1. 19
  1.  

  2. 12

    They’ve acclimatized people to the idea/technology, and now they’re closing the door on the long tail of refusers. As a person who flies several times/year and has never been through a scanner, I have only once stood in line with a fellow opt-outer, and not recently. Widespread opposition to scanning has just not materialized, so it’s going to become a part of the routine.

    1. 14

      Yeah, it’s as you say. That has always been the clear intent with these “security” measures - get people used to them gradually.

      This particular step wouldn’t be news really, but … as a trans person, this one is particularly distressing. Figuring out why is left as an exercise to the reader.

      1. 2

        Actually I’m quite confused why this is trouble for trans. When you opt out, they have to pick a man or woman to do the patdown. When you go through the scanner, they don’t ask about gender. The scanner in my experience is much closer to anonymous and impersonal.

        1. 1

          Excuse me, but what is a trans person?

          1. 3
            1. 1

              Someone who identifies as belonging to a gender different from their biological sex or just has a plainly ambiguous biological sex (this is actually far more common than people realise) and had to pick one of the two options.

          2. 1

            I joined the TSA-Pre program and have no issues whatsoever. Sure I have to pay an extra fee every year, but it beats going through the lines and being thoroughly inspected for no reason.

            1. 10

              I have TSA-Pre as well (via Global Entry), but I’ll be damned if “having more disposable income” resolves to “having more civil liberties.”

              1. 7

                I find the existence of TSA Pre terrible, in the same way as these body scanner changes: it slowly becomes normal for society to give up more information and money to the government to achieve a short term goal of “shorter lines”.

                I’ll happily wait in longer line.

                1. 4

                  But that’s basically what it is, right? It’s a real shame that it’s come to this. My older folks tell me of the days when you could walk into the airport without having a single person check your luggage. Times sure have changed.

                  1. 2

                    Growing up, and even while I was in college, one could enter an airport and go anywhere they wanted (more or less). The worst you would be subjected to was a brief pass through a metal detector.

                    I love flying, but absolutely loathe airports now.

                  2. 1

                    It appears that the fee is only 85 USD, which is good for 5 years, e.g., comes to about 1.42 USD per month, which seems like rather small change, even if all your air travel is free otherwise. They even accept anything from credit cards to money orders.

                    However, what doesn’t make that much sense is that basically almost everyone’s eligible! The list of Interim Disqualifying Criminal Offences is quite amusing, to say the least. It sounds like they might as well do “random” security checks on the spot to start with, instead of making everyone go through the lines in the first place, and accomplish just about the same (or even a better one!) level of security.

              2. 3

                I opt out when I fly, mostly because an injury has left it painful for me to left my arm for more than a few seconds. I wonder how much resistance they’ll put up now.

                1. 2
                  1. 2

                    I find this one of the least problematic privacy intrusions of the whole security theater apparatus, but it still galls me to submit to it when I fly. At least my home airport is YYZ now, so I only have to put up with it on half as many of my flights to the US as when I lived in San Francisco.