Full body scanners. Do you have a problem with them?

[sgreger1]

Pro: They will find if you have something that is dangerous on your person, which will boost airport security.

Con: Some people feel they are too invasive since it basicly allows some rent-a-cop TSA agent to see you naked.

Do you think they should be implemented or not.



*Mods: please let me know if the pictures are considered inappropriate for the forum. They are actual shots from the scanners and not meant to be offensive in nature.

[lxskllr]

You didn't have an option for "I don't know" :^D

I will say this... If that's allowed, public nudity should also be allowed. If you're going to use technology to infringe on my space, I should be able to do the same if it makes me comfortable.

[Christi]

You didn't have an option for "I don't know" :^D

I will say this... If that's allowed, public nudity should also be allowed. If you're going to use technology to infringe on my space, I should be able to do the same if it makes me comfortable.

I agree!!!! hehe

[sgreger1]

My bad, I added the "other" option. I forgot to hit the button to add it the first time.



This is a hard one because:

* It would be virtually impossible to get something explosive onto a plane (then again TSA will probably find a way to mess it up) This is a good thing, and in theory should solve the problem.

*It would be bad because I don't like the TSA guys and I don't like the idea of them seeing my kids naked.

But in the end, it would fix the terrorism problem. This is one of those patriot act questions lol. How much are we willing to give up to beat terrorism.

[lxskllr]

This is a hard one because:

* It would be virtually impossible to get something explosive onto a plane (then again TSA will probably find a way to mess it up) This is a good thing, and in theory should solve the problem.

Would it? I think it may stop the idiots(kind of like locking your house door), but I don't think it would stop a pro. That's part of my problem with it. They're infringing on my rights without a sufficient pay off(imo).

[sgreger1]

Would it? I think it may stop the idiots(kind of like locking your house door), but I don't think it would stop a pro. That's part of my problem with it. They're infringing on my rights without a sufficient pay off(imo).

I gotta agree with you. I mean I really don't see how one could conceal anything with this level of scanning, I mean it's basicly a strip search. But they could always stash something in their rectum etc.

I personally think this paves the way for further infringement of my privacy.

Look at everything we've done since 9-11:

*We've spent billions on new agencies like the Department of Homeland Security

*We've implemented flat out retarded security procedures at airports

*We've signed off a lot of our rights, particularly in the privacy catagory, by the signing of the patriot act.

And what have we got? We get excuses about how all of these agencies can never talk to each other properly or share info effectively, we get guys lighting their balls on fire in airplanes, getting on without a passport while on terrorist watch lists etc etc etc.

I think they have spent a lot of money and created a large beurocracy that (surprise) is inefective and inneficient at best, meanwhile it hasn't really done anything to stop the terrorist threat. This includes the 2 wars, I mean has terrorism gone down since the war on terror? Has drug use gone down since the war on drugs?

We're just burning piles of money for the sweet aroma it emits at this point (apparently).

[jtwh20]

If it actually INCREASED safety, I'd say yes... AND they can guarantee the images are not stored / saved anywhere

But they're trying to close the barn door after the horse got out...

Box cutters, guns and knives are not what the terrorists are using anymore...

If I'm not mistaken, the PETN hidden in the underwear was sewn (and hidden) directly below the scrotum - not sure a scanner would see that...

The next issue we will case will be something, different, and will render the scanners useless...

How about slight breast implants - one contains the PETN, the other contains the detonation liquid...

SO I'm thinking full body X-Ray like Total Recall may be in order, and I'm not even sure that would catch powders and liquids hidden inside your body...

or take it a step further and use the liquid stuff from Die Hard 3 (if it really exists. They still allow small liquids on planes...

[sgreger1]

If it actually INCREASED safety, I'd say yes... AND they can guarantee the images are not stored / saved anywhere

But they're trying to close the barn door after the horse got out...

Box cutters, guns and knives are not what the terrorists are using anymore...

If I'm not mistaken, the PETN hidden in the underwear was sewn (and hidden) directly below the scrotum - not sure a scanner would see that...

The next issue we will case will be something, different, and will render the scanners useless...

How about slight breast implants - one contains the PETN, the other contains the detonation liquid...

SO I'm thinking full body X-Ray like Total Recall may be in order, and I'm not even sure that would catch powders and liquids hidden inside your body...

or take it a step further and use the liquid stuff from Die Hard 3 (if it really exists. They still allow small liquids on planes...

This is the thing is they are already talking about using Israeli technology to give high powered xrays to you when you goto the airport, and the risk of it cancer has come into quesiton.

As far as the images being stored, this is also something that has been brought up. They are thinking of making a database of them for biometric purposes, should they decide to install other scanners deeper into the airport (like at the gates) that study things like body language etc.

