Monday, July 19, 2010

Bogs Exposed, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the TSA

By “Pintface” Pete Bogs/BogsBlog

I recently had my first experience with full-body scanners, the new airport security machines that enable TSA personnel to view any dangerous items you might be trying to sneak aboard an aircraft beneath your clothes – as well as mastectomy scars, false limbs, breast implants, nipple/clit/penis piercings, the size of your junk, etc.

The full-body scanner process is simple and painless, but takes slightly longer than a metal detector, because you have to stand inside the scanner, and the results are not instant (unlike the metal detector’s beep). After being scanned, you have to wait a moment before putting your shoes back on and collecting your personal effects off the floor because they were inevitably scattered by a high-velocity collision with other trays at end of the conveyor belt.

There’s a pat-down option for those who object to going through the scanners – arguably a more intrusive security method, performed by a person of the same gender as the traveler (clearly a policy lobbied for by the radical homosexual agenda) – but I didn’t notice anyone get out of the scanner line.

I don’t have an issue with the scanners; in fact, I think it might be a hoot to be scanned while sporting a serious erection (which poses little security risk to any aircraft, apart from a dirigible). Besides, these scanners allow for greater equality – by making everyone look bald. Welcome to my world, bitches!

Above: A couple of freaky bald-headed terrorists


Jack K. said...

Maryann prefers the scanner. It is much easier than the wand and touch technique. With two replaced hip joints and an underwire bra it is much less intrusive.

I haven't been given the option yet, but will undoubtedly comply. Who knows, I might get a rush out of it. snerx.

Pete Bogs said...

Jack - I didn't mind it at all, and I didn't notice any complaints from anyone else. For those who are too modest for both the scanner and the pat-down, might I suggest Amtrak?

As much as I am against government intrusiveness (illegal wiretaps, suspension of habeas corpus, etc.), I think this is a sensible security measure that has basically been forced by a handful of crafty terrorists. Too bad these things can't also scan shoes and liquids at the same time; 3 ozs of hair gel just ain't enough for me!!! Plus, my religion doesn't allow me to take off my shoes in front of other people.

Pete Bogs said...

This 12-year-old girl didn't understand what the scanner did, nor that she had another option. Her parents are not happy, and I think that's reasonable:

Girl, 12, scanned at Tampa Airport

boneman said...

well, most folks probably know where i stand on body scanners.
And if not, let me just preface it with Passenger airlines use the most fuel of any transportation device.
I think, one gallon per second per kilometer? (a form of kerosene)

Stop flying.
Trains or buses are good.

Now, of course, the scanners will be used there, too.
In that case, get over it..

(just another advert for the regressive party.)


Pete Bogs said...

boney - I think they are ok, and find it ironic that the group of people who are responsible for them being put into airports in the first place are too "modest" to be subjected to them. Like I said, Amtrak, Greyhound, Queen Mary II, etc. are available.

I doubt there will be scanners at railway stations anytime soon, since the NRA has seen to it that people can take guns on trains.

boneman said...

and, with that bit of news...that'll be the end of future train travel for me.

Reckon it's about time to fetch the horse to the wagon....


Pete Bogs said...

I prefer this new "horseless carriage" I heard tell about.