November 15th, 2010
09:54 PM ET

Standing Up to Pat Downs: Join the Live Chat

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/01/02/liveblogfinal.copy.jpg]

Tonight, standing up to pat downs and other airport security measures, like full body scans that fliers feel have gone way too far. One man's pat down videotape sparked this new round of outrage when he warned a TSA worker, "If you touch my junk, i'm gonna have you arrested." How did that turn out? We'll tell you. We're keeping them honest.

Scroll down to join the live chat during the program. It's your chance to share your thoughts on tonight's headlines. Keep in mind, you have a better chance of having your comment get past our moderators if you follow our rules.

Here are some of them:

1) Keep it short (we don't have time to read a "book")
2) Don't write in ALL CAPS (there's no need to yell)
3) Use your real name (first name only is fine)
4) No links
5) Watch your language (keep it G-rated; PG at worst - and that includes $#&*)

Filed under: Live Blog
soundoff (247 Responses)
  1. Marilynn

    We need to be smarter, like Israel. They use racial profiling. Let's be realistic, look at the age/race/gender/religious persuasion of the terrorists in high-profile cases since 9/11.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:18 pm |
  2. La Royce

    I feel that even though there have been terrorist attacks in the past. The majority of the passengers originated in another country. The intrusive security checks make me really analyze whether i want to fly or drive. 9 hours or less..I drive!

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  3. Megan Dresslar - Shoreline, WA

    Charlie Rangel already broke the rule, he won't be take his position congress anytime in the future.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  4. Jennifer

    Thank you for the coverage today re the TSA body scans and pat downs. I fly twice a week, across country and the comment made by the 1 gentlemen supporting the body scanners where he thinks people "don't have to fly" is narrowminded. Clearly he's missing the point that some of us business travellers (who support the travel economy by and large) need to get from point A (Georgia) to point B (California) in less than 1 day.

    When you consider that you could be imaged repeatedly, over and over every week with images who knows where seen by who knows whom is an invasion of privacy. I have only been scanned once, and will always opt for a pat down going forward.

    I understand that we all need to feel safe when we travel, but this feels more like a "guilty until proven innocent" approach. Air travel gets more and more complicated every year, and eventually it will impact those of us who rely upon it to the point where we will find other careers to avoid dealing with it. When that happens, we will see what happens to the travel industry and the TSA.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  5. Jo Ann, North Royalton, Ohio

    Rangel had plenty of time to get a lawyer. I can't believe this guy was re-elected. What were his constituents thinking?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  6. Jason - Houston

    Flying means going through security. Period. If they want me to strip, so be it. Willingness to cooperate makes the whole thing go easier and faster.

    This guy just wanted to get on TV. And Anderson, you let him succeed. Nothing any more special about his junk than anyone else's.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  7. Jane

    Could you shed some light on exactly how much radiation one is exposed to when going thru the full body scan machine?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  8. Joshua Alexander

    There is a direct and inverse relationship between freedom and safety. The safer we wish to be the less free we can be and the freer we wish to be, the less safe we will be. You simply can not have it both ways

    Seems we as a Nation have decided that we do not wish to have a redo of the tragedy of 9/11.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  9. Charles

    I think that some of the people that are complaining are out of there mine, they dont know how the terrious going to come after us,but trust me i believe them that they will kill us,mr Tyner you got ur 15 min of fame, now go pray that they dont blow the plane up with you are on it. these people are thy n to protect us.i"ll go through nude if thats what they need us to do,cos they no the type of alert they have at any given time.some people please stop whineing.Dog!

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  10. william

    lets not forget that commercial airlines are an active target of the terrorists and will be for some time. The screening process is better than being blown up.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  11. Lori

    Kevin Smith-Pool: The pat downs are bad enough.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  12. Mary Hennessy

    If you want to fly and be safe, a patdown should be the least of your worries. I'd rather be patted down than to be sitting on the same plane as a " underwear bomber". It's a sign of the time, so be quiet and and be safe or stay home!!!!

