Yeah, when I was flying out of MSP and they had to double-check my camera bag (I have a high-end dSLR with accessories, not your typical point and shoot). The guy was very polite, conversational, etc. On my way home from ATL, they seemed pretty decent as well, but I didn't have any secondary screening or contact. Then again, they were conversing nicely with an old lady next to me.

Now, that said, this really creeps me out and, well, pisses me off. When it was first introduced, it was supposed to be an alternative to a pat-down during secondary screening. Now, they're using it to replace the metal detector, so if you're flying it's either that or a MANDATORY patdown. Really? Is it really needed? There gets to be a point where we're safe enough, I think, and we don't need *that* much of a privacy invasion in exchange for slightly more security. They say that passenger response has been positive, and that 97% (or whatever it is) of people opt for it over a pat-down. However, it seems like few people actually know what these machines actually do, or even that they're in one. From the New York Times:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
Ms. Jost and her husband own a real estate investment company and fly at least once a week. In an interview last week, she told me that she knew the machines were being tested, and she vowed to stay away from them.

Unwittingly, though, she recently ended up in one at the Miami airport.

“I was stressed out and in a hurry,” she said, when a female screener directed her to one of the boothlike machines. Ms. Jost said she assumed it was another kind of machine, one of those so-called puffer devices that check for explosives traces.

“When I figured it out, I really felt violated and mad at myself,” she said. “I’d been trying to avoid these machines, and I literally walked into one without knowing it. I really did not connect the dots until later when I was sitting on the plane, and I said, oh my God, that was one of those strip search machines.”[/b]
Also, while I&#39;m at it...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
The agency also says that the capability of the machines to store passengers’ images will be disabled, but a lot of people I heard from said they nevertheless worried about the possibility of naked body images being stored and possibly abused.[/b]
When these were originally coming out, I read that the storage capabilities were not disabled. They didn&#39;t even exist. That&#39;s like starting by saying "there&#39;s no light in this room" but later saying that there is, but it is turned off. Even then, even if very undetailed, I would not care to take a naked picture of myself and send it to some random person. When I worked for NW at MSP, I walked by the officer that was making sure nobody entered the secure area through the exit. I mentioned to him that he must have a pretty boring job. His response? "Are you kidding? I get paid $17 [or whatever it was] an hour to look at t*ts all day." THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is the type of person you could very well have looking at that photo of you.

Yes, I understand that some security is needed with the airport. But really, we take our shoes off, can&#39;t have liquids, everything goes through an x-ray, and we go through a metal detector. Sometimes we get a pat-down. Is that really not enough? Is it worth the privacy invasion? Sorry, but the TSA (at least the heads that make the rules like this) have very little respect in my book.

Sorry, this thing just really strikes a chord with me. I&#39;m seriously starting to consider starting some kind of blog dedicated to things like this. We were talking about this in my philosophy class, and it was nothing but angering for me.