TSA Warns That If You Wear Scanner Resistant Clothing, They'll Have To Grope You

from the public-service-announcement dept

With the new TSA naked scanners getting so much attention late last year, a number of different folks started offering up special clothing to wear while going through the scanners. My favorite might be the undergarments with the 4th Amendment printed in metallic ink, so that whoever is viewing the scan can see the "message" left for them. Others apparently created special "flying pasties" (possibly NSFW). While it looks like those "stickers" to put over your private parts didn't actually have anything in them to block the scanner (making them something of a scam), it appears the TSA is warning anyone who might think of wearing scanner resistant clothing. Consumerist points us to a blog post from the TSA, in which they warn anyone who plans to wear such clothing that might "conceal sensitive areas," that it will only mean that you're more likely to get groped.
So basically, passengers should be aware that the use of these types of products will likely result in a pat-down. Some might think this is TSA's way of getting back at clever passengers. That's not the case at all. It's just security.

We're certainly not going to tell you what you should or shouldn't buy or wear, but I feel it's only fair to give you a heads up on your choice of attire.
Seems a bit high on the passive-aggressive scale.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Mike C. (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:12pm

    I was going to make a snide comment about a correction needed (security => security THEATER), but figured I'd go read the blog first. As I was skimming through the comments, I ran across this entry which exemplifies exactly why it's nothing more than theater and until every airport everywhere is "secured":

    So if scanning and/or patting down is CRITICAL to security, why aren't you patting people down at airports that don't have these scanners? How stupid do you think these terrorist are that they wouldn't go to a small regional airport, get through the metal detectors, and fly to a major airport...pat downs and scanners easily avoided by the ones you are really trying to catch.

    January 7, 2011 9:16 PM

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:51pm

    They won't admit it, but all they really wanna do is grab your junk. Why else would they continue doing it even though it was proven without a doubt that it was useless? God bless America.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 1:56pm

    "My favorite might be the undergarments with the 4th Amendment printed in metallic ink"

    They should make some that say
    "If you can read this, you are violating my rights"
    or maybe
    "Am I safe yet?"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Overcast (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:02pm

    Wonder how many sexual predators have applied for jobs with the TSA? lol

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    scarr (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:05pm

    As I like to remind everyone

    You can almost always summarize the TSA's claims with "you were asking for it".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:14pm

    Another good phrase is "You can't touch this!" LoL

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anthony, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:15pm

    Pat Downs

    Instead of wasting so many resources on passengers they should focus more attention on cargo which goes largely unchecked.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Bas (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:19pm

    "It's just security".

    What a waste of resources.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Jason, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:34pm

    Re:

    Fine if they wanna touch my junk, but they better keep their mitts off my 4th!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:35pm

    Re: Pat Downs

    Can Jamie Hyneman go 'Big Boom' again?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:39pm

    What's better to a terrorist 1 plane with one person, or 12 planes with 1 person... So if you get hired on as a baggage handler, who only has to swipe a card to get past (and could hold it open for # many people, or be coerced by one person.), scanners are really just for shits and giggles.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:42pm

    Honestly, if you show up in security wearing something that gets in the way of procedures, you look like you have something other than genitalia to hide.

    It is sort of obvious, no?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:45pm

    Re:

    Yeah, when visiting family there are a few airport choices near me, one of which lacks the new scanners so they don't bother with the new pat downs either. This is the airport I use, and I make sure not to route through confusing or poorly set up airports where I may accidentally exit the secure zone and have to go through security again. (I swear the Vegas airport requires you do it, but maybe I just took the wrong path and ended up being forced to do it without a 10 minute u-turn.)

    Oh, and of course, the people I visit live in a nice quiet small town with a barely accessible airport and the security there is quite lovely, no scanners and high-fives and smiles all around.

    I do feel quite lucky that my only need to fly is still so comfortable, not having to worry about the TSA terrorizing me. But I can't imagine how awful it is for all the less fortunate people who are now having to find alternate means of cross country travel, or accept being violated at an airport.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    candide08 (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:46pm

    Major BS

    If EVERYONE wore "scanner resistant" clothing they could not possibly pat down everyone - it would break the system.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Jason, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:47pm

    Re: As I like to remind everyone

    Was that meant to sound rapey?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    scarr (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 2:56pm

    Re: Re: As I like to remind everyone

    They share a "blame the victim" mentality.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Jake, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 3:15pm

    Yet another example of security theatre backfiring. How long will it be before someone designs a scanner-resistant garment that can actually conceal a weapon from the scanners? And nobody would be spending time and money on such things (which are presumably somewhat beyond the scope of Al-Queda's R&D budget) if the TSA would just add the simple words 'probable cause' to their usage policy for the full-body scanners?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 3:43pm

    Re:

    Honestly, if you show up in security wearing something that gets in the way of procedures, you look like you have something other than genitalia to hide. It is sort of obvious, no?