    November 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm |
  13. Kathy Wilson-Gold

    I have been subject to pat downs for 4 years now due to a defibrillator implant in 2006. I flew quite frequently for my job. Needless to say last week I was surprised with the new TSA procedures. However, all I have to say is "911" and it puts it all in perspective. It is a small price to pay for our safety. For those who don't like it, don't fly. I want my flight safe.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
  14. patricia barclay

    I object to the body scans on medical grounds. We do not need any more xrays in our systems.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
  15. Josiah

    Anderson, I am of the small percentage of frequent flyers and I have to say I am absolutely and emphatically baffled by the backlash to the new pat downs. I have to say to the people that object: What would you say on the morning of September 12th? Would you complain about your "privacy" then? I wonder: are people so self-absorbed and aloof to the safety of their fellow passengers?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
  16. John

    I fly 4 days a week – this process is the least aggravating of all the issues I deal with. Anyone reeling from the choice between the scan and the pat down needs not to fly in the 21th century.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
  17. Rachel

    I'm so glad this is being discussed! I just flew home from Texas and am 23 wks pregnant and clearly pregnant. I have travelled the world and never felt so violated in my life! I had the full body scan done and then was required to go through a pat down. 8 people behind me we not subjected to the search. I wasn't offered a private room. Basically I was spread eagle like a criminal and completely felt up. I sadly started crying I felt so violated. Thankfully I am done with business trips for the year! I am in NO hurry to do that again. I know they need to keep us all safe and I get that but, to go far enough to make someone cry is just wrong! I have never felt this way before and I have been given a pat search in the past (in Europe).

    November 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
  18. Fiona Halfon

    If you had been in a teroist attack you would never object to being patted down or x-ray screened at an airport. It is a choice between profiling (which is Israels policy) or being screened. Don't fly and put others in danger if you choose not to subject yourself to this.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm |
  19. Sue R. Canton MI.

    @Tracie-Pennsylvania,,,Re: "The Tsa has gone way to far"... I agree with you when it comes to a child having their private parts touched by a stranger.I also have concern's on how the radiation will affect certain people who are frequent fliers with the enhanced equipment.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  20. Steve Peterman

    The TSA can do what it wants because of jurisdiction. The federal government has jurisdiction at the TSA check points. Constitution guarantees and non federal law don't necessary apply in areas of federal jurisdiction.

    Jurisdiction is the key. If you are within federal jurisdiction, federal laws and regulations apply. If you are without federal jurisdiction, the federal laws and regulations don't apply.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  21. craig leonard

    I went thru the machine today in chicago. It was noþ intimidating. Anderson you made it sound like it is a big thing and it was not tell the gentleman that rebelled to drive next time and nobody will touch his "junk!"

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  22. Mary

    I would like to know how often Eric Erickson actually flies. For those of us who fly frequently for work, no amount of security check is too much. Thank you to TSA for keeping us safe.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  23. Buck Nelson

    These searches are absolutely reasonable. I agree that we should do this, if not more. I have recently went through one and got padded and find it great that security measures are locking down. So what if it shows anything? So what if they touch your butt? Would you rather see Bin Laden walk by because he argued the same?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  24. Heather - Spokane, WA

    There is a BIG differnce between sexual assault and pat downs

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  25. Mike Heyman

    Hi Anderson - How is it that all US based airlines use profiling in Europe before check-in and thus relay on a lesser security by the local airport, yet we are not able to have the same system here in the US?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  26. Luke Londo

    I fail to lend credence to Rep. Rangel not having or being able to afford legal counsel. According to Zuckerman Spaeder, they had no intention of terminating their relationship, also saying they "explored every alternative." His plea for sympathy won't work for me.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:15 pm |
  27. Simmie

    I am totally against the body scanners. There is no way to make it 100% safe at the airport and the body scanners and pat downs go way too far in their attempt to provide safety.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  28. Lila

