More

POLL: Public Says OK To TSA Scans, Divided On Pat-Downs


First Posted: 11/23/10 02:22 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:15 PM ET

A new poll released on Wednesday shows that most adults in the U.S. support the TSA's new electronic screening procedures, but a slight majority thinks the alternative pat-down procedures go too far.

The ABC News and Washington Post poll found that 64% supported the use of body-scanning machines while 32% were opposed. However, 50% of respondents said that the hand searches for those who do not want to be searched electronically or those selected for additional screening go too far in invading personal privacy, whereas 48% said that they were justified to prevent terrorism. That number is well within the poll's 5% margin of error.

The new poll was conducted Nov. 21 among 514 adults.

The poll is the first to ask a national sample about the new procedures since they were widely implemented and criticized, but an earlier CBS News poll just after TSA began using the new procedures in some airports found that 81% of respondents said that the agency should use the machines and 15% said they should not.

While it's tempting to assume that the different results reflect waning support for the procedures as the public comes to better understand their implementation, different wording in the questions asked makes it impossible to directly compare the results of the two polls. Whereas the ABC/Post poll explained arguments for and against the new measures ("Supporters say these machines improve the ability to spot hidden weapons and explosives, and reduce the need for physical searches" vs. "Opponents say these machines invade privacy by producing x-ray images of a passenger's naked body that security officials can see, and don't provide enough added security to justify this"), the CBS News poll simply stated that digital X-ray machines were now being used by some airports and asked whether they should or should not be used.

The new ABC/Post poll found that those who fly at least once a year are less likely to support either the use of electronic scanners (by 12 percentage points) or the pat-downs (by 8 percentage points). Overall, 47% of respondents said that they fly at least once a year.

The poll also found broad support for using profiling to select passengers for additional screening -- 70% said they supported using profiling and 25% said they were opposed -- but profiling based on some characteristics received more support than others. About 86% in the poll supported profiling based on personal behavior, and 78% supported profiling based on travel history. Respondents supported profiling by nationality by a 55% to 43% margin, and by personal appearance by an even narrower 50% to 48% margin. More respondents opposed than supported using profiling based on sex, race or religion.

Thirty percent of respondents to the poll said that they personally felt either very or somewhat worried about plane travel because of the threat of terrorism, while 66% said they were not worried. Since ABC News and The Washington Post polls started asking that question just after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, this is the lowest percent who have said they are worried about that threat. However, 68% of those surveyed said that it is important to investigate threats even if it resulted in invading privacy, while 26% said that it is more important to avoid intruding on personal privacy.

Clarification: The ABC News/Washington Post poll was produced by Langer Research Associates.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
A new poll released on Wednesday shows that most adults in the U.S. support the TSA's new electronic screening procedures, but a slight majority thinks the alternative pat-down procedures go too far. ...
A new poll released on Wednesday shows that most adults in the U.S. support the TSA's new electronic screening procedures, but a slight majority thinks the alternative pat-down procedures go too far. ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 123
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:17 AM on 11/25/2010
Just say “I Opt Outâ€

Health Risks

Backscatter X-ray uses ionizing radation, a known cumulative health hazard, to produce images of passengers bodies. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with defective DNA repair mechanisms are considered to be especially susceptible to the type of DNA damage caused by ionizing radiation. Also at high risk are those who have had, or currently have, skin cancer. Ionizing radiation's effects are cumulative, meaning that each time you are exposed you are adding to your risk of developing cancer.

Web site with info and printable pamphlets

http://dontscan.us/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeinNH
Ooooo Silly Me
09:38 AM on 11/24/2010
Michael Chertoff is laughing all the way to the bank and the Taliban is laughing their asses off.
steveinohio
A small businessman in Ohio doing the best he can
12:03 AM on 11/24/2010
Tell the public anything about the scanners and watch the numbers change.
10:03 PM on 11/23/2010
Actually, Zogby released a poll today that states 61% of the public opposes the SCANNER. Period! Janet Napolitano wants to fullfill Obama's wish for a national police force and expand the TSA forces to ships,subways and metros. The 60,000 TSA agents we have now aren't enough. Of course it was also announced congressmen and those with official govt. papers will be exempt from these security matters. They can sail right through. I wonder if that includes foreign diplomats too.
10:02 PM on 11/23/2010
Almost any poll at this juncture is probably misled at the height of the issue with a lot of media constantly using salacious verbiage to describe a pat-down. Some of the rants I see and hear almost convince me that a number of people need a therapist over seeded personal issues - but largely it's just that we love to be angry these days.
Maybe a poll in the lull between the holidays and distant from the iPhone internet sensation would be better.
Personally, I have no problem giving up a minute of indignity for an extra sense of security at 30,000 feet. I can recall times shortly after 9-11 where a group in Islamic garb would make me nervous as heck for a whole flight (understanding but not overly proud of my nature back then to 'profile'). To me, it's not a government thing but about my own passenger experience, and if the process really is a placebo as some may call it - hey, placebo cures roughly 20% of everything.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elkhawk
Alternate your future
09:07 PM on 11/23/2010
I don't fly and probably will have no need to fly for some time, but I am against both. I don't want images of myself accessible to the public on the internet and I DEFINITELY don't want anyone groping and fondling my body. Pollsters should really poll more than 10-15 people that have landlines. This poll does not seem accurate to me.
06:16 PM on 11/23/2010
Your talking head Chris Matthews and Ed "nobody watches my show" Shultz are all for these invasive measures.
06:13 PM on 11/23/2010
This is so funny. Liberals contradict themselves all of the time. When Bush was in office and the Patriot Act came out...liberals were up in arms about their rights being infringed upon in the name of "phony terror scares."

Now the liberals fully support being raditated, having a nude picture taken of you or having your gentials groped.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Aerows
09:00 PM on 11/23/2010
This liberal doesn't.
06:11 PM on 11/23/2010
Hello ACLU. With all this insane post. Would you PLEASE inform these people. Before their lives get ruined. If you slap, hit ,spit( yes if you spit it is a assault) a TSO,TSA you are going to be arrested, You will get a pat down from the police that makes TSA look like a hand shake. Read your rights You will as you are screaming they this they that. Be taken out of the airport. Put in a squad car. Taken to the central booking. All your demands about pressing charges will go in one ear out the other. At central booking you will given your call. You will be Photographed Finger Printed and Stripped searched.
BOND( cash property) ROR. This Bonds can be set by Booking. BUT BUT if you are charged with Battery on LEO or worse Aggravated Assault YOU will not get a bond until you go before a judge He or she is not going to be listening to you eithier. They will just tell you take it up with the D.A
So just keep this as comment hype If not. Sitting in booking is not what you want for your holiday
06:23 PM on 11/23/2010
I can't believe I read through your entire post, but in the future, please do us all a favor and never write another post again....because you kind of SUCK at it!
06:26 PM on 11/23/2010
like what
10:10 PM on 11/23/2010
That was mean... albeit somewhat appropriate and funny. That said, there was a point made [don't mess with authorities], just not all that articulate (whew, hard to type when laughing).
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:59 PM on 11/23/2010
I never bought the conspiracy theory of 9/11 because I couldn't believe that the Bush Administration could proactively participate in the destruction of the Twin Towers and the loss of over 3000 lives.
Having said that, I am now convinced, based upon the evidence, that certain individuals within the Obama Administration were completely aware about the malicious intentions of the Christmas Bomber, as warned by his father, and carefully controlled the situation - I'd like more information about the "individuals" who brought him down and what happened inside the plane when he attempted to light the explosives - so that these individuals could manipulate this incident for a nefarious purpose.
Take one incompetent, maladjusted, narcissistic idealist. Allow him to think that he is in control of his intended path of destruction. Let the drama play out in a controlled environment, with no serious injuries. Use the event as proof that a high level of security threat continues to exist, while beating the drum that more intrusive security measures are necessary to protect the public. Manipulate your position inside the government, your legal knowledge, and unfettered access to security information; find several billionaire partners, and, then, invest in new technology to make a financial killing, while collecting and storing, illegally and indefinitely for future use, biometrical identifying evidence without probable cause and without the individual's consent. Lie about collection and retention methods. Store, sell, and trade individual's biometric identifiers on an "as needs" basis. Target will never know.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeinNH
Ooooo Silly Me
09:41 AM on 11/24/2010
As Chertoff is all over the news today......F&F
05:48 PM on 11/23/2010
Your public is stupid.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
E Pluribus Unum 2010
05:24 PM on 11/23/2010
Follow your own instincts people. When the libertarians and the left agree on an idea, you know its hit a national nerve. Stand your ground America.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Benjamin Franklin

http://www.optoutday.com/
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Aerows
09:01 PM on 11/23/2010
Agreed.
05:22 PM on 11/23/2010
The Security Industrial Complex has won the race. They succeeded in spreading o much fear that people are scared so much that they will pay any price for the suggestion that TSA and its alikes sell safety. Forget it, it bring insecurity because it is stimulating terrorists to find creative targets. It even invites ideots to test the system. 100% Security does not exist, no where, wait and see. In the mean time you are running in 1984 ......
05:23 PM on 11/23/2010
Terrorist have now need to expend racecourses when we are doing exactly what they want..
05:17 PM on 11/23/2010
After a bit of worried bleating, the Sheepie are now ready to be patted down.
05:25 PM on 11/23/2010
That make you feel better? You know it takes respect and confidence to lead not contempt and disdain..try having some compassion for people and you might be more effective in influencing peoples thoughts.
05:28 PM on 11/23/2010
Sorry..Might of over reacted a bit. I just hate people being called sheep..People are social and share certain characteristics with other social animals..But their still people. Plus I really love Lamb and Hearing that makes me feel a bit like a cannibal.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MossyOak
05:13 PM on 11/23/2010
Well that makes my day. I'm so glad that a poll of 514 people is able to simply do away with the Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights. To all of you who live in fear of terrorism, you have already lost; you cannot fly in your own country without being treated like a suspect. You think that having an option between a body search and a dose of radiation, no matter how big or small, is perfectly fine so long as you can get on a plane secure in your little bubble world that it won't fall out of the sky, even though it can do that all on its own without the aide of a terrorist. How will you guard against pilot error? Bad weather? You have abdicated your rights for an illusion. Well done.
09:25 PM on 11/23/2010
Pat-downs are routine at some sporting events and concerts because, like commercial passenger flights, the ticket bears an agreement to waive that protection for common safety (also, the interpretation of the word 'unreasonable' in the 4th could be litigated to infinity).
As a student pilot myself, you guard by understanding previous failures (NTSB accident dockets for example). You understand weather situations as best you can and have the best technology available to you. Overall, you limit your odds as best you can that something goes wrong - and that would include any in-flight passenger disturbance. Something CAN always go wrong, but that small chance shouldn't dismiss the effort to minimize it.
As for illusion, the guy who started this - John "Junk" Tyner on his own blog (DEC 2009 entry at johnnyedge.blogspot.com) outing the US as [military] terrorists and giving the Christmas Bomber some 'perspective':
"This spread of democracy looks a lot like terrorism, doesn't it? It should also put terrorist actions like trying to bomb a plane in a little better perspective."
While dissent can be patriotic, he's a tad overbearing and doesn't speak for me when it comes to my own safety.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MossyOak
09:50 PM on 11/23/2010
John Junk Tyner doesn't speak for me either. He's speaking for himself, although I admire anyone who stands up for their rights. But I prefer facts when making a decision, and here are some...

http://planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm

You'll note over 50% of all airline crashes were caused by pilot error. This is not a vendetta against pilots by any means, I merely point out that flying is not safe, never has been. Whatever slight statistical advantage one might gain by being unreasonably searched does not outweigh, IMO, abdicating one's rights, and the fear that everyone seems to feel is misplaced. In this case, dissent is very patriotic. It appears a Bill of Rights refresher course is also in order for most Americans. Wiki has a very lengthy explanation of the myriad of legal cases regarding the Fourth Amendment. It's a hard won freedom that most seem perfectly happy to dispense with... "but don't you dare mess with our God-given right to own guns!"
10:09 PM on 11/23/2010
The odds are greater you will be hit by lightning than be involved in a terrorist situation. .How many people in the USA have died in the past year due to terrorism? Maybe you shouldn't walk from your bed to the bathroom because you have a greater chance of dying that way than in a bomb explosion or hijacking. . Excuse me ,but I don't want my taxes to be used by my govt. to shove me around..