I see you are not familiar with the technology. It can see your junk. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20004436-504083.html I can link you to some other websites too if you like. That picture of you is also stored. So the government is, effectively, creating a database of child porn and voyeur photos anyone wanting to fly are forced to get thrown into.

The combating terrorism line is a distraction. The rules have been arbitrarily decided from the beginning, and are not remotely consistent.  For example a soldier can carry on a M-240B machine gun no problem, but a pair of nail clippers? Look out! He might take over the plane! No, seriously. http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/11/18/another-tsa-outrage/

I love flying. Despite the unbelievable pain I suffer (medical issue) as a result I still prefer to fly over anything else. At the end of the day Happysqurriel has it on this one. This is another random search and seizure forced by the government. The fact that the public outcry against drunk driving has silenced the constitution does not make those random check points any more legal than this.

Security is an issue. I get that. Exactly which threat are they combating by looking at my junk? What terrorist threat is contingent on the size of my penis? That is the question. The burden of proof is not on those objecting to invasive and illegal measures being forced on them by the government. It is on the government who is forcing them on the people. They answer to the law abiding citizens of the country. Never, ever the other way around.

Metal detectors and sweeping me with a wand does not expose my junk. Nor does it involve someone touching it. I will have nothing to do with either. They are offering no viable alternative to people who are either private, or scarred by past experiences. I know more than a few people who simply cannot fly now for fear of being put through one of the enhanced pat downs. Flash backs to prior sexual assault is remarkably easy to trigger. I do not have such a great reason, but it is still plenty valid.

Terrorists are not a particularly diverse group in any way; when you factor in gender, age, travel history, education, employment, marital status and (potentially) dozens of other factors you should be able to eliminate 95% of people as potential terrorists with very little work. On top of that, terrorists are very rare so of the 5% who are "potential terrorists" 99.999% will (probably) not be a terrorist so the goal should be to look for something suspicious before pushing these people to the invasive search. In the end you should only need to be searching (maybe) 1% of the passengers in this was to ensure protection from terrorists ...

Certainly, the TSA might want to suppliment that with random searches to promote the appearance of fairness but if they're searching more than 5% of the passengers in this way they're not doing their jobs effectively.

The fates, destiny. Your life and all your actions were known long before you took your first breath. Your "free will" is just a script that you're acting out, and when you think you're changing your destiny, that change WAS your destiny. Who you are and what you do in life was plotted out before you were conceived.

That is a great way to escape any sense of personal responsibility, but a terrible way of defending random acts. You can continue to think nothing you do falls back onto you, but projecting that out to others is illogical to the extreme. I will continue to believe people are accountable for their actions, as it should be. Until and unless you have something resembling concrete evidence to the contrary that is.

A note: I realize the above might not logically follow for some so let me tease it out a bit for those confused. The assumption is in perfect predestination. In such events then our actions are not our own. This means that nothing we do is truly our fault. As such it is illogical to hold anyone responsible for any action since it is not their action at all. If the beginning is true then the rest must follow.

Other than the 'stars' part, I fully agree. And even regardin your point 2, I agree people shouldn't be so scared of everything. You will die eventually, no matter what you do. And you're much more likely to die in a car accident than in a terrorist strike anyway, Also, I don't live in the country you are speaking of but I can see it happen everywhere.

I don't see why people are being so stupid about this, it's not that big of a deal.  You essentially have three very simple choices:

1. Go through the damn scanner, it can't see your junk.
2. Get patted down.
3. Don't fly.

You have absolute control over which choice you choose!

http://www.gadling.com/2010/09/28/body-scanners-used-as-porn-by-airport-security/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20004436-504083.html

It can see your junk.

that is also against the law. they have to have a reason to stop you. they can't just randomly do it. if its a check point they have to get pre approval and are posted in local papers as to not entrap I believe.

So I can't recall if someone here suggested following the method Israel uses. I have seen it elsewhere if nothing else and thought "well we are not in nearly the extreme situation they are. No need to go that far." Well that and a few less kind words about Israel's typical reaction to "terrorist" threats. Then I found this article and it kind of floored me. I invite you to read it, and remember Israel has had far less issues with airport terrorism. http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother