Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

What is the solution, today.......?

So until this gets ironed out, likely through the courts, are people going to stop flying? If you refuse the scan or the pat down, you will not be allowed to fly, and may face a hefty fine. What are your options, especially if your JOB requires travel? What is the common sense solution at this moment?


Asked by Sisteract at 2:37 PM on Nov. 20, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 36 (80,388 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (33)
  • I will NOT degrade myself. Period.
    No, I will not fly. People who must, must. There is no 'common sense' solution until TSA gets some sense.

    Answer by Jenny-talia at 2:47 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • I can guarantee people in his position are not going to take a stand

    Well, you're wrong. I know other people who fly multiple times per week for work who are putting their foot down. They are working around which airlines have opted out of the advanced security, mapping out routes with multiple legs on smaller airlines that don't use them, or taking a train or rental car in situations where it's feasible. Just because your husband can't be bothered, doesn't mean nobody else can.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 2:57 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • I won't fly. I just hope they get over their stupidity before my miles run out.

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 2:42 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • We won't fly either, but I'd take the pat down, before I'd walk through the radiation of the scanners. They save the pictures too.

    I like long drives and think it would be fun to take a need to lose my rights just to go on vacation or visit family.

    Answer by BridgetC140 at 2:45 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • I haven't flown in 2007. For reasons aside from this one. My tipping point was when my almost 2 year old daughter was the one randomly selected to have additional screening. They weren't so invasive as they are now, but it was a matter of principle. Also, it took almost 16 hours to fly from Chicago to Norfolk and it was a 20 hour drive. Nowadays, I won't fly unless I absolutely have to and that opportunity has not presented itself.

    Answer by Izsarejman at 2:50 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • I seem to recall some disgruntled people on here complaining about the cost of travel expenses for our elected officials, and some even suggesting that in this day and age, if one were really concerned about the economy, those officials, including our president, could do their business via video-conferencing. . .

    If that were a viable option for our president, according to those very wise women, then why wouldn't it be a viable option for the regular business travellers?  If it can be suggested that our president (and other officials) should do their business via modern technology, then why not others?  Wouldn't it save time and money--not to mention the "humiliation" of a pat-down?


    Answer by jsbenkert at 4:12 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • The common sense solution is to take everything out of your pockets, etc so that you don't possibly set off the beeper, but if you do and they offer either the x-ray scan or the pat down that you act like a grown up and do what you need to do so that the line can keep moving and everyone can get on the plane on time and safely. If you don't like it, then you choose to take a train or a car so that you don't hold up the line for everyone else!
    You are not up to date on the topic. They are choosing people at random to go through the scanner, and they want it to be as many people as possible. It's not a matter of taking things out of your pockets.

    Answer by lovinangels at 9:16 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • Just go through the darn scanner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Answer by older at 2:38 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • If I had to fly I would have to accept the conditions and yep I would go through the scanner .... less radiation than an x-ray. The pat down would freak me out. Yes scans have been saved but it is illegal to save them and those that have saved them are being investigated. I believe they will be made an example of because there is so much tension about the scanners right now. If they show a lenient stance this time there will be an out cry.

    Answer by MumaSue at 2:59 PM on Nov. 20, 2010

  • .... less radiation than an x-ray.
    It's come out that the radiation emitted is 20 times higher than initially estimated.

    Yes scans have been saved but it is illegal to save them and those that have saved them are being investigated.
    I'm going to wait to decide that 'it was all a big fluke' until some people see the inside of a jail cell over it.

    The saving the scans started at the first airport the scanners were put in, Heathrow, DAYS after they were installed, when a Bollywood actor was asked by airline employees TO SIGN HIS SCAN they had printed out. This isn't going to stop until WE make it stop.

    Answer by Jenny-talia at 3:07 PM on Nov. 20, 2010