Jump to content
LL Medico Diapers and More Bambino Diapers - ABDL Diaper Store

New Airport Scanners


Recommended Posts

I have no problem with wiretapping and waterboarding terrorist who are non-US citizens. FDR wiretapped first and asked questions later. President Bush's wiretaps rendered usefull information and saved lives.

It should be noted that the underwear bomber boarded an aircraft on foriegn soil. Obama's DHS proceedures would not have stopped the underwear bombing event.

DHS under Bush targeted terrorist. President Obama's objective is to ruin private business. That is the difference.

As I have said all along giving the government power is stupid. And if this poster will take a conservative moment to remember; it was your friend Bush who implemented the TSA :o RDB, if you'll run forward as fast as you can you might catch up with my thinking someday ;) I saw all this coming ten years ago. You're not going to like the next ten at all, nor will I. Until the people involve themselves enmasse in running their lives, someone else is going to screw them.

Today is "Don't touch my junk" day Are you ready people? Will you laugh as they can't figure out how to control you without getting the crap beat out of them? Will you smile as you destroy their world and take it back for yourself? If I had the money to pay for a lovely little supreme court lawsuit I'd be flying today ;) I'd be in diapers and they'd be in hot water :lol:

Bettypooh

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Depending on how intelligent the overall view of TSA is at the moment you go through security will depend on if they are thinking that extras equate to legitimacy. History tells us that people who intended "bad" things during air travel didn't take luggage because they weren't coming back. As that became a red flag, the crazies altered their thinking and started to bring suitcases. The terrorists continue to reinvent themselves to skirt realistic thinking.

Extra diapers may work now and not next time. No guarantees.

My wife was made to throw away things like a used lipstick and mascara applicator and some other small cosmetic items because some stupid TSA employee was flexing her "authority arm". It was all totally unnecessay and cost her plenty to replace it all. At that moment, our choices were miss the flight or trash it. We were pretty pissed off but fair warning, IT'S THEIR GAME - NOT YOURS!

I've thought this way too. Ever since 9/11 every time I fly they swipe my prosthetic arms for traces of explosives. But they never check the inside of them. I've always thought about how a terrorist might resort to an amputee bomb someday. Hope it never happens.

Link to comment

I've said this before and have been bashed by someone for my views. Personally, I don't care if anyone screening me notices what I have on under my jeans, weather it be a diaper or regular underwear. I don't care much if a screener sees a scan that shows my privates since they will not even see my face. They have a job to do and after a while, one is no different than another. They are looking for contraband, not to get off by seeing someone's privates. With the long lines and scheduals, does anyone actually think the scanners have time to lust over what they see? I'm sure it's just like any other job and they are waiting for their shift to be over so they can go home. Besides, they have a tough job! They have to scan for explosives or other dangerous things. They have to have training and always keep one thing in the back of their minds; "What if something happens to a plane and I was the one who missed something?" Besides, it may sound callous, but at their age if they haven't seen it by now, it's time they did. That's not to say they don't have to be compasionate when they do their pat downs. They still need to treat people with dignity and respect. My bottom line is I'd rather go through a full body screening and have a TSA person see my privates or a diaper I may be wearing than to board a plane and take a chance that it may be blown up by a terrorist who happened to smuggle something on board in his underpants! Others should feel that way too! My modesty isn't as important as my life!

Link to comment

I have no problem with wiretapping and waterboarding terrorist who are non-US citizens. FDR wiretapped first and asked questions later. President Bush's wiretaps rendered usefull information and saved lives.

It should be noted that the underwear bomber boarded an aircraft on foriegn soil. Obama's DHS proceedures would not have stopped the underwear bombing event.

DHS under Bush targeted terrorist. President Obama's objective is to ruin private business. That is the difference.

Wait ... what? You actually think there's a real difference between how they do/did all this? o.O

Link to comment

My bottom line is I'd rather go through a full body screening and have a TSA person see my privates or a diaper I may be wearing than to board a plane and take a chance that it may be blown up by a terrorist who happened to smuggle something on board in his underpants! Others should feel that way too! My modesty isn't as important as my life!

Here's a bit of irony for you. In your quest to be "safe" from the terrorists you've put your own safety at risk.

Xray machines use radiation. This is not a theory, it's a fact. Radiation is cumulative. This is not a theory, it's a fact. Radiation is harmful to humans. This is not a theory, it's a fact. If you're doubting any of this do some basic research on your own.

This is the basic reason airline pilots through their national union fought with the TSA to exempt pilots from having to go through the xray machines. The argument is that airline pilots would be going through the machines many times a week for years on end. Since the radiation is cumulative and proven to cause cancer among other ailments the pilots were at risk. Since they also were able to make the argument that the machines offered no security benefit since a pilot could just pilot the plane into a building anyway they were exempted. I feel bad for the flight attendants. I wonder what the cancer rate among flight attendants will be in 10 or 15 years.

Honestly, what do you think the government is going to say or do when years down the road people start showing the effects of the radiation poisoning they are being subjected to. The TSA is protecting us from terrorists but what we really need is someone to protect us from the TSA. The chance of radiation from the xray machine = 100%. The chance of my plane being blown up by someones underwear = slim. The line for the xray machine at the airport looks a lot like the chutes for sheep at the stockyard. Just smile and say baaaaaaaaaaa.

