http://gizmodo.com/5690749/these-are-the-first-100-leaked-body-scans

Lets see when this happens at airports and hits the news.

11/17/2010 9:27:12 AM

^wow.

11/17/2010 9:29:04 AM

^^i dont think anyone is really arguing that it won't happen.

11/17/2010 9:33:26 AM

^^^That was posted on page 5, with some discussion there. It seems that that is the "old" technology, and the new scanned images are much clearer.

[Edited on November 17, 2010 at 9:34 AM. Reason : ]

11/17/2010 9:33:49 AM

There was already a case of TSA employees bullying another employee over the image they saw of his penis to the point that the guy getting made fun of every day eventually attacked his main persecutor...

11/17/2010 9:39:18 AM

^and i find it such a shame that its people like that guy (the one who was making fun) are the ones that everyone is afraid of.

11/17/2010 9:42:29 AM

I am not worried AT ALL about anyone seeing me through one of those machines.

And I understand I am subjected to and subject myself to lots of forms of radiation everyday, but I am not super excited to be forced to expose myself to even more before flying. Especially when it doesn't cause me to feel any safer. I mean the incident rate is so low anyway that it just isn't worth adding this kind of security imo.

11/17/2010 9:45:16 AM

Quote :

"I mean the incident rate is so low anyway that it just isn't worth adding this kind of security imo."

i do tend to agree with this, but at the same time i am TERRIFIED of flying so that plays a role in it too

11/17/2010 9:46:43 AM

^^ I would not be shocked at all to find out the manufacturer of these machines has been padding the wallets of the people who decide we should be using the machines.

Quote :

"How to achieve real security Install the air puffers that everyone seems to have forgotten about. Each person steps through a metal detector and then into a puffer. You're blown with a puff of air which is sucked up and analyzed for trace amounts of explosives. This should be performed on baggage as well. Meanwhile, a bomb sniffing dog is walked up and down the security line to see if he alerts and who looks nervous. This solves the security issue, the unreasonable search and seizure/invasion of privacy, and is actually effective."

But this would be a more cost-effective and less controversial way of finding the bombs. Why would we want to do that

11/17/2010 9:52:03 AM

would the air puffers find guns?

i think that's more of a threat than bombs.

11/17/2010 9:54:19 AM

^ The metal detectors would find the guns...

11/17/2010 9:56:19 AM

Quote :

"would the air puffers find guns? i think that's more of a threat than bombs."

The quote your responding to wasn't a complete quote. Whole post from the end of the last page:

Quote :

"My two cents as a masters level physicist who works in radiation safety. Two points: 1. The radiation issue Dose is calculated as (energy deposited)/mass (there are also radiation and tissue weighting factors i'm leaving out). The vast majority of the energy for these scanners is absorbed in the skin. The TSA figures divide by total body mass rather than the mass where the energy is truly absorbed. Standard easy mistake to make. Skin making up about 5% of your mass could increase the dose by a factor of 20. This doesn't take into account the percentage of the population genetically predisposed to radiation sensitivity (reported as 1 in 20) whose cells do not repair radiation damage as easily as the rest of us. Their risk factor is harder to calculate. Not to mention children who are also more sensitive. While this could be argued as small, in radiation safety it's conservatively assumed that any radiation exposure has some risk. (Linear no threshold model) The latest scientific report and analysis on radiation risk states "At doses of 100 mSv or less, statistical limitations make it difficult to evaluate cancer risk in humans." Beir VII Report (google it). This means below that level we can't tell one way or another, but better safe than sorry. Submitting millions of people to unnecessary radiation that does not even make us safer (rectal cavities anyone?) is irresponsible and only serves to put money in the pockets of the scanner manufacturers and to make some "feel" safe so that they reelect their politicians. Which brings me to point two. 2. The security issue The US did two main things after 9/11 to truly improve security. Reinforce cockpit doors, and an awareness to kick the ass of any knife wielding terrorist. Nowadays, a sharp object won't get a terrorist anywhere and metal detectors take care of guns. All that leaves terrorists is explosives which millimeter wave or x-ray backscatter machines won't detect (a handful of rectums and vaginas can hide a lot of C4). Add to this the fact that large bottles of saline are ignored as "medical supplies", and the whole security theater is a joke. How to achieve real security Install the air puffers that everyone seems to have forgotten about. Each person steps through a metal detector and then into a puffer. You're blown with a puff of air which is sucked up and analyzed for trace amounts of explosives. This should be performed on baggage as well. Meanwhile, a bomb sniffing dog is walked up and down the security line to see if he alerts and who looks nervous. This solves the security issue, the unreasonable search and seizure/invasion of privacy, and is actually effective."

