• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Naked Scanner Fear

skeptigirl said:
So big deal, put men and women through separate lines and use same gender employees to view the scanners. Use software to distort the image. Block recording of the images so no one can invert them. Block faces so if they get recorded they are not identifiable. Use heat scanners to look for things blocking body heat and scanners for those with objects detected. Get better bomb sniffing dogs.

There are many solutions to this outrage if you just quit being outraged by it. They're just bodies fer crying out loud. We all have them.
Click to expand...

Wanna cam? :)

j/k
 
Cuddles said:
As long as they're not gay.:)
Click to expand...
And this matters, why?

Is your issue that someone might appreciate the body they are looking at?

My grandmother was upset a black man was responsible for giving her a bath in the nursing home she lived in after a hip fracture at home made it necessary she live in a nursing home. It wasn't something we had an acceptable reason to complain to the nursing home about. Do you disagree?
 
Last edited:
Well, I for one am outraged. What's next, will doctors be seeing naked bodies next!?!
 
Are there any health concerns around these scanners?

There seems to be information coming from CTs about health issues, no to add to their credibility they said and I quote "They break your DNA, causing it to split and cause cancer." With quotes like that who would doubt it.
 
wattie187 said:
Are there any health concerns around these scanners?

There seems to be information coming from CTs about health issues, no to add to their credibility they said and I quote "They break your DNA, causing it to split and cause cancer." With quotes like that who would doubt it.
Click to expand...

Not yet, they won't look into that until they've been in use for many years, they're installed everywhere, everyone has to use it, and the risk becomes too obvious to ignore. :p

Seriously though I don't see the utility since they can't see into body cavities. Which means that sooner or later we'll be bending over and grabbing our ankles at the airport too.

Bomb sniffing dogs would probably be the better option.
 
honestly, im just gonna make sure i have a hard on, if they scan me for my trip to Europe this year.

if ya gotta go....go with a smile. :)
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
Profiling is a screening test. It should be used to reduce the probability of an individual facing extra checks.

E.g., I believe the number of white, non-Muslim suicide bombers who get on a plane with their partners and kids is near zero, while the number of middle-eastern / African male, Muslim suicide bombers who travel alone is relatively high.

I still don't know why Muslim suicide bombers focus on planes. If you really wanted to kill a load of people easily, blow up passenger trains.
Click to expand...

Ivor,
Do a simple search for "White suicide bombers"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article598536.ece
http://whitewatch.wordpress.com/200...bomber-blows-himself-up-after-ticket-request/
On a train ^

Go on and do a search for child suicide bombers. Also remember who attempted the Oklahoma city bombing, who carried out the Manson murders and on and on.

As far as I can tell, there have been 2 high profile attempted plane bombings since 911. And until this Christmas, you could say that the bombers were never black guys. That's a pretty freakin' low sample to jump to racial profiling from.

As for a family, I assure you, child suicide bombers are not in short supply. If people travelling as a family were given a free pass, I can assure you a child and adult whose papers had the same last name would be headed for your plane.
 
Perhaps we should just all fly naked. We could put that rolling paper on the chairs, like at the Doctor's office. You can get dressed after you gather your bags from the carousel. Any objections? ;)
 
jdp said:
Not yet, they won't look into that until they've been in use for many years, they're installed everywhere, everyone has to use it, and the risk becomes too obvious to ignore. :p

Seriously though I don't see the utility since they can't see into body cavities. Which means that sooner or later we'll be bending over and grabbing our ankles at the airport too.

Bomb sniffing dogs would probably be the better option.
Click to expand...

They have been in use in Amsterdamn airport for a good while now, I was over last May and they were using them. I heard a popping sound on the way through, I hope it wasn't my DNA breaking :eek:
 
Of course do x-ray scanners damage DNA.
X-rays are always capable of damaging DNA, it's ionizing radiation.
That's also the reason why mammography is not done as routine to young women.
They should disclose the dose of a trip through the whole body scanner.
Or better they should install thermal imaging scanners instead of x-ray scanners.
 
gambling_cruiser said:
Of course do x-ray scanners damage DNA.
X-rays are always capable of damaging DNA, it's ionizing radiation.
That's also the reason why mammography is not done as routine to young women.
They should disclose the dose of a trip through the whole body scanner.
Or better they should install thermal imaging scanners instead of x-ray scanners.
Click to expand...


I thought only one-type used any form of x-ray and then only at very low levels?

ETA: Here is an article that seems to confirm my impressions:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60553920100106

...snip...

There are two types of machines -- millimeter wavelength imaging and backscatter X-ray scanners. Both are used to see under clothes and identify unusual objects.

Only one -- backscatter X-ray machines -- expose individuals to ionizing radiation such as that used in common medical X-rays.


...snip...


According to the Transportation Security Administration website, the radiation dose from a single scan on a backscatter machine is the equivalent of two minutes of flying on an airplane.


...snip...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The millimeter wavelength imaging scanner is the thermal imaging I mentioned.
No problem with that kind of scanner (being naked is my natural state; I have spent enough time at beaches where naked bathing was allowed to not care about the guy/gal at the scanner).
The low dose of x-rays I would like have proved by an independend group like the german commission for radiation protection.
 
The part that really gets me is that they were expected to lie about how effective they were, if asked.

The correct answer should be "No. Please tell your representative to get rid of them, it's a big expensive hassle for no gain."
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
It is farcical that we are still (officially) treating every airline passenger as if they each pose an equal risk of being a suicide bomber.
Click to expand...

Of course it is but people amazingly will think nothing of being treated this way in order to get in a tin cigar to get somewhere faster than by car. I quit flying 10 years ago because I am not a terrorist and refuse to be treated as though I might be.
 
Cainkane1 said:
In this day and time you either have security or you have dignity.
Click to expand...

Hah, who is to say you have either, the plane can still fall out of the sky for reasons of malfunction or "security" lapses in other areas.

I value my dignity, I won't set foot in an airport any loner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom