[timepilot]

"It's not a goal to try to prevent someone from doing this again. That's simply not possible. The goal is to make its success as unlikely as possible without causing too great a burden." - agreed

"Groping and virtual strip searches go too far in my opinion." - Understood. Personally, I'm ok with the virtual strip search. If the physical search is a "professionally executed" pat down, I'm also ok with it. My wife and I fly multiple times/month and so far this has been our experience. If the search turned into "groping", I would have a different view.

"Zero people have died in the U.S. from terrorism on airplanes since 9/11. It's extremely unlikely that a terrorist will blow up a plane with the security measures that were in place 1 year ago." - We just had a few close calls. The terrorists appear to be adapting.

"The next place to hide explosives are vaginas and anal regions. Do you think those should be probed as well? If a terrorist blows himself up at a TSA checkpoint should we have a checkpoint in order to get to the checkpoint?" - This is indeed the rub. Where do you "draw the line?" - is always the issue when discussing giving up/forcing people to give up personal liberties for the good of others. Nevertheless, we do it all the time. For me the scanners/searches have not crossed the line. For you, they have.

[OpieCunningham]

So your line is slightly beyond the current TSA policy. What happens to your line when a terrorist successfully destroys a plane full of people with a anal cavity bomb? Do you and your wife submit to cavity searches or, as you stated, your "personal privacy > the lives of the unfortunate passengers aboard the plane that explodes when the terrorists are successful. No?".