered...

Z

Quote from: Zythyra on December 31, 2009, 02:05:35 PM
Yes, there are consequences for everything we do in life, however this sounds similar to blaming women who are raped for wearing mini skirts. Or trans people for being murdered...

Z

Victim? what victim?  There are 2 kinds of non-op, those peeps that genuinely want surgery but can't have it because of health/financial issues.  They have nothing but my utmost compassion & the other kind,

Removed contents that is in breach of rule 10. ~ Miniar

Quote from: Tasha Elizabeth on December 31, 2009, 09:45:38 AM
lol.  if you need some help pulling your foot out of your mouth, i'm available for a small fee.

When & if the moment comes, I'll go for a 'real' lawyer.

Quote from: Yvonne on December 31, 2009, 02:47:38 PM
Victim? what victim?  There are 2 kinds of non-op, those peeps that genuinely want surgery but can't have it because of health/financial issues.  They have nothing but my utmost compassion & the other kind,

Removed contents that is in breach of rule 10. ~ Miniar

When & if the moment comes, I'll go for a 'real' lawyer.

You're making quite a lot of assumptions about non-ops. Some don't necessarily "like" their genitals, but choose to not have surgery. There can be many reasons; religious beliefs, health, financial issues, family, to name a few. Speaking for myself, I didn't choose to be gender variant, I was born this way. Just as you're born as who you are. The choices I've made, and will continue to make, are based on my personal situation, and have absolutely nothing to do with fetish or being a "fake".

As an admin, I remind you to not make personal attacks, or this thread will be locked.

Thanks,

Z

Quote from: Tasha Elizabeth on December 31, 2009, 06:43:48 PM
i wasnt offering you legal services, just manual labor.

i'll help you pull your head out of your ass, though, for free.

Thanks very kindly but no.  Whilst I appreciate the offer, I forgot to say that besides a 'real' lawyer, Removed personal insult. ~ Miniar

You've got to the double standard :laugh:  When I post they quickly say:

Quote from: Zythyra on December 31, 2009, 02:59:11 PM
As an admin, I remind you to not make personal attacks, or this thread will be locked.

Thanks,

Z

but when somebody attacks me nobody says anything.  You've got to love it. Typical.

*Puts moderator hat on*

Since it's clearly been forgotten again, I'll remind you to follow the rules, this includes;

10. Bashing or flaming of any individuals or groups is not acceptable behavior on this web site and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:

Advocating the separation or exclusion of one or more group from under the Transgender umbrella term
Suggesting or claiming that one segment or sub-segment of our community is more legitimate, deserving, or more real than any others

And

15. Items under discussion shall be confined to the subject matter at hand, members shall avoid taking the other users posts personally, and/or posting anything that can reasonably be construed as a personal attack.

One more post to this thread that is in breach in either of these rules and I will personally lock this thread and issue a warning to the offender.

*takes mod hat off*

I'll be flying to the States in a few months for the very purpose of having SRS surgery. I was a bit concerned about the body scan thing but surely they don't just do it where everyone in the airport can see the scan? As I understand it you may refuse to be scanned but will then have to submit to a physical pat-down. As I'll be flying into LAX it's a good bet that's one place they'll be trying out the scanners if they're required at that time. If so, I'll just have to explain my situation and tell them I would prefer a female to perform the search.

Security, immigration, and customs are mainly looking for people acting suspicious or like they're trying to hide something. They're specifically trained for it. My U.S. passport has my legal, female name on it but still carries the "M" gender marker until after surgery, so I'm not really hiding anything. If I were going to try to sneak something past security, the last thing I would do is try to pass as a woman with an "M" on my passport!

Quote from: Yvonne on December 31, 2009, 08:14:45 PM
Thanks very kindly but no.  Whilst I appreciate the offer, I forgot to say that besides a 'real' lawyer, Removed personal insult. ~ Miniar

You've got to the double standard :laugh:  When I post they quickly say:


but when somebody attacks me nobody says anything.  You've got to love it. Typical.

If someone were to attack you with the same vehemence of your comments, I would say the exact same thing to them. No double standards.

Z

But what was said was not supportive in any way, shape or form.



Janet

Regardless of reasons for being non-op, it is nice to know we can go to a place with support for us and ask legitimate questions or voice legitimate concerns such as the one raised in this thread.