    Honestly, if you have security procedures that require looking at genitalia, you're doing it wrong (or right, maybe, if you are into that kinky stuff.) It doesn't help security, and it only inconveniences the honest, non-terrorist folks as the terrorists just side-step the whole process.

    The fact that a terrorist can easily bypass the security procedures in place by inserting bombs into orifices which aren't detected by the scan, or by putting bombs into air cargo, going to an airport which lacks the additional security, or detonating them in a busy airport checkpoint is what makes this all academic. Sure, having security procedures in place is good, terrorists have to keep guessing on whether they will trigger a trap or not. But making the process ridiculous adds no more security than having a sane process in place.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 3:49pm

    Re: Re:

    But making the process ridiculous adds no more security than having a sane process in place.

    ... and acting irresponsibly and mocking the procedure isn't very sane either.

    If you want to protest, do it somewhere else then in front of me at the airport. If the TSA wants a picture of my nutsack, they are welcome to it. I don't care. It's just a nutsack. If you want to keep your nutsack out of the image and piss and moan about it, do it somewhere else.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:02pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Nearly every sentence structured "If you want to protest, [insert arbitrary condition that you feel makes protest acceptable here]" is bullshit.

    People have every right to fly and to wear clothes with metallic ink if they want. If you want to piss and moan about that, then you should do it somewhere else. Like, perhaps, in a country that doesn't have freedom as its first principle.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:09pm

    Idiots.

    You people are idiots. Seriously, every single poster above me, slating security, all you're saying is "I'm bitter and angry about how I or someone I know, someone I spoke to, or someone I read about, was treated when going through security and enduring a standard security procedure. Anyone working in security of this standard would honestly tell you, security is nothing more than a deterrent. It's not going stop 100% of terrorism, it will never be that easy, ever. Everyone already knows this and anyone working in security would tell you this. Unless you start placing giant padlocks over the world and closing all access to all places terrorists are always going to bypass security. This is god damn obvious, so what the hell are you ll whining about? Seriously? If you can come up with a full rpoof security procedure that will prevent any terrorist activites, whilst appeasing the general public and distinguishing between a genuine traveller and a terrorist, by all means, please, let us know. Security is nothing more than a damned deterrent and should only be considered as that, that's damn common sense. You people are utterly stupid for bothering to whine about it, don't you think people in the industry already realize this? You got a better solution? Think about it, where does security start? It starts with you, and unfortunately, you are all idiots, so were pretty much screwed. Any terrorist can walk into any airport and kill 100's/1000's of people without even reaching security. They can do this ANYWHERE? not just airports, anyone can cause as much devastation anywhere. It's not just airports. Why are you all so hung up on airport security? Refer to my earlier point(s). You may as well complain about every single form of security everywhere, be it the airport , next tiem to go to school, or into a shopping centre. Every method of security ultimately has one simple goal, to deter. When it works to that point you can say it's a job done well enough because it can't and it will never get any better, unless you want to enforce some sort of communist dictatorship with big brother popping out your behind every second to check what you're upto.

    What it all comes down to common sense and indiviudals. No ones the same, no one has the exact same opinions, ideas or mind. Be it good or bad, everyone differs and that will never change which is why there is never a full proof solution to anything because you can not provide security against a billion differing opinions. This is god damn common sense. What you do is provide as much as a deterrent as you can because, again, it doesn't get better than offering that minor peace of mind.

    Poster #18 (Itlwolf is the exception to this rant, as he appears to have common sense) thank god someone does. The rest of you are blind idiots who deserved to be treated the wya you have because YOU are the hinderence to the only minor thing we can use to help prevent terrorists. You make me sick. Thanks for listening.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:11pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I know a country like that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:11pm

    Re: Re: Pat Downs

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:12pm

    Here's a what-if scenario I have had mulling around in my head for a bit (it came about largely in response to those "pretend you enjoy it" comments, for when you're patted down, to weird out the TSA agent).

    If I went through security acting deliberately suspicious, wearing this scanner resistant clothing and such, in a deliberate attempt to get called for a patdown *specifically because* I actually do want someone handling my junk (and/or putting things into my ass for a more extreme search) because, I dunno, I'm weird and that kinda thing gets me off, and it's clear to the TSA agent who is dealing with me that I'm enjoying it...

    Is that sexual harassment? Like, is the TSA agent being sexually harassed? Keeping in mind that I've specifically set up a situation where my genitals are being fondled because I enjoy that.


