Full body scanners

[jzmtl]

But you are not getting any real security! They even admitted that the guy who prompted the FBS wouldn't be caught with it. And privacy is part of civil liberty.

[thebullfrog]

You're right, it wouldn't have caught him. But they sure as Hell didn't catch the guy with strip searches and pat downs either did they?

Yes I fully realize that privacy is a civil liberty. A liberty that goes right out the damn window when I have to remove half my clothing, and be felt up by some guy. And WTF privacy do you have being locked into a room, forced to remove all of your clothes in front of a bunch of strangers, while be video taped by the way, and then after being ogled and fondled, being told you can enjoy your vacation, but you're not allowed on the plane wearing your bra? Yeah, that sounds waaaaaaaay more private to me.

[Grant Lamontagne]

That's the big point- this isn't going to make things any safer than they are now.  Long lineups and pushy, uptight security people at the airport are there to harass people, and make it look like something is being done, when in fact, it doesn't really accomplish anything.  I could see if there was some actual merit to this system, but honestly, as a security speSmurfpillst with a degree in investigations and criminal law, plus about 15 years' experience, I really don't see this as actually doing anything but submitting people to a new indignity in hopes of convincing them that something is being done.  It's like putting a band aid on a screaming kid's knee- it doesn't do anything but they think everything is ok and move on with their lives.

As for pointing micro cameras into people's houses for a voyeur thrill, that is actually illegal, and not condoned by the government, unlike these body scanners.

Def

[DaveK]

That's the big point- this isn't going to make things any safer than they are now.  Long lineups and pushy, uptight security people at the airport are there to harass people, and make it look like something is being done, when in fact, it doesn't really accomplish anything.  

All true, but with Full Body Scanners I'll probably get an extra half hour in bed on the mornings that I catch flights

[Grant Lamontagne]

Tragically, I doubt that, but in a week or so I will be waltzing through one or more of these machines on my way to SHOT and I'll make certain to report back on how much faster I made it through, and how much safer I truly felt! 

Def

[Medic82]

And these scanners are great for averting a terrorist with a stinger missile or one with a private plane crashing into the terminal

[jzmtl]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater

You're right, it wouldn't have caught him. But they sure as Hell didn't catch the guy with strip searches and pat downs either did they?

Yes I fully realize that privacy is a civil liberty. A liberty that goes right out the damn window when I have to remove half my clothing, and be felt up by some guy. And WTF privacy do you have being locked into a room, forced to remove all of your clothes in front of a bunch of strangers, while be video taped by the way, and then after being ogled and fondled, being told you can enjoy your vacation, but you're not allowed on the plane wearing your bra? Yeah, that sounds waaaaaaaay more private to me.

You are just exaggerating.

All true, but with Full Body Scanners I'll probably get an extra half hour in bed on the mornings that I catch flights

Do you honestly think that's gona happen? They'll find a way to make up get up half hour early if anything.

[DaveK]

Well it should be quicker, and if some pervert wants to look at my junk as payment for that, well.... that's a bonus

[Grant Lamontagne]

More likely when they see you coming they'll switch it off, so how does that make everyone safer? 

Def

[Medic82]

Well it should be quicker, and if some pervert wants to look at my junk as payment for that, well.... that's a bonus

Not everyone is hung like an elephant mate

[thebullfrog]

Dave is just all about not standing in line lol.

And Def I get you're point about the camera being illegal, but I said that in response to your saying that these images would wind up on the internet. That would be just as illegal and not condoned by the government.

I reread some of what I said and do need to clarify something: To an extent my arguments are playing devils advocate. I do not really believe that the scanners are a better system. Nor are they really going to be significantly safer. I really don't. But when I feel my liberties are being violated as it is by the way airport security is run, I'd rather make the tradeoff for (as def put it) one indignity for the other. I'm basically being violated one way or the other. But in theory this MAY increase security in some situations, and be more efficient, and I won't be getting groped and having remove half the crap I'm wearing in front of a whole airport. I don't see the scanners as better per se, but I don't think it's any WORSE than what we have now. More efficiency, less or the same invasion of privacy depending on your point of view, and maybe, just maybe an ever so slightly plane. It really doesn't seem that bad to me. I don't like it, but it isn't any worse than the crap they pass off as security now. And at least nobody is grabbing at my junk.

[yud]

what we need is two things

1. make a concealed carry airliner permit, they lower crime on the ground why not the air,  then all you are looking for a bomb which can be found with dogs

2. have a sealed cockpit no way in from the inside, then at wrost they blow the plane up

[thebullfrog]

And no JZ I am NOT exaggerating. That HAS happened here. Just because it didn't make the news in Canada doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[jzmtl]

And no JZ I am NOT exaggerating. That HAS happened here. Just because it didn't make the news in Canada doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I know it has happened, but trading one wrong for another doesn't make either right.

[thebullfrog]

Yud is right. Concealed carry really would solve sooo many problems. Make the cockpit only accessible from outside the plane. If the plane can't be hijacked nobody will try.