I wish everyone realized this is a support site.  If I see a thread that burns me up, I recognize that they have different motivations for coming here and I go about my merry way.

Security, immigration, and customs are mainly looking for people acting suspicious or like they're trying to hide something. They're specifically trained for it.

Customs and immigration sure, TSA, not so much.  TSA, like most the Patriot Act, was a knee jerk deal that was not well thought out.  They've spend more time trying to keep them from joining a union than in really trying to figure out airline security. 

While customs agents are very good - I've watched them, and immigration is a different deal, TSA doesn't know what they are really doing.  And, customs, unlike TSA uses profiling, and uses it well.  TSA is all bend out of shape with the PC deal, and spend a ton of time searching people who are not the problem.  Really, when was the last time an elderly African-American woman, or a old white guy in a wheelchair hijacked an airplane?  Never?  Right.  And until that happens - and as long as hijackers are male, between 20-40, and of late adherents of a particular faith based system, TSA should be looking right at those people, and not everyone else.

And so long as you have a bunch of minimum wage people doing the job, you're going to get a minimum wage work product.  Sure the Customs guy is better, I bet he makes 3-4X what the TSA people do, and you get what you pay for.

Matter of fact, I don't think the TSA people get much training at all.  This last guy, he was on a terrorist watch list.  Some of those 9-11 people, they were on watch lists.  So what good was any of that?

But give yourself plenty of time and take a book to read - like War and Peace, and it shouldn't be too bad^*.  If nothing else, LAX is the best place in the world for stargazing.  I've never been through LAX without seeing someone I knew from movies, or recording artists and those types. 


* - just kidding, it will suck like a Hoover vacuum.  I gave up flying for anything that is not life and death (and at that it better be my life and death on the line) over a decade ago.  Before 9-11.  And the one time I did have to fly since then only confirmed that it had got even worse.  Really, I'd pay extra and sign a waiver to fly on No-Search Airlines.  And it would be hijacker free.  What hijacker is going to get on a plane where none of the other passengers were searched?  I'd also pay extra to get on a flight that bans screaming crotchfruit.  We have adults only housing, movies and lots of other things.  Would it really be that hard to have a kid-free airline?  Really, most kids are well behaved, but when they aren't, it makes a rather hellish experience much, much worse.  I always want to tell them to go outside and play now.  Their parents never see the humor in that.

Sorry Kat what are TSA?

I was in LA a few months back and found the entry system quite intimidating and utterly useless. As you said why profile a seventy year old in a wheel chair and try to get a pupil shot from someone with cataracts. But they tried. Very impressive technology. Absolutely no brains, but lots of swagger, in the people using it. Where is the weak spot?

I have a student from the Mid-East, of all places, he is a REALLY nice guy. Seriously into medicicne and wanting to help people. He is six foot tall grows stubble every few hours is swarthy and held up at every airport. Singapore wouldn't let him out of the transport lounge for 48hrs. His crime? He looks like a terrorist on CSI. This is modern day profiling? I'm really sure that every terrorist cell says; let's send Abdul, he looks like a terrorist. He can be holding a bag which says BOMB on the outside. Shouldn't be a problem getting into the USA. Doesn't seem to be either.


As for full body screens, just sue if anyone laughs or makes a comment. They are supposed to be professional. If there is anything said or done inappropriatly, sue them. I'm sure there are lots of law firms willing to go for 10%(+) of damages. You can of course record conversations on your mobile recorder, for future use. Been a blessing to me at work.

Cindy

Actually... I sortof agree with Yvonne, shes got every right to say that... there ARE those that are non op by choice, but yes, there are those that cannot too. it has to be ballenced.

The quality of the scanners is good enough to show profile, although resolution is an issue. Its main advantage is it shows up the density of materials under clothing, such as knives, glass, guns, and PE etc. It is not, a 'turns your clothing invisible' scanner.

Yes, you can clearly see a penis dangling down between a mans legs due to the change to the profile it makes in that area. if you are tucked, well, it will not be visible as a profile change. If anything is noticed, and someone asks, explain, dont wait for them to find out. Yes, its invasive, but s*** happens. If people resort to these measures to blow you up, what would you rather? and easy hastle free trip through the airport onto your plane, only to be blown up because nobody checked joe bloggs for explosives? or security that catches these people, and keeps you alive?