    Please note the use of "I" is purely hypothetical in this question

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:19pm

    I don't see this as a deterrent for organized terrorists: only those nut jobs who want to put some sort of (almost) harmless explosive in their underwear.

    No real theat to our airplanes is going to be deterred by a system with very visible flaws.

    Aside from that, it's fucking insensitive to people who have been abused in the past. It's not idiotic at all to call out the farse that this is.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:21pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Hope you get selected for groping and the TSA agent pass his fingers between your ass chicks so you feel the problem.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:24pm

    Re: Idiots.

    Well if it is not intended to be 100% there is no need for harsh measures stupid.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    Hugh Mann (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 4:25pm

    Not really passive-aggressive

    Well, I find the whole "peek or grope" system offensive, likely ineffective and going too far down a slippery slope (what happens when the bad guys start forming explosives into suppositories?).

    However, it really only stands to reason that, if you make an overt effort to avoid a security measure (putting aside the question of whether the security measure is reasonable in the first place), you will then be subject to greater scrutiny.

    HM

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 5:07pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    FREEDOM HARD!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 6:00pm

    Look the TSA and it's need to violate every everyone they can get away with is a pointless waste of money and time.

    9/11 changed the rules forever.
    #1) No airplane full of passengers will ever sit quitely and obey the hijackers orders ever again because none of them are willing to be used as a weapon against thier own (or any other) people. Flight 93 proved that on the very day, they got wind of the plan and fought back. Each and every attempt since then has been thwarted by the passengers. Frankly I am annoyed at how little press these incidents are given in the USA.

    And

    #2 The airlines were forced to remake the cockpit doors to prevent anyone from the passenger crew from being able to get into the cockpit.

    Further I personally believe that every time the TSA violates a citizen's rights or person the Terrorists win.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Morgan Getham, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 6:17pm

    What If ...

    What if you come up with clothing that is not only scanner-resistent but GROPE-resistent too?

    And to answer "anonymous", a lot of people in this country feel that these procedures are a violation of the constitutional right to be secure from unreasonable searches. They feel that it is their duty as a citizen to resist these procedures as much as they can in order to uphold these constitutional principles. There may well be court decisions to the contrary. Well, there were court decisions that approved of the incarceration of Japanese-Americans (many of them American citizens) without due process or any evidence or wrongdoing during World War II too. Doesn't mean it's right or not a gross violation of someone's constitutional rights.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 6:30pm

    Re: Idiots.

    tl:dr I work as a TSA inspector

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 6:39pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    My ass doesn't have chicks. If they want to grab my pasty white ass, whatever. They are the one getting the stink finger, not me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    Tim, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 6:40pm

    Re:

    We'd love to make more...

    Thing about our version, was it in no way impeded the job of TSA agents. In fact, it didn't even say 'don't search me', so any claim by TSA agents that our line could be seen as interfering is false. Unlike some of the others, nothing gets in the way of what they're peering at. The only point was to get people to think more about their rights.

    Tim Geoghegan
    Timmovations LLC
    4th Amendment Wear.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    icon
    flyingpasties (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 8:09pm

    i beg to differ

    You say: "While it looks like those "stickers" to put over your private parts didn't actually have anything in them to block the scanner (making them something of a scam)"


    We Say: we don't know how your site can call us a scam without even contacting us and inquiring what's inside our pasties? We would have gladly mentioned to you that our pasties DO in fact have '3' materials that will either block or deflect harmful radiation...and KEEP your privacy (our main objective). In fact, our pasties have a secret "pasty girl" that would clearly show up in any airport scanner! ;-)


    Please be kind and write a retraction. Thank you.
    Best,


    - flying pasties

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 8:18pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    and acting irresponsibly and mocking the procedure isn't very sane either.

    When have I ever said that I protested in an airport? When have I acted irresponsibly? Sure, I mock procedure here, but I've been through the rape-scan device several times, and all I hope is that the person behind the curtain got an eyeful. The problem is that neither you nor I are a security risk, and while some security is good (as I said before,) going overboard is a problem, no matter what side of the security scanner you are on.

    Since when has thoughtful protest (even at the airport) not been a right in a free country. If you don't like Freedom, I am sure they have a place for you in Iran.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    icon
    The Groove Tiger (profile), Jan 13th, 2011 @ 9:08pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Translation:

    If you want to protest, don't protest.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 9:32pm

    They still can't catch a single terrorist I see. Keep trying, maybe one day you will.

    It's pathetic, our security is a complete waste of billions of dollars and Jared Loughner shoots 13 people before being restrained by two civilians.

    and now Obama wants to Create Internet ID for All Americans.

    Here is the alleged reason why this is needed.

    "What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy, and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities"

    As mikeman2 in the comments section pointed out.

