Repeated arguments that aren't relevant? Really? Amid a lot of other functions that I do or have done, carrying explosives and contraband through security to test and train security is among them, as well as testing and training dog teams and handlers, and other functions. Those are a very small part of what I do or have done, but rest assured that security issues (which will not be discussed in detail here, let alone trivial irrelevancies or emotionalisms) are not something about which I become emotional. Nor is it something that I visit once in a blue moon, nor confine observation or participation to in one or two places on an occasional basis. Security responses vary, even in the same location, intentionally. One cannot say this will work, or that will work, or you may get away with this by doing that. It doesn't work that way. The response is varied. This is with good reason. I carry credentials that allow me to bypass security screening, but even those credentials are frequently rejected and I am sent for random screening. This is supposed to occur. I should be able to pass unhindered, and often am, but I am also screened with every measure, and that's really the point. I can't predict it, and shouldn't be able to, because if I can predict it, so can someone else, and that's the security threat. It's a maze, and it's supposed to be. People complain when they see a child patted down, or an old woman, or an inspection of a wheel chair. Yet people have placed devices on children and in old women, and have rigged wheel chairs. When people make comments such as "A guy with his penis locked in chastity is not concealing anything threatening the safety of others," it smacks of ignorance, and is very incorrect, and does stand up for correction. Clearly you don't know, and clearly you don't like to be told. Your response to being told is to be dismissive and call it "emotional." It's anything but, and yes, it's very relevant.