Flight Ban for refusing X-Ray

cool. no x ray no fly. should make the air ways safer. compensations can't be made to those wanting special treatment because of their religion at the cost of putting others in danger.
 
Muban said:
I know it isn't mandatory for every passenger, but it's not going to be that uncommon either. Much like being selected for further baggage checks, it doesn't happen to everyone but it's quite common. If it's something that you are going to be turned away from your flight for refusing to do then it should be made apparent before the purchase of the ticket.

How many people in the thread have already said 'If you agree to the T&Cs' then it's OK to refuse to let them on the flight. It isn't in the T&Cs though.
Click to expand...

As said, it is made apparent as people have quoted, and as people have said, they can't add every single detail all the time, its ridiculous. And as said, if people can't be bothered to read the T&C's thats their own lazy god damn fault to be honest.

Dolph said:
I wonder how many people would object if the 'guidelines' (they aren't laws, laws have oversight, but they can't be ignored either) were suddenly changed to include a cavity search tomorrow... How many here would be saying, "well, it's in the terms and conditions of flight"...

For those that say it wouldn't happen, there's as much evidence of effectiveness in such a measure as there is in the body scanners...
Click to expand...

Yes...because they are going to include a full cavity search on every passenger....why would they? They have no need what so ever.

It's not their fault the passenger was being a nuisance, if she wont have an X-Ray (Which is by FAR less demeaning than a cavity search) then again thats the passengers choice.

benneh said:
Ah ok, I seem to have answered my own question, partially. This is the type of image it produces ('Rapiscan Secure 1000');

And we think that this is acceptable?. Bearing in mind that millions of kids will also pass through this machine.
Click to expand...

Meh, so what? Yes some people will have an issue, but hey ho. As stated, these aren't stored anyway, and even if they were, you wouldn't know about it. Hell, your face is probably stored somewhere anyway what with the amount of cameras about nowadays

People are forgetting something...You do realise why she had to have an X-Ray? One, probably looked suspicious, Two, she no doubt didn't want to remove some of her clothing while going through the metal detector, which in turn either set some alarm bells off in peoples heads or the metal detector caught something.

Which then either leads to a strip search, oh wait, they can't take their clothes off due to religious reasons...so, next best thing, stay clothed and have an X-Ray.

Makes perfect sense to me
 
Last edited:
K1LLSW1TCH said:
What do you think is worse though? Pictures that for arguments sake are solely used to determine whether something is being concealed that shouldn't be, or someone slipping through the net with a knife, gun or explosive? It's not as if you are sending HD photographs of your kids genitals to known paedophiles, it's a security force doing the job it's paid to do.
Click to expand...

If I was a peado and there were no jobs going at cub scouts it is where I would get a job.

And as this is this extended to every airport that means I can't fly without having my children's balls potentially perved over.

I would rather risk the terrorism thanks.
 
starfighter said:
If I was a peado and there were no jobs going at cub scouts it is where I would get a job.

And as this is this extended to every airport that means I can't fly without having my children's balls potentially perved over.

I would rather risk the terrorism thanks.
Click to expand...

Problem is you couldn't just get a job, there are no doubt security checks before hand.

Most security related jobs or jobs that potetnionally evolve around children wkill require you to be CRB checked etc or whatever the term is
 
starfighter said:
If I was a peado and there were no jobs going at cub scouts it is where I would get a job.

And as this is this extended to every airport that means I can't fly without having my children's balls potentially perved over.

I would rather risk the terrorism thanks.
Click to expand...

If the images aren't able to be stored then what are you going to do? Crack one out in the middle of an airport? :confused:
 
Utterly retarded increasing security at airports. Anyone who thinks it's a good idea is an idiot.

Just imagine, for one second, that after spending billions of pounds we actually made airports 100% secure (would never happen, and that's just our end). The terrorists would just move to another easy target.

Ocean Liners.
Schools.
Cinemas.
Sports venues.
Town centres.
Shopping malls
Train stations.
Tunnels.
The non secure area in airports. (Should the scanners be as you enter the carpark?)
Office buildings.
Bus stations.

All of these targets would have to be secured in the same way. Costing hundreds of billions in equipment and staffing.

And then what? Well take a guess. They'll then start targeting people, or water supplies, or the biggest, unsecure groups of people.

If terrorists had the will to hit us they'd be doing it week in week out, every day. If we're under that much of a threat there is no way, NO WAY they wouldn't be able to blow up tube trains, regular trains and God knows what else on a daily basis. Hell, driving trucks onto railway tracks etc. They would be doing it right now.

Thing is though, we're not actually under any real threat at all from terrorists. What you should be worrying about is crossing the road, getting cancer, having a heart attack, being murdered by family or friends etc.

I'm disgusted every time a moron calls for more security, or removal of our rights in some way. As if it would help.
 
Surely they could have just been searched normally as an alternative? Actually get those airport "security" (lol) people to do something pro-active.

A lot of fuss over nothing IMO.
 
Murf said:
Utterly retarded increasing security at airports. Anyone who thinks it's a good idea is an idiot.

Just imagine, for one second, that after spending billions of pounds we actually made airports 100% secure (would never happen, and that's just our end). The terrorists would just move to another easy target.

Ocean Liners.
Schools.
Cinemas.
Sports venues.
Town centres.
Shopping malls
Train stations.
Tunnels.
The non secure area in airports. (Should the scanners be as you enter the carpark?)
Office buildings.
Bus stations.

