>>>>http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/19/airport.security.issues/index.html?hpt=C1
>>>>
>>>>This is what Al Qaida has driven us to.
>>>
>>>I think think you got there for yourselves Mike> Also most security experts agree that airport searches are for public consumption and have nothing to do with effectively increasing security.
>>
>>This is not really correct. These measures do increase the security in the avenue of attack they are trying to close. Leaving aside the desire of those in power to want to be seen to be doing something - the problem with security is that any security measure applied will simply change the modus operandi of the attacker, not eliminate the attacker or remove their motivation. If the authorities do nothing then you can board the plane and attack as before. So they have to close that channel (usually erring on the side of too much rather than too little since political careers are at stake in the event of a failure). But then the attacker simply changes to some other avenue or other target. It's a cat and mouse game which is in favour of the attacker since they only need to succeed some of the time while the defender needs to succeed all the time.
>
>I'm in agreement with you. The question is, where to draw the line? Why not just load the plane and then scan the entire plane, passengers, baggage and all? :o) The problem with scanners is that there are always ways to bypass the scanner (rubber pasties now).
>
>In reality, I'm leaning more towards the scanners and away from the pat downs but then the pat downs are only required for those who refuse the scan. If they can verify (as they say) that the scanners only subject you to the equivalent of 2 minutes of flight time radiation (everyone is subjected to radiation flying but no one seems to be avoiding air travel due to it or screaming about it) then it is an acceptable risk for flight.
>
>I understand not wanting the full pat down, but really, if you don't want it, and you don't want the scan, then don't fly. Flying is optional which in turn makes the scans and pat downs optional. I'm still more concerned about drug mule methods and the baggage and the cleaning folks, ground crew, etc. Where is the effort to ensure those avenues?

That's the way it works now, isn't it? Pat downs are for passengers who don't want to be body scanned.

You probably know you can't just walk away if you refuse both. The TSA can arrest you or hit you with a fine.

A funny take on an unfunny situation ---

http://www.despair.com/tsa.html