    Is this extreme concern with security worth more than people's health? What are the chances of finding someone who is a threat with these devices compared to how many people will be more likely to have cancer as a consequence of being exposed to the X-RAY.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  29. Madhuri

    Hi Anderson,

    I think there should be a line between the privacy of the passenger and security of the passenger , and if any of these fail or does'nt satisfy us then it would be worse for every one.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  30. Jennifer - Michigan

    I would not want to be patted down or bodyscanned when going through security. I'm not sure I would feel "safer" after that.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  31. Noah

    Are we really any safer though? I don't feel any safer on a plane since 2001, remember all the pilot has to do is point the nose of the plane down. How do you know that your pilot doesnt have an affiliation with a terror group?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  32. Kevin Smith-Poole

    @Carol – I agree. My husband has to fly for work, but some of the pat downs get ridiculous. I think if this continues we will have to submit to a body cavity search in order to fly.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  33. Jason

    ok everyone so lets just say some people from a us state may smuggle some lets say knives (or box cutters on board)and a little pat down would have saved your family but you said " you know what i am against this to intrusive". well maybe you should just drive your own car last time i checked the air lines were private companies and they can refuse service.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  34. Jerry McGraw

    What is next? The bill of rights places limits on what the government can do. Are body cavities next? Only the government!

    November 15, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
  35. Kenneth

    I think it's ridiculous. I understand the safety aspect of it, but the system we had in place before this was just as effective. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Eventually, we're going to surrender so much individual freedom in exchange for security, we won't be free anymore.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:13 pm |
  36. Kenya

    I say let it be done in the name of security. If you don't like the idea, too bad. Find some other means of transport.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:13 pm |
  37. lee

    you know, if people are so mad about this, then the TSA should have no security at all and the next time there is a high jacking or bombing, then the people affected better not go crying to the government for help.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:13 pm |
  38. Greg

    The comment was made that if people were upset they would ask their representatives to stop the TSA screening process. Perhaps people don't go to their congressman or woman because they know nothing will change; that their representative won't listen to them.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:13 pm |
  39. Lily Lago

    Animals are exstreamily smart. If you give chickens a ball they'll play a soccer like game with it. Humans are classified as animals after all.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:12 pm |
  40. Jo Ann, North Royalton, Ohio

    I have always believed that animals were smarter than we thought.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:12 pm |
  41. Emily

    @ZoeAnn, Oregon,
    I would NEVER go into a room with just one TSA worker! I think that they have at least two people there for security reasons (for both).

    November 15, 2010 at 10:12 pm |
  42. Heather - Spokane, WA

    Sorry Aaron!

    November 15, 2010 at 10:12 pm |
  43. Derek

    Good evening Anderson,

    I'm very glad to see someone standing up to TSA finally. My family was planning a trip to Florida in the New Year, but we have now decided on a staycation.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:12 pm |
  44. Heather - Spokane, WA

    @Aron, I think he was looking for fame too because he was tapping this and he admitted when he streemed it that he wanted it to get around

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
  45. Carol, Virginia

    Everyone has a choice not to fly? What about the person whose job requires them to fly. They have to submit to a sexual assault to keep their job?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
  46. Maureen T., Canada

    Great topic Anderson.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
  47. Megan Dresslar - Shoreline, WA

    Yes, I agree with Anderson's question, Good point!

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
  48. Starr, formerly known as vincent

    @Emily, i think you raise some good points.

    Jeff Toobin's remark about being naked is analagous to the scans, from my understanding, you might as well be naked.

    Eric made a good point about no attacks "within" the US.

    Based on who you are, this can be a difficult issue.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
  49. Marlene

    Honestly, the whole think leave me very apprehensive towards flying. I know it is all for our own safety, but how much is too much! There is no enjoyment in traveling anymore.

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
  50. Janet

    My largest concern is experiencing regular exposure to X-rays especially for weekly travlers. What can TSA and the govt say about the radiation impact?

    November 15, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
1 2 3 4 5