I'm afraid terrorism is a problem, Ever since its use has proven effective in providing leverage to demands, and the fear has been realised, it has become a usable tool. In this world of high security and military technology, its one of the few ways to fight that. Right? wrong? not discussing that. Although I do feel some people underestimate the job of security.

These people are not employed to hastle you, or out you, if you care that much that they may find out... explain before hand. What the hell difference to your 'stealth' does some random at the airport knowing make?

I'm pre op, and have no worrires about flying. Tucked, the only way to tell im not born female, is to actively investigate my knickers contents.... Nothing that shows up in a mirror naked =  nothing will show on a scanner.

As I pointed out earlier, if anything, security wont care about Jane Doe with a dong... shes got no metal on her, or polymers, or non clothing shapes.... safe as houses... on you go. They are the same professionals that perform strip searches now, dont imagine the first thing they will do is look at your genetals to 'find you out' or have a good perv....


As for the seated during flights issue. International flights, its only no out of seat for last hour. Problem? drink less.

Domestics = different rules.

Its physically impossible to ban people from leaving thier seats with the DVT risk on longhauls.

TSA, it is the Transportation Security Administration, the kiddie-cops at the airports.  I'm sure mall cops make more.   

If people resort to these measures to blow you up, what would you rather? and easy hastle free trip through the airport onto your plane, only to be blown up because nobody checked joe bloggs for explosives? or security that catches these people, and keeps you alive?
How about solving the problem the easy way, don't check anyone and we'll all be security.  Really, if they didn't check people in the US, then you would not only have to be suicidal (which they are) to try to take over an airplane, you will also have a major pile of fail going down, because the American mentality is such that we'd rather crash the damn plane then let you succeed - and we're armed to the teeth if we need to be. I'd fly that airplane because I know terrorists are going to avoid it as if it was made from bacon. 

And they've gone way beyond just checking for explosives, they are down to the component parts, and a lot of other stuff too.  That whole you can't take more than four ounces of a liquid.  See, part of the problem in this situation is that security is an illusion. You can't secure everyone, on every flight every time.  In part that's because top scientists around the world have worked out all sorts of ways of making things explode that you can't detect.  That's why, I'm sure, that I'm no longer allowed to bring my tools with me.  It's not like I was going to whip out the Makita and start disassembling the plane mid flight, and its not like any of that electronic testing equipment is going to make a bomb, but they don't know that.  They don't know much at all.  However, I do know something (and lots of my fellows do to) if you check that bag your $1000 plus inventory of tools that you need to work is not going to be meeting you upon your arrival.  Hell, I bet they are on E-Bay being sold before you get the 'meal.'

This last moron, who managed to pack their underwear with enough explosives to at least blow their own dick off (guess his 72 virgins are going to stay virgins) - so what, panty check for everyone now, like they did with the shoes?  How about we make everyone fly naked?

In this world of high security and military technology, its one of the few ways to fight that.
Well if that's all you need to fight it, then the security ain't that high, and military technology ain't that powerful. And the more technology dependent they are (and they have to be because they can't hire the people who are capable of doing it, or they would not tolerate the methods) the LESS secure everyone becomes in the end.  It would be remiss of me not to point out that the higher the levels of security, the less secure everyone seems to be, and in many cases, the less secure they actually are.  Because the more people depend on technology, the less they depend on people, so the security people themselves no longer have to be vigilante, they don't have to be highly trained, the machine will take care of it.

I've worked in two different places that were very low tech security, we just depended on the people there, all of them, to pay attention.  But, some Mister Manager (against my advice both times) went ahead and put in a CCTV system, and of course, hired someone who job it was to sit on their ever expanding ass and watch the damn thing.  Now the workers, they knew what was up.  They knew that the sum total of 'security' problems were very small, so what was that guy up there watching?  Us of course.  And, where once everyone was paying attention, as soon as the cameras went up everyone just seemed to think the cameras had it covered and they didn't have to bother anymore.

For over 30 years we kept the truck ramps out in the alley behind the dumpsters.  They were not locked, they were not 'under surveillance' or any of that. And for 30 years they just sat there until we needed them.  So when the new corp took over their 'security coordinator'^* first made us lock up the ramps.  Then they put a camera out there (really to keep people from sneaking their pals though the back door, but...  But, locking the things up, and sticking the camera out there was just a neon sign that said "Something worth stealing is back here."  So, after 30 years of no problems, one week - ONE WEEK - after all that went down, we showed up and the ramps were gone.  Gotta love it.


* - and I for the life of me can't even figure out what security this dillweed is coordinating.  We never see him at the shows, and ya know, when there is not a show the security concerns are low, its just an empty, or near empty building.  Not that it's rocket science, but in a big nightclub the security problems tend to occur when you let the public in and turn the bars on. Duh.  Oh yeah, he's not really security, he's a security coordinator, so far be it from him to actually be there when we have real problems, he might, you know, have to do like security work, and no doubt get his ass beat like a drum by some drunk. 

They are the same professionals that perform strip searches now, dont imagine the first thing they will do is look at your genetals to 'find you out' or have a good perv....
For the life of me, I sure don't understand how anyone who is not a sexually deviant pervert would even do a job that would require strip searching people - with the attendant 'cavity check."  A person with normal morality and normal sexual tendencies would be thinking right about that time that the barista job is looking pretty good after all.

Well, that violates the 4th amendment. Even if they had to though,they wouldnt really care about genitals as long as there are no explosives. They can't tell someone they can't board because they are transgender.
Ftms are basically screwed if thats the case in being non op since most of us dont have the surgery.

Even though these 'enhanced security measures' can easily be defeated.

The next time I fly, I'm going to wear my prettiest party panties!

Everyone's going to be flying naked pretty soon.

I see this as a non issue, after a while it will be just one more thing to help the public feel safer. Sure it sucks with all the measures that the TSA is taking to try to ID anyone these days, but we as a group are a tiny compared to the total traveling public. Not that it helps to be pulled aside when your just trying to blend in.

Interesting thought...if these scanners are designed to pick up non-biological "anomalies" in someone's underwear, would a packer raise a red flag? I know some soft packs have a bendy metal rod in the shaft that might show up if the silicone/plasticky material doesn't...

That would be a REALLY uncomfortable strip search.

Quote from: Tasha Elizabeth on December 31, 2009, 06:43:48 PM
i wasnt offering you legal services, just manual labor.

i'll help you pull your head out of your ass, though, for free.

I was going to say it was a ham-fisted attempt, that those who blow up planes can get past that.  And see, there you go.

That would be a REALLY uncomfortable strip search.

And, pray tell me, what (other than having Megan Fox do it) would constitute a comfortable strip search?

Oh, I don't know, maybe Sean Connery?  Oh Yeah, Baby.

It is still an evasion of privacy.

If it was an Evasion, there would be no issue lol. The fact you belive (I think) it is an invasion of privacy is the problem.

Perhaps it is, perhaps it is not. But we surrender more in more other situations too. Visiting the doctor, the hospital. the gym locker room. Perfect example... To change, iin the gym, you must get naked, then put other clothes on. You do it... so  its not really an issue.

In reality these are no more than a cursory tool to check for hidden items such as polymer knives... a rather significant threat actually as scanners existing cannot detect them. (Dont anyone mention the famous glock 9 polymer handgun, its fake :P, though there have been entirely plastic shotguns developed...)
Explosives and other materials protected or masked from search dogs or other methods are designed to be picked up. Actually... should someone board through a system like this, thers not much chance of them getting anything illegal onto the plane. Its a fairly good system.

From imagery seen, m2fs have no problems  if they tuck... if they DONT tuck, then im sure you expect to be spotted either way...  Ftms with packers could pose a problem unless they explain, but im sure it could be possible for a flight to swap out your packer for a pair of socks or a non metalic one? Afterall if its got a metal bit in it the metal detector will pick it up anyway and you get to explain that.... so no change there.

Flying for trans people has never been easy per say, but i think theres an overestimation of the security measures and thier actual ability. As for wearing your prettiest panties...  they wont see them. Nor will they even have the resolution to see the little bulge in them. Outline? yes, tucked = female outline, preop, non op, or post op... well nuff said. I've had no problems being seen in my knickers in hospital tucked... and if the naked eye couldnt tell, then the scanner has no chance. A little common sense and a lot less hysteria will prevail. And if you're going to let it hang out like some of the images of males on scanners... you deserve to be caught.... thats just... mmm a bit odd.

