Before making a “substantive change” to regulations affecting the public, the TSA, like all government agencies, is required to engage in “notice and comment rulemaking.” The basic idea is that before a rule gets made, the agency should publish the proposed change and their reasons for proposing it and allow the public to provide feedback. The agency then reviews the feedback, responds to it, and decides whether or not to proceed with the proposed rule.
The TSA failed to do this before implementing the rule establishing the body scanners as primary screening in 2010, but was ordered to do so post hoc by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and did so in 2013. Over 5,500 people took the opportunity to tell the TSA how they felt.
While a quick look made it clear that the overwhelming majority was opposed to the scanners, there was no way to get a count of exactly how many were in favor and how many were opposed. So, I personally reviewed the 5,578 comments sent in and found as follows:
|Opposed to the Rule:
|In Favor of the Rule (Implants):
|In Favor of the Rule (Other):
When all was counted and the comments that took no stance were removed, 5,129 people (94.0%) asked the TSA to discontinue its program of scanning and molesting the public, while 329 (6.0%) were in favor of continuing. It should also be noted that of the 329 in favor, 115 specifically mentioned that they were in favor because they or a family member has a metal implant in their body (such as a hip replacement, or a pacemaker) that could not pass through a metal detector and that they liked the body scanners simply because they were tired of being patted down by blue-gloved security personnel.
Of those opposed to scanning, the following were the most common reasons given (percentages approximate): invasion of privacy (~34%), violation of rights/unconstitutional (~31%), health risks (~23%), ineffectiveness for security (~12%), cost/benefit analysis (~11%), concern for effects on children (~5%), and a distinct group that requested the TSA to be completely disbanded, defunded, and/or privatized (~2%).
Of those in favor of scanning, the following were the most common reasons given (percentages approximate): artificial implant (~35%), feel safer (~29%), efficient (~7%), effective (~6%), “not a big deal” (~2%), too many “whiners”/”cry babies” (~2%). Many did not give a distinct reason, simply saying they support whatever is chosen or necessary. A large percentage also qualified their support on one or more conditions (“if it’s effective…,” “if it’s safe…”).
So, TSA, the public has spoken, and the consensus is clear: body scanners should not be used as primary screening, and if they are to serve any purpose, that purpose should be completely optional screening for those who cannot go through a metal detector and would prefer it to a pat-down.
For complete transparency, I’ve created and hereby publish a full report, indicating which comments were counted as for/against and discussing the methodology, which can be downloaded here:
TSA AIT Comment Index (.pdf)
To view any of the comments, take the following URL:
…and replace the XXXX at the end with the 4 digit comment number from the index.
Fighting the TSA in court is expensive! Want to contribute to the fight against TSA assholery? Donate via PayPal, Venmo, Chace QuickPay, Bitcoin, or check