11/17/2010 10:05:51 AM

^^exactly. A lot of the stuff people are talking about these scanners finding (knives, guns, etc.) should already be found via metal detectors. These new scanners basically do very little imo as far as security goes. That tied with the incidence rate and it just makes me scratch my head as to why they feel this is the only way to go and they need to rush this stuff into every airport out there.

Quote :

"I would not be shocked at all to find out the manufacturer of these machines has been padding the wallets of the people who decide we should be using the machines."

I definitely would not be shocked either.

I'm not someone who gets super up-in-arms about this kind of stuff normally but this whole scanner situation is stupid on a lot of levels. At least imo. It's a poorly thought out knee-jerk reaction to some minor incidents that I don't think adds much security.

[Edited on November 17, 2010 at 10:12 AM. Reason : .]

11/17/2010 10:06:14 AM

ahhhh i didnt think about metal detectors


im a dummie

11/17/2010 10:07:55 AM

^*? That video makes it seem like those scanner images are fuckin useless

11/17/2010 10:49:20 AM

this thread is boring, now

11/17/2010 11:04:04 AM

Anyone hear about that Indian movie star Shahrukh Khan having his scanner images printed off and circulated around security personnel at Heathrow? Granted it's not the US, but I'm sure an incident involving celebrities is not too far off. Which makes me think there's obviously not any way to guarantee that the TSA employees reviewing images aren't actually seeing the passengers.

11/17/2010 11:12:23 AM

^ Yeah I heard about that. Wonder if those pics are on the internet yet.

11/17/2010 11:45:19 AM

i havent read the whole thing yet but interesting

the "isrealification" of US airports

http://www.thestar.com/iphone/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother

[Edited on November 17, 2010 at 12:06 PM. Reason : wow. very interesting]

11/17/2010 12:00:28 PM

lol I think that's the 4th time that article has been linked. Is it on reddit or something?

11/17/2010 1:02:09 PM

It's on Reddit about 80 times.

11/17/2010 1:04:11 PM

Quote :

"Anyone hear about that Indian movie star Shahrukh Khan having his scanner images printed off and circulated around security personnel at Heathrow? Granted it's not the US, but I'm sure an incident involving celebrities is not too far off. Which makes me think there's obviously not any way to guarantee that the TSA employees reviewing images aren't actually seeing the passengers."

Yeah, a lot of people don't realize it over here but he is one of the most recognizable movie stars in the world--imagine if Harrison Ford or Tom Hanks had their dick pics circulated around the airport, it would be a big deal.

11/17/2010 1:10:29 PM

a big deal to one person

11/17/2010 1:26:31 PM

lol


my bad.

im too busy schooling to read through everything. sorry.

11/17/2010 1:44:48 PM

the last time i flew out of LAX, tony danza was getting wanded by security in the line next to me

no body scanners at that terminal then though (late-september)

11/17/2010 2:16:44 PM

11/17/2010 3:48:38 PM

^ man face

11/17/2010 3:57:36 PM

I only made it to page 6 (from 4 where I left off) before I had to mash post reply.

I hope none of you who support this silly horseshit have the balls to ever call yourself:

(1) a patriot
(2) anything other than submissive to authority
(3) anything that pretends you care about liberty, like "libertarian"

You people are worse than run-of-the-mill cowards, you're motherfucking traitors

11/17/2010 5:58:20 PM

What about those of us who are just apathetic?

Srsly. I really care . this much

11/17/2010 9:26:54 PM

In regards to the "child porn" allegations of these machines - it took some government rule overturning to get the machines legal to use for minors.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/04/new-scanners-child-porn-laws

Quote :

"The rapid introduction of full body scanners at British airports threatens to breach child protection laws which ban the creation of indecent images of children, the Guardian has learned."

Quote :

"A 12-month trial at Manchester airport of scanners which reveal naked images of passengers including their genitalia and breast enlargements, only went ahead last month after under-18s were exempted. The decision followed a warning from Terri Dowty, of Action for Rights of Children, that the scanners could breach the Protection of Children Act 1978, under which it is illegal to create an indecent image or a "pseudo-image" of a child."

Now - http://www.prisonplanet.com/exposed-naked-body-scanner-images-of-film-star-printed-circulated.html

Quote :

"The revelation that airport security staff are completely abusing any notion of the professionalism promised by authorities by printing out and circulating images of naked body scans should set alarm bells ringing, especially in light of the fact that such images of minors break child pornography laws. British authorities have made it mandatory for travelers to submit to the naked body scanners when asked and have overturned previous rules that prevented under 18’s from passing through the devices. Within days of the devices being introduced at Heathrow, staff have abused their professionalism and printed out naked scans of a famous actor for their own titillation."

So, take those UK developments as you will.

[Edited on November 17, 2010 at 11:13 PM. Reason : Yes, PrisonPlanet appears to be a fanatical website, but this information in the article is solid]

11/17/2010 11:12:59 PM

Im gonna be doing a little in depth research into these machines.


cause im curious as to how they actually would help a security process (i am highly doubtful they accomplish anything)

11/17/2010 11:23:18 PM

Quote :

"What about those of us who are just apathetic? Srsly. I really care . this much"

About liberty? Really?

Quote :

"(i am highly doubtful they accomplish anything)"

They accomplish lining the pockets of some businessmen and lobbyists

our breached privacy will pay for some asshole's dynasty + his right to fly on planes where him and his are not subjected to the bullshit porno spycams they made the fortune on

[Edited on November 17, 2010 at 11:43 PM. Reason : .]

11/17/2010 11:39:59 PM

It begins...

Quote :

"Man arrested after punching TSA screener in Indy A Connecticut man has been arrested after exchanging words and punching a TSA screener at a security checkpoint at Indianapolis International Airport. According to a report from airport police, John A. Christina, 51, Simsbury, Conn., was charged with battery as a misdemeanor in connection with the incident about 2:50 p.m. Tuesday at the Concourse B checkpoint. ... The report does not indicate that Christina refused to be screened before entering the concourse and boarding an airplane. He had already stood and been scanned in a full-body advanced imaging machine before the incident. After he stepped from the machine, the men talked, but full details of the exchange are not in the police report. But it indicates that Christina said he has a history of medical issues, including two metal implants, a colostomy bag and a fused right wrist. According to the report, as Christina stepped from the scanner, he asked Hutman a question, though the report doesn't provide details. Hutman responded, according to the report, "He's not from the Indianapolis airport and was not familiar with the process you are talking about." The report doesn't explain further. "After the conversation, Christina punched him with his right closed fist in the middle of his chest," the report said. When Hutman asked why Christina hit him, Christina said, "I was only kidding with you," according to the report."

11/17/2010 11:53:45 PM

no one answered my question

Quote :

"Seriously not trolling here, but I have a question For those who don't care about the part where they see your goodies... Would you feel the same way if you had to go into a room and strip down?"

11/18/2010 12:40:28 AM

Looks like I'm traveling for thanksgiving (and likely christmas too). I will be refusing any body scans, I hope that many others do as well.

