Brickbat: A Thorough Search


A Transportation Security Administration report found an airport pat-down search that exposed the breasts of a 17-year-old girl an "embarrassing" and "unfortunate" accident. The girl was traveling with classmates from a private Christian school when she was searched at Los Angeles International Airport. During the search, her sundress slipped, exposing her breasts to everyone in the terminal.

NEXT: Think Tank: Pentagon Can Sustain Deeper Cuts Without Risk

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Can the TSA just stop screening 17-year-old girls?” MacFarlane asked Roth.

    “See, they can’t. If they did it’d be just as bad,” Roth said. “[Terrorists] have no problem using kids. Anytime you say, ‘This is going to be a group we’re not going to screen,’ that’s what they’re going to look for.”

    17-year-old girls will like totally be into like suicide bombing and like hijackings and stuff. omglol

    And if a congressman’s neice gets wronged by the TSA and nothing else happens, then the agency has achieved complete autonomy.

    1. The mendacity of these assholes is breathtaking. They start off arguing that small children still must be searched because terrorists will use them, without their knowledge, presumably by hiding a bomb in their diaper or something. Then they use the same argument to justify searching teenagers, because they’re exactly the same as toddlers. The slipperiness of their “logic” is remarkable.

    2. Because fuck you, that’s why.

    3. Well, I think that 17 year-olds exist who would do things like that. But this isn’t the way to stop them.

    4. I hope everyone saw the breathtakingly onionesque post on Volokh. This is a followup with links to some reactions. Be sure to read the comments.


  2. I think people should start wearing clothes subtly rigged to create “wardrobe malfunctions” during TSA patdowns.

    1. How about we just make what they are doing very clear?

      “OH BABY, YEAH! A little to the left… Do that part again!”

      1. I do that anyway. I stare them in the eyes the whole time and make suggestive expressions and groan softly when appropriate.

  3. Hmmm, I never thought about it like that before.


    1. Whew! I was concerned that anonybot would repeat its vocabulary malfunction.

      1. He’s slipping. Sentient anonbot would have offered a relevant comment like: “Pics or it Didn’t Happen”.

        1. That was pretty creepy.

  4. Don’t fly.

    1. I wouldn’t, but my job occasionally requires international travel or domestic travel that equates to two-three days’ driving.

      So I’m working on the next best thing–my PPL. I don’t think our expense system allows plane rentals, though. It’s getting to be time to go out and consult on my own.

      1. I’d drive. Even if it meant eating vacation time. I have no patience for power drunk retards, and I know I’d end up in prison if one of those TSA fucks ever touched me.

        1. But you’ve got patience for several unnecessary days in a car?

          1. Driving doesn’t bother me.

            Being assaulted does.

  5. I recently went through the scanner at John Wayne Airport. After holding my hands above my head as instructed, the TSA agent then asked me to raise my left leg. I did so instinctively and then he started to laugh. He was actually having a bit a fun. I was actually amused.

    1. Simon says bark like a dog.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.