WeX Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Yeah, you're right, regular airline travel isn't for me. I've travelled by air for my work every three weeks on average since 1980, mostly between continents. That's +/- 550 flights. I think I'm entitled to my opinion. Ignore people like ECCOnoob. Governments and manufacturers alike need simpletons to shout their support for these kinds of restrictions to maintain the air of fear. As said be the head of security for BAA, these scanners would not have prevented a single terrorist attack on a plane since air travel began. the scanners are a fraud, designed to make you fearful so as to make you welcome the loss of liberty and more importantly, your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 How about a small step initially - change airport perhaps to one without scanners? You have to wonder what is the point of having just one airport with scanners in the UK. I'll continue to use Manchester because they have a direct flight twice a day to Billund, which I couldn't get from anywhere else nearby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Ignore people like ECCOnoob. Governments and manufacturers alike need simpletons to shout their support for these kinds of restrictions to maintain the air of fear. As said be the head of security for BAA, these scanners would not have prevented a single terrorist attack on a plane since air travel began. the scanners are a fraud, designed to make you fearful so as to make you welcome the loss of liberty and more importantly, your money. Who is the simpleton here? Im not the one making assumptions on something I never actually said. I am perfectly neutral one way or the other about scanners. I have absolutely no "fear" of air travel nor do I support every governement idea. I personally have no idea whether or not they have any benefit compared to other methods since they have only just been introduced and are still on a trial period. Just because one BAA person gives their opinion does not mean its a correct one. Maybe you just take everything at face value. What i do understand is that we need some form of security or are you so thick that you would be happy to be able to just turn up and walk onto a plane without any form of restrictions or checks. I support scanners more in the sense of why the hell shouldn't we try to bring in something that is far quicker and simpler than having to queue up remove belts, shoes, empty pockets get a pat down seach etc.... etc.... Now sod off back under your rock and lets see if the grown ups can carry on with their discussions. Back on topic. what I was trying to understand is why someone would feel that scanners are intrusive and degrading. Its a question that still hasnt been answered depite me asking it twice now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 What i do understand is that we need some form of security or are you so thick that you would be happy to be able to just turn up and walk onto a plane without any form of restrictions or checks. Did I say we do not need security? Did I say we should just be able to walk onto a plane? To answer both of your incorrect claims. I said neither. I pointed out we do not need these scanners. As I said before, even the head of BAA security, when pressed in an interview on radio last year or so, accepted these scanners would not have prevented any terrorist attack to date. can you name one threat or attack that is not covered by already in place security measures? have a think about the last time you left the UK by plane, then compare it with when you came back. did you have the same level of security or was it much more relaxed (unless you traveled from the USA). this is the problem, disjointed support. you support the idea of scanners because you are convinced their is a threat, but when you look into the issue the threat and the measures do not meet. its disproportionate and the only people to gain from this are the manufacturers at our expense as tax payers paid for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I am perfectly neutral one way or the other about scanners. I have absolutely no "fear" of air travel nor do I support every governement idea. I personally have no idea whether or not they have any benefit compared to other methods since they have only just been introduced and are still on a trial period. Just because one BAA person gives their opinion does not mean its a correct one. Maybe you just take everything at face value. I support scanners more in the sense of why the hell shouldn't we try to bring in something that is far quicker and simpler than having to queue up remove belts, shoes, empty pockets get a pat down seach etc.... etc.... . So where did I say we need scanners because im convinced there is a treat? Why do you feel so strongly about "scanners being a fraud" "government maintaining a air of fear" Personally I dont care whether the government invests in scanners, biometric passports, iris scans or teleportations. I dont see any investment in trialing out new techniques or new equipment as "wasting taxpayers money". Its progress. More importantly its still an ongoing trial. As I said before, I have no opion one way or the other at the moment. I am more in support of any evolved methods of getting through an airport more quickly. In answer to your question about my last travels - which were to asia. It was no more or less "relaxed" than before. What i did notice is slipping through the manchester scanners vs queuing up, removing everything metal and being frisked at singapore was far easier and if I had a choice there would be absolutely no comparison. What is your point about only the manufactuers will benefit?? That's what happens in the world. Someone creates something, governments trial it out, its gets introduced and the manufactuer gets paid. Is that not fair in your opinion??? Do you feel that trials on a new health scanner would be a waste of money too? After all there would be no guarantees that any more patients would be saved or any more ilnesses cured compared to the old system. Or look at schools. Why do we waste money trialing digital whiteboards, touchscreens, laptops etc. After all, there is no guarantee any more students would be better off than using a pencil and a blackboard. Sometimes im amazed we have any progress at all with the thinking of some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I confess to having changed my mind on this one. I went through a scanner the other week at Manchester and hated it. I think that what disturbed me the most was not being able to see the person operating it and knowing that they have rather a revealing outline of me. I probably put the operator off their lunch, which was also an unpleasant thought. At least with the patting down you can see the woman doing it, even though I also dislike that. It also reminded me a bit of the confessional as there is no human contact at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackLakeland Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I confess to having changed my mind on this one. I went through a scanner the other week at Manchester and hated it. I think that what disturbed me the most was not being able to see the person operating it and knowing that they have rather a revealing outline of me. I probably put the operator off their lunch, which was also an unpleasant thought. At least with the patting down you can see the woman doing it, even though I also dislike that. It also reminded me a bit of the confessional as there is no human contact at all. Yes it can be a bit worrying for some people. Problem is there is no other way possible for security to be as effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Yes it can be a bit worrying for some people. Problem is there is no other way possible for security to be as effective. RUBBISH! these scanners prevent nothing! If you think they do and other means of security are less effective, go ahead and give us some examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Yes it can be a bit worrying for some people. Problem is there is no other way possible for security to be as effective. I didn't say that it was worrying, it was unpleasant and disturbing. There is something, which admittedly may just be me, about being seen in any form when you can not see the viewer; I think that it was that aspect which made me feel really uncomfortable. It's almost like being spied on and is disempowering. I had a similar feeling today when I saw a woman in a niqab. I know that there is CCTV everywhere and we're constantly being 'spied' on but this was up close and personal. *awaits the onslaught to be told that I have 'issues'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 What i do understand is that we need some form of security or are you so thick that you would be happy to be able to just turn up and walk onto a plane without any form of restrictions or checks. Could you tell the thickies what security you think these scanners provide to prevent the terrorist attacks we've seen in recent years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.