11/18/2010 12:45:58 AM

I'm leaning towards the pat down. no body scan

11/18/2010 12:49:29 AM

I'm going to wear two strap-ons during the pat down so that the TSA will shit bricks.

11/18/2010 12:50:31 AM

^or ask you to please remove your pants, sir. Do you have any foreign items in your pants?

11/18/2010 1:44:58 AM

Quote :

"About liberty? Really?"

yes really. there are a lot worse things for me to worry about than the body scanners are rdu. things that affect me more personally. for those of you that fly all of the time i understand you need to be more caring about the subject. i fly like maybe twice a year. therefore my willingness to be totally for or against these things is meh.....


now this four loko thing-THAT affects me.

11/18/2010 7:51:04 AM

SHE'S A FREEDOM-HATING DRUNKEN SLORE

THROW ROCKS AT HER

11/18/2010 7:56:24 AM

Quote :

"yes really. there are a lot worse things for me to worry about than the body scanners are rdu. things that affect me more personally."

now you've done it...McDanger's going to shit a brick

DON'T YOU REALIZE THAT YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO YOUR COUNTRY, TO LIBERTY, FOR NOT CARING AS MUCH AS HE DOES?

11/18/2010 8:22:49 AM

LOOK AT ME NAUGHTY BITS

LOOK AT THEM

11/18/2010 8:52:47 AM

^^i know. im trying to rile him up a little bit

11/18/2010 8:54:17 AM

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1796&Itemid=60

ru paul finally does something i can get behind...

11/18/2010 9:16:28 AM

Southeast airports debate TSA vs. contractors

Quote :

"Airports in Florida and Georgia are debating whether to replace Transportation Security Administration employees who run security checkpoints with private contractors. Republican Rep. John Mica of Florida sent a letter to the nation's 100 busiest airports this month urging them to consider using contractors. He's a longtime critic of the TSA. Sanford Airport Authority CEO Larry Dale said his board has authorized him to opt out of using TSA employees at the Orlando Sanford International Airport. Dale said he expects to send the government final notice in January. Macon City Councilor Erick Erickson said he wants to stop using TSA screeners at the small Middle Georgia Regional Airport. Erickson said a private contractor has more ability to fire security workers who are rude to passengers."

It's a start



[Edited on November 18, 2010 at 9:42 AM. Reason : figuring out bolding]

11/18/2010 9:42:04 AM

Fuck it, just use dogs. Metal detectors and dogs and we'd be set.

11/18/2010 9:47:33 AM

Quote :

"Erickson said a private contractor has more ability to fire security workers who are rude to passengers."

In a right-to-work state sure. You can forget about it in union states. And I doubt contracted employees would be any less rude and will probably cost more money.

Quote :

"My legislation is simple. It establishes that airport security screeners are not immune from any US law regarding physical contact with another person, making images of another person, or causing physical harm through the use of radiation-emitting machinery on another person. It means they are subject to the same laws as the rest of us. "

This sounds fair to me.

11/18/2010 10:02:08 AM

Quote :

"In a right-to-work state sure. You can forget about it in union states. And I doubt contracted employees would be any less rude and will probably cost more money."

the TSA can vote for union representation just the same as any contractors.

As to the cost, airlines and airports have a hugely vested interest in keeping flyers safe and happy (well happy enough at least). That they are willing to pay for contractors as opposed to government TSA screeners should say a lot about their opinions of TSA.

11/18/2010 10:07:28 AM

Quick, who wants to start a business as private airport security firm?

We'll do this shit the "Israeli" way

11/18/2010 10:10:34 AM

underpaid and undertrained screeners were part of the impetus that created the tsa in the first place and airports with private contractors follow the same screening rules as the tsa

it used to be the case that tsa workers were not allowed to unionize, but idk if that is still the case

11/18/2010 10:13:54 AM