However some here may want to apply the lubricant before hand, because some attitudes here are going to end in a rubber glove and an unconventional handshake.

The difference is huge, what you do in a locker room is voluntary, but we actually have a law here - and not just a law, the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States - that prohibits the government (and these are government agents, make no doubt about it) from doing this without a warrant, that requires a judges siggy and probable cause.  And the technology will get better once everyone is forced to buy them, the pictures will get clearer, and they will find their way to the net.

And they will be laughing at you.  Bet on it.

By law, a warrant is only required for them to perform a body search (This), or a search of private property should the individual refuse permission.

If you dont agree, turn around and leave the airport. If you do however wish to board the plane... then you agree to the scan. It is simple in my mind.

That's your law, not ours.

I belive the US system is the same... you agree to pass through security, you agree to the scan,  you dont want it, you dont go through. They cannot 'force' it. In the US or UK. A warrant is only required, as I said, without permission. I'd check up on that one :)

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

And I, and lots of other people, do not fly anymore.  Flat out refuse.  I'll take the bus, but most likely the train, because they have a cocktail lounge on the train.  Like I said, I'd pay more to fly on 'no search airways' and even more if they were no screaming crotchfruit airways also.  You'd have to be even more insane than a suicide bomber could ever be to try to hijack a plane full of un-searched Americans.  We'd get so stabby on you so fast they could air-mail your bits back in #10 envelopes.  And I've very worried about becoming precisely the kind of nanny state that Brittan has become.

All this is doing is letting the terrorists win.

Define win?

America has been leading the way in the 'paranoia omfg terrifying terrorists' game since 9/11... England is NOWHERE near as bad as you folks with security and screening and fearmongering.

Right, and that's what sucks about it, of course it's pretty much against the law in England to own any sort of weapon in the first place, so what would they search for?  And they are going to make all inbound flights to the US use this, once that happens, they will use it on everyone for all flights.  But last time I went through Heathrow (early 1990s) they had people walking around with automatic combat weapons, so that's a bit paranoid also.

Wouldn't the ID of a non-op "out" them anyway?

Or is the objection due to the more graphic nature of the "outing?"

As I mentioned before in this thread you can refuse the scan but if you still want to fly you have to then submit to a physical body pat down.

Unfortunately, most of my flying is done between Australia and the States so not flying is not an option, unless I want to hitch a ride on a slow freighter to China, and being on board a ship with a bunch of horny Chinese sailors is not my idea of a dream cruise no matter how cute some of those sailors might be. :laugh:

Quote from: tekla on January 17, 2010, 03:09:11 PM
Right, and that's what sucks about it, of course it's pretty much against the law in England to own any sort of weapon in the first place, so what would they search for?  And they are going to make all inbound flights to the US use this, once that happens, they will use it on everyone for all flights.  But last time I went through Heathrow (early 1990s) they had people walking around with automatic combat weapons, so that's a bit paranoid also.

Police firearms unit, a security measure not always employed you'll find.
As for weapons... actually yes... we have plenty. Unlike america, we dont try to justify owning a .50cal machien gun by saying its for controling vermin, or opening cans of beans.


I still really dont see a problem with this system... its not a big deal. I'm hiding nothing, im breaking no laws, I have nothing to fear.

I have a solution to this problem. Since America is supposedly so much about consumerism and consumer choice, let's give the masses a choice about air travel. Americans can choose to go on a secured or unsecured jet. The secured sections of the airport would be like they currently are: no firearms or weapons, no explosives, not even a ball-point pen. You automatically consent to a search by going through security and this may as well include the full body scanners.

The other option would be the fly at your own risk or unsecured one. In this option, the only searches done would be the X-ray scanning of baggage going on the jet. Any suspicion would allow physical searches of the bags going on the plane. The difference is that instead of government agents doing the searches, the airliners themselves would be doing this. This would be similar to bouncers at a bar. They aren't cops but since it is private property they can search you before you enter but you have the option of not entering the venue. In this scenario, the government never is involved. The airliner makes the rules. In addition, not only would firearms be allowed on board, signs would be placed encouraging Americans to bring as many firearms as they can comfortably carry and store on board. Government air marshalls would be obsolete because all 300 passengers would be packing holstered pistols and the overhead cabinets would be filled with shotguns and even "assault" rifles.

