Grayfox
US Veteran
Yesterday a couple of local DJs on the radio were discussing the new airport security full body scanners. We've all heard about them. Supossedly they can look right through a person's clothing and detect illegal items, weapons, bombs, etc. I always thought it was an x-ray type image. Until I saw the picture of an actual scan the DJs posted on their stations web site. While its by no means a perfectly clear image, it is quite a bit more than an x-ray.
These scanners are about to go into standard use in the UK, I'm not sure about the US.
Anyway, the discussion centered on the issue of security vs individual privacy. How far is too far?
Now myself, I've reached the age where I don't care to look at myself naked. Much less have a total stranger peeking through my clothes. I have to admit that the thought of an image of me like this stored away in an airport computer somewhere leaves me a bit uneasy.
In England one of the major issues has been children. Many believe that such images of youngsters run through the scanners would violate child pornography laws. As such, its been ruled that persons under the age of 18 will not be scanned.
Now I'm all for protecting children. However, we must realize that our enemies have no problems with strapping a bomb to a child and sending them out in public. Could this ruleing result in a weakness in the system?
Second comes the privacy issue. According to those in charge, only one trained operator will see the scan after which it will be deleted from the system. However, in this day and age is it hard to believe that some of these images will find their way to the internet? Most likely scans of curvy young women. Could internet scanner porn be in our future?
Reportedly there has already been one incident where a man became aggitated when his wife was scanned a second time. Seems he got the impression that the operator was enjoying the picture a bit too much.
Bear in mind that any of these images that found its way into public view would be completely without the consent of the person in the image. Then again, I suppose the arguement could be made that a person does give consent simply by stepping into the machine. Oh yes, I see another tangled legal knot that will spend years in court being unraveled.
There's no doubt that airport security is a major issue these days and absolutely necessary. While these new scanners could very well prevent another 9-11, the possabilities for abuse are staggering.
So the question remains. How much of our privacy, our individual freedom should we sacrifice in the name of security?
I have mixed feelings on the matter. But a certian quote by Ben Franklin keeps coming to mind.
These scanners are about to go into standard use in the UK, I'm not sure about the US.
Anyway, the discussion centered on the issue of security vs individual privacy. How far is too far?
Now myself, I've reached the age where I don't care to look at myself naked. Much less have a total stranger peeking through my clothes. I have to admit that the thought of an image of me like this stored away in an airport computer somewhere leaves me a bit uneasy.
In England one of the major issues has been children. Many believe that such images of youngsters run through the scanners would violate child pornography laws. As such, its been ruled that persons under the age of 18 will not be scanned.
Now I'm all for protecting children. However, we must realize that our enemies have no problems with strapping a bomb to a child and sending them out in public. Could this ruleing result in a weakness in the system?
Second comes the privacy issue. According to those in charge, only one trained operator will see the scan after which it will be deleted from the system. However, in this day and age is it hard to believe that some of these images will find their way to the internet? Most likely scans of curvy young women. Could internet scanner porn be in our future?
Reportedly there has already been one incident where a man became aggitated when his wife was scanned a second time. Seems he got the impression that the operator was enjoying the picture a bit too much.
Bear in mind that any of these images that found its way into public view would be completely without the consent of the person in the image. Then again, I suppose the arguement could be made that a person does give consent simply by stepping into the machine. Oh yes, I see another tangled legal knot that will spend years in court being unraveled.
There's no doubt that airport security is a major issue these days and absolutely necessary. While these new scanners could very well prevent another 9-11, the possabilities for abuse are staggering.
So the question remains. How much of our privacy, our individual freedom should we sacrifice in the name of security?
I have mixed feelings on the matter. But a certian quote by Ben Franklin keeps coming to mind.
) Recently I went thru security and told the TSA person about the ICD and that the metal detector wouldn't bother me but it would set off the alarm. So, off I went to a glass enclosed section where I was patted down. I was then told to wait and another TSA agent came in, spoke to the pat down person, and then they swabbed my palms and also the soles of my shoes. When I cleared the room, I was handed my CPAP machine and the agent said, "Whenever you fly with this first wash it thoroughly."