[thebullfrog]

And no JZ I am NOT exaggerating. That HAS happened here. Just because it didn't make the news in Canada doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I know it has happened, but trading one wrong for another doesn't make either right.

Read my other post. I never said it was right. I clearly said it's a tradeoff, but a trade off that may be better overall.

[Pacu]

grabs duck tape and a kielbasa for a trip to the airport.   

[DaveK]

If I sound flippant about all this terrorism malarky, there is actually a good reason for it.

We've had terrorism here in the UK for my entire life, well up until 9/11 anyway. Since then we've only had one incident I think (7/7 as it was creatively dubbed)  

The bottom line is, I'm not going to let all this hysteria affect my life any more than I have to. In fact, if I do let the threat of terrorism influence my life and spend time worrying about it, then they've actually achieved what they set out to do frankly.

So, I want to get my junk out now please if it's going to be more inconvenient for me.

[Anthony]

Before these scanners I refused to fly, but this is also not something American citizens should be asked to do.  I don't know if it has been mentioned yet in this thread, but where will the naked images of children be stored?  What effect will this scanner have on children in the womb?  

I have a problem with bowing down to anyone anywhere, but I also try not to put myself in those kind of situations.  

As far as terrorists in the skies are concerned...well, I don't think they are concerned at all by these scanners.  

[thebullfrog]

I do not think that the scanners are what we sould be doing. I do not think they are "right". I also don't think they are any "worse" than the crap they do now. Yes, it's a trade-off. Yes it's a violation of civil liberties. No, it will not solve anything. But at the least fraom a certain perspective it is less and invasion of civil liberties than what we have now, depends how you look at it, and it in theory should be faster, so in that way it's better. Not safer, but more convenient, and my rights are being smurfed with with long lines now. Long lines + being violated vs. short lines + being violated in a different manner. I'm still being violated, and it still pisses me off, but at least the indignity is shorter lived.

The problem really needs to be solved a different way. But my argument isn't about whether this will solve anything. We all know full well it won't, except for certain situations (like the fiberglass knife example). The argument is about whether it's better than the mess we have already. I think in some ways it is better than the mess we have already. I do prefer the scanners over what they do now. It doesn't mean I want the scanners, or that I think the scanners are going to actually fix the problem.

[thebullfrog]

Damn good question about the children though

[Medic82]

Damn good question about the children though

If the scanners are going to be tested in Norway every person under the age of 18 will not go through it and Save the Children in Norway are very concerned about that also.

[thebullfrog]

Sooo terrorist brainwashes easily impressionable 16 year old to go blow smurf up and he just wanders right on through.... yay for logic.

[Medic82]

Sooo terrorist brainwashes easily impressionable 16 year old to go blow Colorful Enunciation up and he just wanders right on through.... yay for logic.

Nahhh, they will have to follow the old system and if the metal detector rings they will be patted down

[thebullfrog]

Well yeah I figured that much, but you get my point.

[jzmtl]

Before these scanners I refused to fly, but this is also not something American citizens should be asked to do.  I don't know if it has been mentioned yet in this thread, but where will the naked images of children be stored?  What effect will this scanner have on children in the womb?  

I have a problem with bowing down to anyone anywhere, but I also try not to put myself in those kind of situations.  

As far as terrorists in the skies are concerned...well, I don't think they are concerned at all by these scanners.  

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

[thebullfrog]

You know, I gotta be honest, I never even thought about the whole  children thing. No way should they be subjected to the scanner. Which means their families have to do things the "old and slow" way to stay together. And since a rather high percentage of people who fly are families with children, a large part of the efficiency benefits is completely nullified. So there's really no point to the scanners at all, which sort of kills off a large part of my argument.

So I just spent a good chunk of my afternoon defending a point that while I still feel is correct in theory, in practice it just doesn't hold up. Soooo I'm just gonna go ahead and retract my last 10 posts in this thread.

[DaveK]

Lol.

The way they can make this work is to make it optional. Some people will use it if it is a bit quicker to get through security, some won't.

It ain't gonna be the wonder solution that Mr. Brown promised Mr. Obama though, that's for sure. Our Prime Minister doesn't have the authority, and right now he doesn't have the support to get the authority, and you'd get pretty good odds at the bookies for him still being in the job after this trial period anyway!

[cerbera147]

We need body scanners like the ones in Total Recall:
(Image removed from quote.)

+1
I have been saying this to everyone as well 

The best example of airport security I haver ever seen was a group of kids [11-13yo] coming home from some sort of sporting exhibition and one of them had a skipping rope in her hand luggage. The security guy said it had to go in the hold as it was a lethal weapon

Maybe in the hands of an assassin  ; surely these objects need to be taken in context with the owner?

[yud]

We need body scanners like the ones in Total Recall:
(Image removed from quote.)

+1
I have been saying this to everyone as well 

The best example of airport security I haver ever seen was a group of kids [11-13yo] coming home from some sort of sporting exhibition and one of them had a skipping rope in her hand luggage. The security guy said it had to go in the hold as it was a lethal weapon

Maybe in the hands of an assassin  ; surely these objects need to be taken in context with the owner?

look at 5:09