6 Votes
Privacy or Security: The Question Over Body Scanners
Body scanners are nothing new, I first remember joking about them as far back as 1997 when I speculated about how the scientists went about testing them during the R&D phases. The topic has come up periodically over the years depending on various security scares. Most recently, the underwear bomber has brought the technology back to the forefront for identifying threats to safe air travel. As per usual, the argument is that the scanners are too good. Ben Franklin once commented, “he who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.” Perhaps in this situation, liberty could be substituted by privacy. Is it worth it? (Just for humor, here’s the opinions from the AVN awards, aka porn stars, on privacy and the scanners.)
|
||
Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:
- Modern Counter Terrorism, by VnutZ about 5 years ago
- Drive Encryption Defeated, by VnutZ about 5 years ago
- REAL ID to Become American Reality, by VnutZ over 5 years ago
- Passwords, Privacy and Border Security, by VnutZ over 5 years ago
Print Friendly
Write an Article
Panic Reaction by Occams
I think this is another of the over reactions that happen after every aviation terrorism event. Of course the people who have the detection responsibility will want to have every means at their disposal and they use these events to get the budget.
If these things can detect explosive chemicals then they might have some point, but it appears from this reference that they may only detect metals. Bionic noses may do better on chemicals.
I maintain that passengers need to be armed but with non -lethal weapons that are not suitable for taking over the aircraft: pepper spray and stun guns. They should be handed out at the security screening point to anyone who will undertake to use them on a terrorist. Discounts should be given on air fares to passengers who bring their own stun gun.
RE: Panic Reaction by GreatWhiteDork
I hope you are serious, because that’d make two (2) things that I completely agree.
Let’s see:
3 terrorists with boxcutters
vs.
20 pissed off people with pepper spray
15 pissed off people with stun guns.
Reinactment: Allah ackb – (spray)(spray)(spray)(zap)(spray)(zap)(zap)(spray)(spray)(spray)(spray)(spray)(zap)(spray)(zap)
Priceless
Fixation by Occams
it seems so obvious that I wonder why this solution is not being given serious consideration. We seem to be fixated on disarming innocent passengers.
Scanners and your health by JyroBritanniac
My concern would be more with what effects this would have on someone’s health, specifically a pregnant woman. I haven’t read too much into it yet, but this is what I did find:
Scanners
Health fear
The second article touches more upon my line of thinking. Sure you are exposed to “natural” radiation, but the more you expose yourself to it, the more at risk you’re going to be. In London they gave the option to opt out of the scan and be hand-searched. I’m sure a terrorist would be able to slip something past a hand-search, thus rendering the whole body scan ordeal a waste of time, money, and causing an unnecessary health risk.
Developing the Body Scanner by VnutZ
On the lighter side … somewhat akin to the poll about Urinal Policy no man adhering to Man Law wants to see another man’s junk. So how did they go about testing the device over and over and over in order to make sure it works?
There was always the option of rock, paper, scissors to see who lost and had to stand in the scanner … but that still resulted in the other guy losing and having to watch the output. So I’m sure that the years leading up to developing the scanner and the decade since where they’ve refined it have been unduly abusive to female interns that were never told what the scientists were making. The scanner probably framed a doorway and the unwitting intern was frequently asked to bring coffee, donuts, etc to the developers and to “walk slowly to avoid disrupting the sensitive equipment.”
ALCU Please by Anonymous
Would the ACLU please get these machines removed as a clear 4th amendment problem. If this isn’t a strip search without probable cause then what the hell is? I have an easy solution. If you read the Koran then you fly with other people who read the Koran. Special flights for Koran readers. You want to stuff a bomb in your shorts then the only people you will take with you are other believers. I suspect that the various other Koran readers would put a stop to this whole mad bomber thing in 2 seconds.
Skynet is here. by EyeOfSage
Why don’t they have AI programs that recognize specific shapes, pattern, and data so that anything the human eye can detect will be detected by the program. This way, only the machine is looking.
Says it all really. by Occams
The Canadians have the right idea.
Gotta love those signs at Canadian airports that say; “Welcome to the USA”
Have they no self respect?
Orwellian by Anonymous
Well, its not exactly the same as shining an LED Flashlight on someone’s body. This sort of technology could be acceptable, compared to the future inevitability of implanting people with RFID tags. That could make a person’s movements trackable everywhere by a simple satellite internet connection. Ben Franklin was right, but could he estimate post-terrorism fear? (at least terrorism with the scale we see today) These machines are probably just the tip of the iceberg. (coming from a pseudo-paranoid… pseudo)
You Knew It Had To Happen by scottb
When these scanners were introduced, the TSA responded to a lot of the controversy by insisting the images were transient—never stored.
Guess what? They lied.