All of these targets would have to be secured in the same way. Costing hundreds of billions in equipment and staffing.

And then what? Well take a guess. They'll then start targeting people, or water supplies, or the biggest, unsecure groups of people.

If terrorists had the will to hit us they'd be doing it week in week out, every day. If we're under that much of a threat there is no way, NO WAY they wouldn't be able to blow up tube trains, regular trains and God knows what else on a daily basis. Hell, driving trucks onto railway tracks etc. They would be doing it right now.

Thing is though, we're not actually under any real threat at all from terrorists. What you should be worrying about is crossing the road, getting cancer, having a heart attack, being murdered by family or friends etc.

I'm disgusted every time a moron calls for more security, or removal of our rights in some way. As if it would help.
Click to expand...

You do realise the X-Ray precedure has been around for a fair while rite? It's not as if its something new.

People have twisted the story and made it sound as if ts going to be mandatory, it isn't and won't be any time soon.

Theres nothing stopping terrorists doing all of the above now...there has been no step up in security regarding X-Rays within the last month, again it's people twisting things

Freefaller said:
Surely they could have just been searched normally as an alternative? Actually get those airport "security" (lol) people to do something pro-active.

A lot of fuss over nothing IMO.
Click to expand...

Well yes...but as I stated, she probably refused to be 'touched' as in that pathetic 'patting' test they do.

So they went, okay X-Ray...but nooooooooo, thats suddenly against her religion also :o
 
TriedandTested said:
"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

So damn true.
Click to expand...

Got nothing to do with giving up liberty, its to do with not allowing airport security to scan your body then you refuse it, so they give you an alternate method that involves no physical touch what soever and you refuse that as well

Go figure
 
Delvis said:
Well yes...but as I stated, she probably refused to be 'touched' as in that pathetic 'patting' test they do.

So they went, okay X-Ray...but nooooooooo, thats suddenly against her religion also :o
Click to expand...

I agree that if the alternative isn't taken it's daft. I don't mind the pat down, but so many people don't do it properly. I've never had my tie checked, or the under side of my collar checked for example. I often clutch my hands and they've never asked me to open them either. Many people have held items in their hands and been searched but never asked to open them, albeit there's not much lethality that can be held inside a closed hand. All the xrays do is mitigate the poor standard of the staff - furthermore, complacency will set in, and thigns will be overlooked in time - even with these full body scanners.

No system, or security is unbreakable. If someone desperately wants to do an act of terrorism enough, it'll happen. Making the life hell for everyone else seems like overkill to me.

Also, all this liquids thing is such a farce now - at least they should provide you with free water when you're airside. It's such a bunch of rubbish.
 
Freefaller said:
I agree that if the alternative isn't taken it's daft. I don't mind the pat down, but so many people don't do it properly. I've never had my tie checked, or the under side of my collar checked for example. I often clutch my hands and they've never asked me to open them either. Many people have held items in their hands and been searched but never asked to open them, albeit there's not much lethality that can be held inside a closed hand. All the xrays do is mitigate the poor standard of the staff - furthermore, complacency will set in, and thigns will be overlooked in time - even with these full body scanners.

No system, or security is unbreakable. If someone desperately wants to do an act of terrorism enough, it'll happen. Making the life hell for everyone else seems like overkill to me.

Also, all this liquids thing is such a farce now - at least they should provide you with free water when you're airside. It's such a bunch of rubbish.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I see your point, it is pathetic how they do it sometimes. :)

Oh don't worry, I know full well security will slack over time, it always does, hence why most things happen in the first place really.

I've been to partys abroad with better patting than all the airport security I've been through :p And thats saying somthing!

The liquids thing, i'm used to it now, I've gone away with just hand luggage before and plenty of liquids on me...Tooth paste, deoderant, aftershave stuff, tablets not in boxes all sorts! Could have easily smuggled stuff on a plane.
 
And dangerous weapons are illegal almost everywhere anyway so that is obviously not what I ment. Once we start losing our rights and freedom then the terrorists really have won.
Click to expand...
How is a minor inconvienence to a few passengers a loss of freedom?
Do you have something to hide hidden deep within your rectum? Are you really that desperate to hide something?

Terrorists can hit anywhere, as soon as you make it easy, you're giving up the fight. Planes are a big target because they have massive destruction potential.

Irony of you hurling insults is he is more right than you are lol, this is nothing more than a placebo

If you engaged your intelligence instead of seeing red you would have read it as him saying the current procedures are adequate and the money could have been better spent on more safety in the air from accidents (which cause more incidents than terrorists ever have)
Click to expand...
How is it a placebo, we've been xraying baggage for years and it's saved a lot of crap from happening.
This is basically the same thing, it just stops people getting stuff through security by hiding it inside them.
 
Last edited:
Dolph said:
There is absolutely no evidence of meaningful benefit whatsoever to the whole money wasting fiasco?
Click to expand...

Which is a completely seperate issue. I was responding to the fact that a child might be seen naked. Which really falls into a "So what?" category for me as I haven't bought in to the media fear of predatory peadophiles lurking everywhere.
 
Leave afganastan and iraq, give a few million pounds to muslim charities....

Hang some western general / MP / what ever for war crimes...

spend a few million on aid to people who in africa, and you save more lives that will be lost in the civil war on afgan / iraq...

that saves billions of pounds, 10's of our troops, 1000's of lives....

and no need to these x-ray scanners...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom