Considering driving instead of flying because of TSA

[Sadiebird]

I have a trip to WDW planned for May 2011. I've already purchased my flights, but I'm seriously considering requesting a refund based on all the stories I've been reading about the invasive security procedures being used by the TSA. I don't have a problem going through a metal detector or having my bag searched. I don't even have a problem with a standard pat down. But I do have a problem with being strip searched by a machine. And if I choose to opt out of that, I also have a problem with a pat down that involves touching my private areas. I don't want to subject myself or my 5 year old son to these things so that we can get on a plane and fly to Disney World. I'd rather drive 17 hours in a car. My husband has convinced me to wait until closer to our trip to get a refund on the plane tickets, just in case the TSA decides to back down on their procedures. I'm just wondering if anyone else is feeling this way. I can't believe this is the direction our country is heading.

 

[loveofamouse]

You need a new username, then. wdwrdwarrior maybe?

hahaha:lol: I was drawing a blank on user name. I actually hate it and want to change it.

 

[jimjjr]

fly v. drive

To be honest, I know that some people are bothered by the idea of someone else looking at them, but let's face it, it's not like they've never seen anyone like you before, with your parts. It is men looking at men and women looking at women. Haven't you ever been in a locker room? I would say that this is still a very small price to pay to help ensure that someone with nefarious intentions cannot bring something on to the plane. And it doesn't solve every potential problem, true, but it helps. That said, if you don't want to fly, that is your right. More seats for us, and maybe it will help make the airfare lower if they suddently have alot of empty seats.

 

[TDF]

My only issue with the new security measures is for teens and children. I don't think a 16 year old wants ANYONE especially someone older touching or seeing them...

 

[LowesChevy]

Yes, some of the measures are evasive, redundant and pointless, but it is not going to stop me from flying. It is still the safest and fastest way for us to travel. I want to be able to enjoy my vacation in the destination, not spend the day in my car.

At least people and bags are being scanned for explosives, but until they totally overhaul TSA's current system it is still just a big charade. I think we are still too relaxed on airport security if you ask me, I would like us to adopt more of the Israeli Airport Security methods.

 

[barrettismyhero]

2 hour flight is better than a 24 hour drive..

Flying is completely and totally worth it to me.. Security doesn't bother me.

 

[TDF]

2 hour flight is better than a 24 hour drive..

Flying is completely and totally worth it to me.. Security doesn't bother me.

Yea... if it gets me to Disney you know what i'm happy. I'm not going to let TSA stop me from having a good vacation.

 

[NedFlanders]

18 hours of driving... But next trip I'm driving.

Even if the TSA BS wasn't in play I think I would still drive. The last time we flew our flight was delayed and when you put in the extra hassle time of security checks and such I could have driven it.

My only problem is convincing the wife that I can drive it straight without stopping to sleep.

 

[sshindel]

My only issue with the new security measures is for teens and children. I don't think a 16 year old wants ANYONE especially someone older touching or seeing them...

This is the side I don't get. Don't teens and children go to the doctor? I know I didn't love the old "turn your head and cough" when I was a kid, but you had to do it to play sports so we did it. I realize that TSA agents are not doctors, but really, another person is another person. Maybe I'm thinking about this wrong, but I have a daughter (about to have a second) and I just can't picture myself getting worried about someone scanning my kids. I'd rather have someone scan my daughters or even pat them down (in a completly professional way, as I'd guess a vast, overwhelming majority is) than I would have some wackjob blow up a plane we're on.

Again, it all comes down to what people are comfortable with. I'm 100% ok with all the security measures and will continue to fly rather than spend the extra few days on the road.

 

[ctosh]

We have a 14 hour drive and have always flown in the past. Well, we will be driving in Jan. I love the fact that it is only a 2 hr flight but that is all I love. To me it is not worth it. I have a ds12 and dd 10. I don't mind a road trip at all. I am looking forward to over packing and buying whatever we want and not worring about how to get it home..lol

 

[EpcotGrl]

The only problem I have with the scanners is that they don't actually work. They can't detect "powders, liquids, thin layers of plastic, or anything resembling skin". Nor can they show anything secreted in a body cavity.

I'm not getting groped by a TSA employee for refusing a scan, though. The rather anonymous scan is the lesser of the two evils for me

 

[nikkie876]

This is the side I don't get. Don't teens and children go to the doctor? I know I didn't love the old "turn your head and cough" when I was a kid, but you had to do it to play sports so we did it. I realize that TSA agents are not doctors, but really, another person is another person. Maybe I'm thinking about this wrong, but I have a daughter (about to have a second) and I just can't picture myself getting worried about someone scanning my kids. I'd rather have someone scan my daughters or even pat them down (in a completly professional way, as I'd guess a vast, overwhelming majority is) than I would have some wackjob blow up a plane we're on.

Again, it all comes down to what people are comfortable with. I'm 100% ok with all the security measures and will continue to fly rather than spend the extra few days on the road.[/QUOTE]

I have 4 kids, 3 girls and 1 boy....the difference lies in they have a realtionship with their doctor, know who he is and trust him. I don't think my older 2 daughters (16 and 14) would have a problem with the scan or a professional pat down, but my 2 younger kids will. My 5 year old is terrified of quite a few things and I have a feeling if she would have to go through the scan she would flip out but then she would have to get a pat down which could be worse for her and possibly the TSA agent. Then my 2 year old would see this then follow suit. I know why they have to do it, some nut job would have their kid be the patsy....but this is better than a 12 hour drive with them.

Half hour into any drive my 5 year old tells me 'I can't take it anymore'....I would pull my hair out in the drive....so the plane is the lesser of two evils

 

[ddbowdoin]

So they werent supposed to be able to save images? whooooooops!

http://gizmodo.com/5690820/body-scanner-pic-gallery/gallery/1

 

[Testtrack321]

To be honest, I know that some people are bothered by the idea of someone else looking at them, but let's face it, it's not like they've never seen anyone like you before, with your parts. It is men looking at men and women looking at women. Haven't you ever been in a locker room? I would say that this is still a very small price to pay to help ensure that someone with nefarious intentions cannot bring something on to the plane. And it doesn't solve every potential problem, true, but it helps. That said, if you don't want to fly, that is your right. More seats for us, and maybe it will help make the airfare lower if they suddently have alot of empty seats.

It doesn't matter, Fourth Amendment.

Continue your post, what if they require scans to drive a car? Would you be outraged? Well, more space on the roads for us.

And the worst part is that it doesn't even remotely increase security.

 

[pax_65]

I read through this entire thread, and I didn't see anyone talk about why these security measures are needed. When a terrorist hides explosives in his shoes, you can make people take off their shoes to be x-rayed. So what do you do when a terrorist hides explosives in his underwear? It's already happened. Tell me... how do you deal with that threat?

I'm not crazy about any of these security measures (especially for my wife and kids), but I don't think there are pervs downloading these images to flash drives. They are looking for explosives, not getting their jollies looking at naked bodies.

I think flying becomes more of a hassle year after year, but it's a LONG drive for me. So for now, I will continue to fly.

 

[EpcotGrl]

I read through this entire thread, and I didn't see anyone talk about why these security measures are needed. When a terrorist hides explosives in his shoes, you can make people take off their shoes to be x-rayed. So what do you do when a terrorist hides explosives in his underwear? It's already happened. Tell me... how do you deal with that threat?

...They are looking for explosives, not getting their jollies looking at naked bodies.

The problem is that these scanners wouldn't have caught the underwear bomber. Check out the German video on YouTube where they sent a reporter through--the scanner caught his cell phone but missed the assorted bomb-making materiel they'd secreted about his person. These scanners AREN'T making us safer, they're just pretending to.

Unfortunately, the short answer is that if someone is bound and determined to blow up a plane, they're probably going to find a way to do it--no matter how invasive our security measures.

 

[jimjjr]

Trying to compare the security measures regarding flying with driving is absurd. It is like comparing apples and rockets. As for the Fourth Amendment, it restricts "unreasonable" conduct. It is perfectly reasonable IMO to check everybody getting on an airplane for weapons to the limit of technology. It is not "unreasonable" unless they are going to require everyone to be strip searched or body cavity searched. Again, I think that the searches can be taken to the extreme (children, etc.), but that can be solved on a case-by-case basis if everyone remains calm and respectful.

 

[PhilharMagician]

To me, the idea of a non-descript picture, possible pat down and a safe plane is far better than the torture of car travel. Driving from NY would completely ruin my vacation and also take up valuable Disney time.

add a few hours for me coming from MA... aweful! I can't even drive 5-6 hours without my back starting to hurt or becoming annoyed.

I have to agree. I can see driving if it was within a reasonable distance, but 1200+ miles is a long trip. I have thought about driving in the past because of the cost of airfare except I hate to loose 2 days travel on each end of my vacation. Fortunately airfare rates have come down some and we are still going to fly until the cost is too much or the safety of flying declines.

 

[fosse76]

I'm of the opinion that there is nothing wrong with the scanners and/or patdowns. I've seen pictures of the images from the scanners, and it really doesn't seem that bad.

Yes, it is. You aren't supposed to be seeing the pictures. That's one of the reasons people are protesting:that the pictures will get out. And it is essentially a strip search. It is a grotesque violation of the fundamental right to privacy. I am doing nothing wrong, so you have no right to see a digital version of me naked.

It's a no-win situation for the TSA and the airlines. People will complain about loss of "freedoms" as long as nothing bad is currently happening. But, God forbid a plane gets hijacked or bombed and then everyone yells about why wasn't anything being done.

It's all for show. Do you think any of these procedures is going to stop someone? They just find other ways. And none of these procedures has found any weapons. And I don't mean that it is being effective. Journalists and law enforcement have been putting weapons in carry-on bags for ten years and TSA agents have yet to spot them. But beware those toe nail clippers!

I understand why some might not want to be physically patted-down, but it's for the safety of everyone you travel with. They have to check the "sensitive parts", because that's where people will hide things if those areas become off-limits to searches.

See above. If you are afraid your plane is going to be highjacked, then don't fly. But I, as a law-abiding citizen with nothing to hide, should not have to subject myself to an invasive search as if I am guilty of something, simply because you think it will make us safer.

I wouldn't want to get on a plane if there wasn't adequate security. As many have said, the solution is simple. If you can't comply with the screening rules, drive. If traveling for fifteen hours instead of three is acceptable to you vs. airline security rules, go with what makes you feel better.

As I stated above, that door swings both ways. If you don't think the security measures are good enough, you don't have to fly either. Why is it good for the goose but not the gander? It is a gross violation with no real intrinsic value. All passive travelers are exactly what is what is wrong with this country. Very clearly the terrorists have won.

Finally, I hope the person who started the thread can get a refund, but I wouldn't hold out much hope. With airlines being the way they are, I don't think they'd be that concerned about someone's discomfort.

Anyone who's flown coach can attest to that!

 

[ddbowdoin]

Yes, it is. You aren't supposed to be seeing the pictures. That's one of the reasons people are protesting:that the pictures will get out. And it is essentially a strip search. It is a grotesque violation of the fundamental right to privacy. I am doing nothing wrong, so you have no right to see a digital version of me naked.

I provided a link on the top of the page of images that were leaked. I understand where you're coming from and all, but did you take a moment to actually look at the pictures that were leaked from the TSA files? We're not exactly talking about high definition here, are you naked in the images... yes, to a degree. And I stress the degree, the images are whited out and not defined like the way our minds think the scans will come out.

 

[JillC LI]

To me, the idea of a non-descript picture, possible pat down and a safe plane is far better than the torture of car travel. Driving from NY would completely ruin my vacation and also take up valuable Disney time.

Short and to the point.
Ditto what NYBaloo said.