Oh, I'm on the same boat as you. I didn't even bring up the pat down crap. I don't think that's legit in any way, shape, or form. The photographs from the full-body scan are one thing, physical contact is an entirely new ball of wax.

I purposefully left that out, btw....

So, they pull all the money out of security, and something happens? Would that open up the government to lawsuit? My guess would be "oh hell yes, and then some." Where do we sit then?

I'm all for efficient government, but not one that does so by sticking their head in the sand and hoping nothing goes wrong. If there's some other method that is proven more capable at detecting and thwarting terrorist attacks on the airlines, then people should complaining why those AREN'T in use, not why these things ARE in use.

That's cute rhetoric, but really doesn't mean anything. What's not dignified about body scans (under the hypotheticals I posted). What's oppressive about them?

You keep saying this, but it really doesn't convey anything. Grats on the post, though.

If you don't like hypothetical posts, then this isn't the post for you. Feel free to mod it down, flame it, whatever you do best...

Let's say for the time being that these devices are 100% foolproof. If you're carrying something onto an airplane, and it is capable of taking down said airplane, it will get noticed. I'm fully ware this isn't the case. That's irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make. Let's also say that the images taken from full-body scanners are not capable of being saved out to remote locations, or even locally. Finally, let's say that your average TSA isn't an immature kid who will giggle and point when looking at a full-body scan image. YMMV on this, depending upon location.

Under those conditions, what's the big deal? To me, it isn't a big deal.

First, since when has the internet (especially /.) become so self-conscious? I mean, "Hey, you can't look at my junk" is on the same sensitivity level I'd expect to hear from school districts, churches and daycares. Have we really fallen that far? I mean, my bits look just like the next guy's bits. Under the hypothetical assumption above, your average TSA agent wouldn't care about the bits. They just care about the bombs. If we're saying that we can't find a person to objectively look at body-scans without it becoming an "ordeal", then we've lost more than just the "war on terror."

Second, for those who cite Franklin and his Safety/Liberty bit, what personal liberty are you giving up? Do you have a right to protection from Body Scans? I mean, you already agree to have your entire contents searched via x-ray and also agree to not transport certain materials. Those rules are strictly enforced as it is. Assuming that the body-scan is 100% effective and your TSA agent isn't a snickering 15 year old...How does this violate anything that isn't already being violated?

Finally, to address the phrase "The risk of a terrorist attack is so infinitesimal and its impact so relatively insignificant": Risk and Impact here are presented in a grayscale. That's just not the case. If you or your loved one is killed in something like 9/11, the chance is 100%. There's no statistical consolation in this case, and the impact is quite significant.

So, if we could close those loopholes outlined in the hypothetical section, what do we have to lose? What am I missing here?

I had the same experience. We had to run to two different stores (not even AT&T stores) just to buy phones. Most AT&T stores in the area (read: Dallas Metroplex) only got between 5 - 7 phones. Really.

We both love our phones.

You're right. It could happen next year. Everybody Panic!!!!

And if Obama gets his moratorium on deep-water drilling, it should be no problem to find a handful of rag-tag well-drillers to complete the ultimate space mission.

Actually, the Bible does have much to say about "Single-Partner, Long-term, Public" homosexual relationships. Often when you find mentions of homosexuality, it is in the same sentence or passage with rape and incest.

If you come across a Bible Thumper, you should really ask them if their hard-line, book-waving stance on homosexuality is preached with the same fervor as all the other teachings of the Bible. Ask them how they feel about Women's Hairstyles (Longer is better!) or about how they should plant their crops. (Two types of seed in the same vineyard is really, really bad.)

I think Betty Bowers has the best take on it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw

Would like to go tangent here and say that Battle Kid is insane. Fun game, and hard as heck. Plus, the cart is pretty empty since technology shrunk the daylights out of the ICs in there.

It was always impressed upon me (heavily) that the term "art" was bidirectional.

If the observer thinks the piece is art, then it is art.

If the creator considers it art, then it is art.

My guess as to why these brash and controversial statements are surfacing has two words: Rotten Tomatoes. With the proliferation of social media, anyone can be a film critic. The quintessential movie critic days have long since passed, and there just isn't place for Ebert anymore. He needs to let it go, get out on his front porch and tell kids to get off his lawn.

Just my $.02.

I'm pretty sure if we could get 1.3 billion PEOPLE to run on a treadmill, we could produce just as much power, and we'd actually shed some fat....

Nah, screw it. Make the cows do it.

That R2 is in prime condition, a real bargain.

Some cities go a step further than just a picture. They will give you a picture before, a picture after and a 12-second video of you running the light. All that information can be found online via a URL given to you with your citation.

http://www.plano.gov/Departments/Police/RedLightCameras/Pages/default.aspx

Dark Age of Camelot (the game that put Mythic on the map) players were affected too. Unfortunately, DAoC players don't have the luxury of prepaid game cards, and MUST use a CC/Debit card to pay for their account.

I'm not sure why people are surprised, this isn't the first time there's been a billing issue: See here