    "So let me get this straight, President Obama is worried about my need to remember passwords in a world where the government is close to insolvency, public education is in shambles, and illegal immigrants continue to come across the border in droves? "

    As Consecrated2God points out

    "I manage my passwords just fine, but even if I didn't, that just doesn't seem like anything that is in the realm of government oversight."

    and as rlj points out

    "My fear of it ... is based in the fact I have never seen any reason I should trust the government with my personal data. From the data that was lost to Wikileaks to the number of misplaced laptops to the foolish errors by government workers that put trojans on their machines I simply don't trust the feds to have them oversee my online transactions this way."

    These people are the very definition of incompetence. Why should we allow them to manage our passwords? Seems more like a security threat than anything.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 10:27pm

    Re: Not really passive-aggressive

    However, it really only stands to reason that, if you make an overt effort to avoid a security measure (putting aside the question of whether the security measure is reasonable in the first place), you will then be subject to greater scrutiny.

    Kind of "just asking for it", huh? Kind of like how if a woman dresses a certain way or walks a certain way, she's "just asking for it" too. Yeah, I see how that works.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 10:30pm

    Re:

    Further I personally believe that every time the TSA violates a citizen's rights or person the Terrorists win.

    No, the TSA wins. They out to prove that they can do more to stamp out freedom than those other terrorists ever dreamed of.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 13th, 2011 @ 10:41pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    My ass doesn't have chicks. If they want to grab my pasty white ass, whatever.

    I hope the agent has a big, fresh load of infectious disease organisms all over his hands from the person in front of you. And since they don't change those rubber gloves between examinations, that's a real good possibility.

    They are the one getting the stink finger, not me.

    Heh, you just might be getting more than you realize. Let us know when your "pasty white ass" rots off.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 14th, 2011 @ 12:23am

    Re: Idiots.

    I know at bwi airport the 7.00 an hour employee is deffo a deterrent. when they look at your with the messed up teeth you run your ass the other way

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43.  
    identicon
    abc gum, Jan 14th, 2011 @ 4:44am

    Re:

    This just in - the perp is the victim.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 14th, 2011 @ 5:46am

    Re: Idiots.

    There is a cost/benefit breakdown to airport security. As said, nothing is 100%.

    So why spend billions of dollars, huge amounts of lost time, 4th Ammendment/privacy violations, etc. on procedures that add a minute (negligible) amount of improvement? The costs are high, and the limitations well known and significant.

    Despite the vast sums spent on airport security, it has not stopped a single threat from getting on a plane. All the plots since 9/11 have completely bypassed the entire TSA checkpoint. Why spend tons of money and give up freedom for it, when you get nothing tangible in return?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 14th, 2011 @ 6:16am

    Hell, they can grope me all they want. I'm old and haven't been groped in years. They can even handle my junk if they get off on it. Maybe we could make it a group activity. Massive groping.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46.  
    identicon
    Anonymous passer-by, Jan 14th, 2011 @ 8:33am

    Re:

    God Damn It!!

    you made me spit out coffee all over the keyboard and display

    Thank You!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 14th, 2011 @ 8:44am

    Re:

    "How long will it be before someone designs a scanner-resistant garment that can actually conceal a weapon from the scanners? ... (which are presumably somewhat beyond the scope of Al-Queda's R&D budget)"

    Thats actually cheap and easy, latex rubber or latex foam appliances (body parts) filled with something that approximates the density of human fat or muscle. Shove what ever you want in it, Glue it on and you are done. Or you can hide it where the sun don't shine, or ... all in all the naked body scanners are pretty worthless.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48.  
    icon
    keepingtheusasafe (profile), Jan 14th, 2011 @ 4:46pm

    its called a pat down not groping!!!! and not all passangers are subject to pat downs or what you refur to as the naked machine.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49.  
    icon
    Thomas (profile), Jan 14th, 2011 @ 4:58pm

    I thought..

    they groped people when they were just bored? Working for the TSA is definitely not fun, so a grope now and then (especially if you can grope underage teenagers) is a bonus.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50.  
    identicon
    villa begur, Feb 28th, 2011 @ 2:50am

    What TSA wants..??

    I do not know What TSA wants from the travelers...?? the thing which just come in my mind is that they want to distract the passengers and wants to make them uncomfortable too...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51.  
    identicon
    mickey mouse, Jul 29th, 2011 @ 9:46am

    Re:

    shhhhh stop thinking, they don't like people who can think anymore

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  52.  
    identicon
    steve2, Sep 8th, 2011 @ 10:31pm

    There's no need for the scanners, which expose you to high amounts of radiation. Metal detectors were working just fine. The government should remove the scanners from airports. They should just absorb the financial loss. It's not a big deal for the government financially.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This