TSA Does Full Grope Search On Screaming Three Year Old [Update]

from the i-feel-much-more-secure-now dept

There certainly are a lot of TSA search stories these days but it's an important topic, so we'll keep covering it as long as there are interesting stories. The latest, found via Slashdot, is of a three year old girl who got a full pat down while screaming at the TSA agents not to touch her. Update: Pointed out in the comments is that this actually happened "pre-enhanced pat down." This original story was from 2009, but the press seems to have picked up on it again... Apparently, she was initially upset at having to send her teddy bear through the machine and she then refused to go through the scanning device herself. Her actions somehow set off the scanner's alarm, leading to a TSA agent trying to do a forced pat down. The girl's father is a reporter and caught 17-seconds of the pat down on his mobile phone.

Oddly, it appears that the Tribune Company is pulling down this video every time it appears on YouTube. It's not clear why the Tribune Company won't allow it to stay up but others keep re-uploading it. This version is working as I type this, but it might not be for long.

Filed Under: privacy, safety, security
Companies: tsa


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    out_of_the_blue, 17 Nov 2010 @ 5:19pm

    Re: Re: Re: Urethra search: READ THE PDF!

    The msnbc piece spins Rez as saying risk is vanishingly low when he doesn't, he's trying to find out what it is.

    From NY Times: "Thatís one reason Peter Rez, a physics professor at Arizona State University, has been pushing for more data to be shared so that academics can do their own analysis."

    And read the Rez et al PDF from bottom of Rez page:
    "Our findings indicate effective dosages may be as high as 0.8-0.9 uSv for the personnel screening systems. This is about 4 times higher than the maximum value determined by the vendors as indicated by their claims that doses are in compliance with ANSI 2002 standard..."

    Now. The "1 in 20 million fatal doses" figure is PER mieroSv. So that's roughly the risk PER scan. But radiation is a cumulative risk. Ten a year may be 9uSv so 1 in 20M is divided by 9, to 1 in 2.2M of fatal cancer. -- Still low, only wimps would complain, huh? But Rez can only INFER from the supposed ANSI compliance limit; there is NO real data provided by TSA, it's just "trust us".

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.