Hugs,

Freta

Link to comment

I have no problem with wiretapping and waterboarding terrorist who are non-US citizens. FDR wiretapped first and asked questions later. President Bush's wiretaps rendered usefull information and saved lives.

It should be noted that the underwear bomber boarded an aircraft on foriegn soil. Obama's DHS proceedures would not have stopped the underwear bombing event.

DHS under Bush targeted terrorist. President Obama's objective is to ruin private business. That is the difference.

What happens when an American private business gets control of a product? Have you ever worn Depends before :P

Bush and Obama are no different (well, one's Daddy bought his way through college and the other was on Harvard Law Review board, but let's not split hairs).

  • Like 1
Link to comment

What happens when an American private business gets control of a product? Have you ever worn Depends before :P

Bush and Obama are no different (well, one's Daddy bought his way through college and the other was on Harvard Law Review board, but let's not split hairs).

Shhh ... the sheep don't need to know that their "fearless leaders" are all the same. :P I bet if you go through every single policy ever passed you'd see that all the politicians pass the same things just with different wording, I know it's been so the last 16 years at least. But again, the sheep don't want to know that the people they entrusted with their lives are really the same, it shatters the illusion of choice we have in this country. The truly sad part is that Obama and Bush are absolutely perfect examples of how the same policies can get passed with different wording and people will think that they are completely different policies. LOL

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Even with a medical card stating everything the TSA has to be smart enough to know the rights of disabled persons. As I still have not met a "smart" TSA person in an American airport, I rest my case. I refuse to fly unless it is a family emergency.

Link to comment

i just went thru the system this weekend, not all airports have the xray machines yet, in my case i beep because of joint replacements, so i have to have the enhanced pat down, which means they actually run their hands in your pants and around your underwear waist bad, since i didnt wear anything before the pat down i can only say that i feel if they did feel a diaper they might make you go in a secure secluded are for further investigation. they also test the gloves they are waering for chemical residue, ie explosives or gun powder. they definitely would detect a diaper in my opinion, wet or dry

Link to comment
  • 7 years later...

the back scanner will not pick up a dry diaper, if you have a small wet spot it will pick it up as a density chance and flag secondary pat down in the suspected area..

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I've never had a problem with the nude-o-vision but I have precheck which means I usually go through the wtmd.

I do make sure the diaper is clean and dry before I go through security.

I've gotten the random selection a couple of times and got patted down, no issues.

Link to comment

I have PreCheck as well, but for prosthetic reasons I must use the scanner. I can tell you that from summer to winter they change the calibration because my suit jacket never shows up in winter time, but will in summer months. Wet or dry doesn't seem to matter, but I am never soaked when I go through.

Link to comment
16 hours ago, Bengie said:

the back scanner will not pick up a dry diaper, if you have a small wet spot it will pick it up as a density chance and flag secondary pat down in the suspected area..

Oh yes it does and that's from a personal experience. It also picked up my all-elastic knee brace :whistling: Not really a problem though, it just got me a pat-down. It seems they were surprised by me wearing even though I had an extra Molicare visible in my open laptop bag right there in front of their eyes (and everyone else's eyes too) <_< With people like that doing the screening it's not doing much for security but I guess it helps the unemployment rates for those with lower IQ's :lol:

Bettypooh

Link to comment

When I went through the airport scanners this year on my way to and from the states I thought the security staff fairly discreet. At one airport they patted me down and looked in my bag but said nothing and didn't draw attention to others that I was wearing a nappy and had others in my bag. I was at least somewhat damp too 

Link to comment
17 hours ago, Bettypooh said:

Oh yes it does and that's from a personal experience. It also picked up my all-elastic knee brace :whistling: Not really a problem though, it just got me a pat-down. It seems they were surprised by me wearing even though I had an extra Molicare visible in my open laptop bag right there in front of their eyes (and everyone else's eyes too) <_< With people like that doing the screening it's not doing much for security but I guess it helps the unemployment rates for those with lower IQ's :lol:

Bettypooh

I can tell you form someone that fly's 3 to 4 times a week. I have been thru them hundreds of times with no pat down and i looked back at my image and nothing jumped out as a diaper. One time i had a small accident.. im mean 2 shotglass worth and it picked up the density change and i got a secondary check. I looked back and it was exactly where the wetspot was.. It looks for a density change. same with a knee brace It shows a deviation.

 

Link to comment

Which diaper you're wearing also plays a part. Something thin may not show up as an anomaly. Plus the machine's sensitivity settings are adjustable and not every one will be set to the same standards.

It's still a moot point though- the worst that will happen is your getting extra screening before you're allowed to board the plane and that happens randomly too so it's no more of a problem than you make of it.

Bettypooh

Link to comment
  • 2 years later...

I travel a lot and am always pulled aside for the manual pat-down. I always tell the officer I am wearing a diaper. I always travel with a diaper bag so there have been times when I've opened it up to "prove" what I just told them. It's never been a problem for me other than a few extra minutes going through security. There is no reason anyone should have to disclose a personal issue such as this - unless he or she wants to, of course - but I find it's better to do it this way and not miss my flight. I'm in the airport at least once a week so I am used to it already.