Guess which aircraft would NOT be hijacked or bombed? I know I would feel much safer getting on a freedom flight with patriotic gun-toting Americans than a nanny flight where permission to board is granted by government beauracrats who are not liable for your safety and ensure that you are helpless and defenseless.

That aside, I've never understood why the government has ever been so involved with air travel. It should be the airliner's responsibility to ensure the aircraft is safe to fly and any personal information required (such as a photo ID) should be between you and the airliner, not between you and the police. As to the hijackings of 9/11, had the government been on the ball which they never are, the U.S. Air Force to which so much of our tax dollars go would have had jets up in the air within minutes to bring down the planes before they hit anything.

Time and time and time again it is demonstrated that when the people put their trust in the government to keep them safe or provide for them, the government comes first and the people come second.

That sounds great except who would insure the airline that did that? What if a gun went off accidently and shot holes in the cabin?

Only a pussy would use a gun, real guys want to get stabby on them.  No explosives would include ammo.  But even then, as I said several times in this thread (but who reads before they respond?) what mental case would hijack that >-bleeped-<?

the U.S. Air Force to which so much of our tax dollars go would have had jets up in the air within minutes to bring down the planes before they hit anything.
the US Air Force was on Stand Down that day to train for a 'terrorist attack.'  Explain that.



^{Uncalled for response. Deleted.}

Quote from: Britney_413 on January 17, 2010, 10:41:21 PM
Government air marshalls would be obsolete because all 300 passengers would be packing holstered pistols and the overhead cabinets would be filled with shotguns and even "assault" rifles.

Guess which aircraft would NOT be hijacked or bombed? I know I would feel much safer getting on a freedom flight with patriotic gun-toting Americans than a nanny flight where permission to board is granted by government beauracrats who are not liable for your safety and ensure that you are helpless and defenseless.

Firstly... erm, I think you miss a fundamental point here and I cannot see how being in a confined space for several hours with 300 armed americans is every going to be qualified as 'safe' EVER.... I'd take the terrorists any day, Atleast theres only one or two of them.

Regarding govornment involvement in Airtravel: They arent as much... The gorvornment interest is in border security, and domestic security protection. Airports have these strange ways of having people arrive inside metal birds from distant lands...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=972_1262283908 (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=972_1262283908)

if non-ops still don't want to fly, they can always take amtrak or greyhound ya know? 

One problem is that some things that were considered "privileges" become over time "necessities".
Theoretically, driving is a "privilege".
Sure, you can live without a driver's license.
It will cause limitations in your lifestyle.
Also many jobs require that you have a driver's license.
Not having one will limit the amount of jobs for which you would be considered.

To those who counter with "If you can't do X, then you can always do Y", these loopholes eventually get covered.
You can't walk from Boston to New York City without trespassing.
True, the buses don't currently do body scans, but I believe that they eventually will.

Sure.  It will be like drug testing.  In the beginning a lot of people were opposed to it.  It seemed both invasive and demeaning. So it was established that people in jobs were the public safety might be at risk - bus drivers, airline pilots - were going to be the only ones tested.  Then that began to expand.  Teachers, yeah, they work with kids, test them.  And government workers, yeah, test them too, convicts also.  Gradually it expanded to the point that you pretty much can't even get a job as a janitor without peeing in a cup.  Scanners will be the same way - the more they get used, the cheaper they will become, the more ubiquitous they will become.  I'm waiting for you to have to get scanned to go into and out of a mall.

Quote from: Marie731 on January 17, 2010, 03:42:53 PM
Wouldn't the ID of a non-op "out" them anyway?

many non-ops have IDs that match their affirmed gender.  In many states surgery is not a requirement to change the gender marker on the DL.  And in states that are, a surgeons letter stating you jhave had top surgery, either augmentation or reduction, is sufficient to be defined as the necessary surgery.

The American Constitution doesn't GIVE you your rights, it merely lists them.   Your rights are God given, they are inalienable(look this up in a legal dictionary) if they were given to you by one government then another government could take them away.

Google 'freeman on the land', or Rob Menard or Maxwell Jordan.  I guarantee that you will find this fascinating.