I mean the whole thing is very "brave new world"ish and i'm not sure that i'm onboard with it. Sounds like another way to sell extremely expensive hardware= we spent 100 million$ to stop a terrorist and then he inevitably ends up getting on the plane with PETN strapped to his nuts anyways.

[jtwh20]

I mean the whole thing is very "brave new world"ish and i'm not sure that i'm onboard with it. Sounds like another way to sell extremely expensive hardware= we spent 100 million$ to stop a terrorist and then he inevitably ends up getting on the plane with PETN strapped to his nuts anyways.

I hear that - all that $$$$$ and it still seems the one thing our "intelligence agency's" lack is any actual intelligence, and they still get paid. In fact their budgets will probably increase 10 fold...

No reprimand, no nothing but a hollow the buck stops with me speech, and a we'll do better from now on... WILL YA? We heard the same crap after 9/11

[RedMacGregor]

as a LLL shareholder, i love 'em

[sgreger1]

You know, if you think about it, Al Qaida has really won. We have changed our laws out of fear, we have reacted to their every move, and we have pushed the envelope about what parts of the constitution to throw to the side in order to make us “more safe”. All objectives of the terrorists.



Lets take a look at how our leaders dealt with such threats in the past. To sum it up:



FDR: Oh, I'm sorry, was wiping out our entire Pacific fleet supposed to intimidate us? We have nothing to fear but fear itself, and right now we're coming to kick your arse with brand new destroyers riveted by waitresses. How's that going to feel?

CHURCHILL: Yeah, you keep bombing us. We'll be in the pub, flipping you off. I'm slapping Rolls-Royce engines into untested flying coffins to knock you out of the skies, and then I'm sending angry Welshmen to burn your country from the Rhine to the Polish border.

U.S. NOW: BE AFRAID!! Oh God, the Brown Bad people could strike any moment! They could strike ... NOW!! AHHHH. Okay, how about .. NOW!! AAGAGAHAHAHHAG! Quick, do whatever we tell you, and believe whatever we tell you, or YOU WILL BE KILLED BY BROWN PEOPLE!! PUT DOWN THAT SIPPY CUP!!


We have lost our resolve, we have tired, we have faltered, and we have failed. (I'm looking at you Bush)


In the past when we were threatened by some overbearing enemy who we could not beat in a traditional land war (Japan), we decided to enlist the rage of mother nature herself by inventing nuclear fusion to split the atom and brought down the hammer of justice on 2 cities. To add injury to insult, we made sure the effects of it would be felt for the next 200+ years, to serve as a reminder that we will not lose… no matter what.

Today we cower and combat the terrorist threat by hassling people to remove their hair gel from their bags at the airport, and have us standing in security lines in our socks.


Hopefully stem cell research can find out how to bring General Patton back to life so we can get back to old school American beat downs of anyone who has a problem with us.

[desirexe]

How about slight breast implants - one contains the PETN, the other contains the detonation liquid...

SO I'm thinking full body X-Ray like Total Recall may be in order, and I'm not even sure that would catch powders and liquids hidden inside your body...

or take it a step further and use the liquid stuff from Die Hard 3 (if it really exists. They still allow small liquids on planes...

I just had this discussion with a friend, about the implants! These body scanners are going to just make for more creative terrorists. Like you said about internal liquids/powders - we already have drug mules, so instead of swallowing balloons full of heroin..well you get the point.

Anyway, to answer the question of this thread...all I know is I don't want some Merv the Perv airport security guy checkin' out my goodies, but he can look at all the other people. So yea..not really against or for scanners but in the end, I don't think this will prevent another 'panty bomber' from emerging in the future.

[NorSnuser]

No. I think that these devices constitute unreasonable search and seizure as set forth in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

There is no form of perfect security in a free society, and there never will be. It is better to be free with some danger than to be enslaved and never be completely safe anyway.

[lxskllr]

No. I think that these devices constitute unreasonable search and seizure as set forth in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

There is no form of perfect security in a free society, and there never will be. It is better to be free with some danger than to be enslaved and never be completely safe anyway.

Succinct, and to the point. Perfect :^)

[sgreger1]

No. I think that these devices constitute unreasonable search and seizure as set forth in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

There is no form of perfect security in a free society, and there never will be. It is better to be free with some danger than to be enslaved and never be completely safe anyway.

Exactly how I feel. I don't trust the gov will make us 100% safe even if we throw endless amounts of money at it. We've spent probably a trillion $ if not more on this endeavor already and still no safer than 9-10.

This just paves the way for us to live in a nanny state like Europe, to where we all give up our privacy rights for the illusion of safety. Soon they will have CCTV's with loudspeakers attached to them like in the UK.

All I know is I lost out on yet another great investment opportunity by not owning stock in these scanner companies.