Link to comment

I have worn diapers through airport security for years and there most definitely has been a change in how TSA officers react to my padding.  I believe, courtesy of social media, that they have been forced to undergo what I like to think of as diaper sensitivity training.

As far as the machines, when I am in Europe the backscatter machines most definitely flag a diaper everytime.  The machines in America do not unless you are in a heavily saturated diaper or an EXCESSIVELY thick diaper.  

I have read so many posts about airport security and what one should and should not do as far as wearing diapers but honestly it most definitely is not that big of deal anymore.

Link to comment

So, as it was explained to me, any moisture of any kind shows up in green on the scanner's monitor. Green means the person is flagged for a further check. This is also why they always ask me to take off my shoes for a check (very sweaty feet). The last few times I've passed through the scanner and then the manual check, the agents are more interested in the backside of the diaper than the front (no idea why) and use that swabbing device contraption a lot on the back of the diaper, even going inside to swab around the top of the diaper. They always tell me they are going to do this. I always say it's fine. Of course, nothing ever happens after this because it's just a diaper... but rules are rules, I know. No agent has ever made a comment about my diaper but I do hear "Wash your feet, son" from time to time. ;) Anyway, just sharing...

Link to comment
On 2/14/2020 at 4:36 AM, J-P said:

So, as it was explained to me, any moisture of any kind shows up in green on the scanner's monitor. Green means the person is flagged for a further check. This is also why they always ask me to take off my shoes for a check (very sweaty feet). The last few times I've passed through the scanner and then the manual check, the agents are more interested in the backside of the diaper than the front (no idea why) and use that swabbing device contraption a lot on the back of the diaper, even going inside to swab around the top of the diaper. They always tell me they are going to do this. I always say it's fine. Of course, nothing ever happens after this because it's just a diaper... but rules are rules, I know. No agent has ever made a comment about my diaper but I do hear "Wash your feet, son" from time to time. ;) Anyway, just sharing...

Are you talking about back scatter machines in Europe?  I know with the body scanners in America this is most definitely is not the case.  

Link to comment

I used to travel in China in 2014 and never had an issue. Just pad analysis for explosive research (it's what the agent told me when I asked what is it for...) after I walked through the portal.

Even in Shanghai, each subway stations have scanner for backpacks and they never have asked me. Although my backpack and suitcase were full of diapers. And you know it takes all the space available.

Same for few other air port in Europe. Still it's better to travel without to disclose diaper pack in front of other people.

Anyway what if this would happen? To me I think the more embarrassing would be for people I travel with like co-workers or manager because they will get know us my medical condition it would change the way they perceive me. That the way I see things, maybe I'm overthinking.

Link to comment

Much ado about nothing. In the last 10 years, this hasn't been an issue and I've flown a lot. The "brief" idea wasn't very workable. I just wear a normal disposable. Never had an extensive pat down. Only had my carry-on searched once. No big deal with the stack of adult diapers. I usually  change to a fresh diaper just before boarding. This gives me 8-12 hours in case we sit on the tarmac.

Going thru the scanners with a wet, even saturated diaper, doesn't cause any red flags.

Link to comment
On 2/17/2020 at 2:39 AM, CuckoldedBabyGirl said:

Are you talking about back scatter machines in Europe?  I know with the body scanners in America this is most definitely is not the case.  

I'm almost positive European and Middle Eastern scanners detect moisture.   I've travelled to Europe a couple of times and never had an issue with a pull up.   Especially if it was mostly dry.   I can't remember what I did when I traveled to Norway back in 2017, but I cleared security at Gatwick, Bergen, and Oslo.  Mostly it was an issue with putting my liquids in a bag, which I never do here.

This summer I went through security at CDG, OSL, and DOH.  I was in transit in Paris, and my diaper was damp.  Not ready for change, but definitely damp.   I was flagged, but scanned by an older lady who probably knew I had a diaper on.   I think she scanned with the metal detector, because I can't imagine a female attendant frisking a male passenger.  To be honest- it was so brief I barely remember the specifics.      I went through Oslo with a dry pull up, and no flag, but it was wet prior to going through the transit security in Doha, and got flagged.   If I did it over again I would change out of the wet diaper in one of the bathrooms between the plan and the main departure level.   I was searched privately and given a very thorough search, but they realized it was an Abena diaper and let me on my way.   

My typical MO is use a Pull Up while getting to the airport, and then once through security I find a stall and put on the full diaper- using the pull up as a cover.  

Link to comment

I can tell you without a doubt the machines that detect my diapers the least are in America which is strange considering the evolution of airport security after Septemeber 11th.  Yesterday I went through airport security with a wet Little For Big Cuties diaper with a booster pad.  This obviously made it extremely thick and I cleared security okay.  I have proven over and over again that unless your diaper is heavily saturated, ie you wet in it all night, the scanners in America will not flag your diaper.  For those that worry about wearing diapers through scanners in America you are doing so for no reason in my opinion.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...