Bill,
You hit upon the right solution. Dogs have been trained to sniff out drugs, dead bodies, and bombs. They could be used instead of the sexual assaults that the TSA has implemented and in fact would eliminate the need for the new x-ray-ted scanners. We could continue to use the metal detectors and then pass the 'sniff' testing dogs to make sure there are no explosives on our persons.

Who would/could possibly object to this solution, why the makers of the new x-ray-ted scanners is who. Funny how they made the alternative to posing nude so much more unappealing, makes the public's acceptance of posing nude with your clothes on the preferred choice. So who is making those new scanners? And more importantly, who at Homeland Security is a stockholder?

Deming Seminar - Cincinnati - 1991
Dr. Deming was related to us the scenario where border agents could discover x tons of contraband per man, while dogs could discover 100x tons per dog. The border agents cost $80,000 per year each, while the dogs cost about $10,000 per year. Then Dr. Deming said, "The answer is simple and obvious! HIRE MORE DOGS!" The place erupted with laughter.

Bill, I agree with the idea about dogs. In fact, I saw a TV documentary about dogs being trained to do just that. But instead of dogs, the TSA decided this invasive scanner coupled with "feel ups" was the best solution. There may be some other issues with the dogs, like maybe they need to be trained and fed. But I would guess the scanners have some issues too, like cost, for example.

What surprised me most about your article, however, was the end. I was expecting some really tantalizing quality solution in which statistical analysis of terrorist probabilities and other such data would be used to show the need for some alternative to this inane attempt to thwart terrorism. Your ending was a real let-down. After all, you started by telling us all about the reasons why these invasive techniques were a real problem for a lot of people. And the fact that 80% of the people say it's OK still doesn't justify it. I guess you could say that we are a democracy, but I must have missed that election.

On the other hand, isn't there a constitutional right we all have to protection from unjustified search? Isn't this one of the values that we have in America? Are we all now to be guilty until proven innocent? The whole thing is insane, and I firmly believe that less invasive approaches such as the dogs, should be the first approach the government should look at, not the last. I'm sure some entrepeneurs with a body scanner got in there first. But this is not trivia. I hope this goes to the supreme court because it is truly "guilty until proven innocent" and "unjustified search and siezure". We are not a nation of criminals and it's about time the government stopped treating us as such.
- Mike Harkins

Archie the Gopher - - Serving Education Delivering Quality

Hey, the "learning opportunity" for persons preparing for challenges at the airport looks pretty good! Include munchies and a cool one and you'll have a winner! As an old guy my need to travel has been reduced. My running here & running there is no longer needed to earn a living. I receive Social Security! I've got it made!

Seriously, the problems of poor service, faulty procedures, challenges getting to an airport and finding parking, buying a fair priced ticket, getting accommodations on the aircraft, being able to take along clean socks plus other needed items, and more have resulted in my avoiding commercial air travel. The current TSA procedures definitely need to further improve to meet customer needs.

But, I'm ready to enroll in the training sesion. Remember, munchies and a cool one is expected.

+++ Archie - - The Senior Citizen Semi-Retired Educator +++

Of course we all want to be safe flying. But is the groping really the best solution? How about profiling (gasp) passengers? I think we all know that the terrorists have a few things in common that could be used to identify and target the high-risk travelers. This would be more efficient and more focused on the problem at hand.

If we decided to get really serious about drunk driving, would we pull over every car on the road and subject each and every driver to field sobriety tests and breathalyzers? Of course not. Law officers profile cars and behaviors to narrow their focus on the likely offenders. I realize that bombing/hi-jacking planes is quite a bit different, but do the methods need to be that draconian and across the board? I can put up with the groping but I do not want my wife, mother, or children to be subjected to this.

While I love the proposed solution and completely agree with its premise on "neophyte travelers", I have several points of dispute with this article. I realize you wrote this mostly in fun, but I am QUITE tired of hearing about the atrocities of the TSA, who I consider one of the top security agencies in our country. Think of the demands of millions of people put on this force on a daily basis, especially in some of the busier airports in the US, which are also the busiest in the world.
I would be classified as one of your "veteran travelers", traveling for work at least once a month; this year I'm currently up to 16 trips since January. I travel in mostly major airports, Intercontinental in Houston and Orlando International to name a couple. The larger airports being where the most changes to security were supposed to take place. I traveled at the end of October (Oct 25th) and at the beginning of November (Nov 3rd -6th), across when the changes were to take effect Nov. 1st. The difference? Absolutely nothing. Same procedure. No pat downs; I haven't had a pat down in 2 years. I did go through the dreaded full body scanner in Indianapolis' airport. I wasn't thrilled with the idea as I've been reading about the increased radiation exposure, which is what pilots are really complaining about, not the "increased security" they might be subjected to. With the scanners, pilots could be subjected to this radiation several times a day. I did not however have to go through both a metal detector and a scanner AND have a pat down. People and the media are GREATLY exaggerating in these cases.
What this tells me? You're exactly right that new travelers are having the largest problems, and apparently have the biggest mouths, and most importantly that TSA was already doing its job. Most of these procedures have been in place for 9 years now. If you haven't gotten the notice maybe you should just stay home or read some of the thousands of hits on Google when you search "Getting through airport security". The body scanners were proposed immediately after 9/11 and are just now in trial phases in some airports. Most of the airports I travel to do not even have these scanners yet. Sorry to unload on this column, but I'm pretty sick and tired of hearing all the incorrect information out there and not being able to correct any of it. Thanks for listening and keep writing!

Greetings to all from Lake Orion, Michigan where as the signs at all the entrances read: "Where living is a vacation".
I want to thank everyone who wrote, who e-mailed, who called, or who saw me in person and discussed my column about airport security. The response has been overwhelming. The column also ran in a couple of local papers here in Michigan and it was interesting hearing from everyone. Some thought the increased security was tolerable and appropriate while others thought it violated our rights. Others thought that profiling should be increased. It was obvious that I hit a nerve with many. Hopefully, all accepted the column for the humor it was intended to generate - and most did. I will be serving refreshments during the complimentary pat-downs at our home! You might be interested in knowing that I practiced my cavity search process on a Thanksgiving turkey and discovered some secret State Department documents from Wikileaks! Go figure! Hope all of you had a marvelous Holiday!
Bill Kalmar
Lake Orion MI