Lets tallk.....BODY SCANNERS

Discussion in 'The Guru's Pub' started by cartdog, Nov 17, 2010.

?

Scanners, do we need them

Poll closed Dec 17, 2010.
  1. Yes

    41 vote(s)
    36.3%
  2. No

    54 vote(s)
    47.8%
  3. Dont care, im a hermet and never travel

    22 vote(s)
    19.5%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. crushilista

    crushilista Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 670
    Bingo. And to the person who said the restaurant scenario, yes. I wouldn't mind them checking me if it was there personal establishment, and I opted to dine there. I doubt they've had much bombings and loss of lives though.
     
  2. mmicrosysm

    mmicrosysm Master Guru

    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Cirrus Logic GD5430 1Meg
  3. Redemption80

    Redemption80 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,517
    Likes Received:
    260
    GPU:
    GALAX 970/ASUS 970
    Stuttery old man most of the time, while he does have some points, about people making money off it and the i agree the pilots should obviously not have to go through this sort of security since its laughably pointless, but if a nightclub can pat you down for weapons, i see no reason why an Airport shouldn't, mostly i think its down to him being an old prude.

    I also fail to see how he thinks a locked door, and a pilot with a gun will stop a suicide bomber on a plane.

    Not that the TSA has much to do with my country, i flew back from the Canary Islands a few days ago, and had nothing more than a metal detector, and a hand luggage scanner to go through, all very simple.
     
  4. Dustpuppy

    Dustpuppy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    integrated - fffffffuuuuu
    The TSA is a federal agency. As a citizen I have a vested interest in the TSA.


    "Don't think any of the people complaining live in anything other than free countries."

    They weren't always free countries. Then again if you weren't so busy thinking your response to my previous statement was clever, you might have considered that.
     

  5. wootwoot

    wootwoot Master Guru

    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX295
    Nightclub = Private

    TSA = Government
     
  6. Seref

    Seref Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire 7970 GHz Vapor-X
    Courthouses are government, and if the metal detector goes off they give you the ol' pat down. No one has a problem with that.

    You only get the pat down if you refuse to get scanned, and you refuse to get scanned if you're blowing things out of proportion. The images quite literally show nothing of interest.
     
  7. Stukov

    Stukov Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    6970/4870X2 (both dead)
    No, to body scanners, not only does it invade your privacy (they can erase the blurs on faces/private areas AND save the images), but it has the random potential to UNZIP YOUR DNA.

    What is worse is the government has turned pat down searches into sexual molestations in order to try to get more people to go through the scanners.
     
  8. Seref

    Seref Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire 7970 GHz Vapor-X
    Honestly I'd just take the pat down and make animal noises. Freak the hell out of the TSA people.
     
  9. __hollywood|meo

    __hollywood|meo Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,977
    Likes Received:
    131
    GPU:
    MSI 970 @1.55ghz
    im not trying to be condescending or anything, but your entire argument here is a fallacious rationalization. and that "you have no rights in a public/private establishment outside your home or the park" thing is a load of nonsense.


    also they changed the procedure for the "patdowns" which is now a euphemism because instead of literally being pat, you are getting stroked all over your body. would you folks let an officer of the law pull you out of your vehicle when he has no probable cause or legal justification to do so? would you be okay with being presumed guilty of "hiding something" because you declined that officers request? the same thing is happening here at airports. it seems like some folks dont understand the laws or citizens rights at all sometimes. go take a criminal justice class. im all for making airports a safer place, but this is absurd when there are more effective, cheaper, less embarrassing alternatives (that wont give you skin cancer)
    thats not really up to you to declare by yourself. lots of people dont want xrays (which go straight through clothing) of their entire basically naked (albeit blue-grayish) bodies stored indefinitely in local & federal airport records.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2010
  10. Cyrosis

    Cyrosis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    HD4000
    So? They could be fapping under the table with drool dripping down the side of their cheek for all I care.
     

  11. wootwoot

    wootwoot Master Guru

    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX295
    Last I checked courthouses weren't a private industry.

    and if all we were talking about was a metal detector, with a wanding when flagged. It wouldn't be a problem.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2010
  12. Finchwizard

    Finchwizard Don Apple

    Messages:
    16,442
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    -
    I don't have problems with them.

    But images should not even be stored, not even in a cache. It's already been found they've kept photos which is not on.

    As for people saying "Well if I have nothing to hide" that's utter bulldust. It's people who say that who get all these stupid laws in the first place, like having your freedom cut down so much by the time you've noticed it's too late.
     
  13. Sprecker

    Sprecker Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Zotech 680 4g
    Never give up your given rights in the name of security. The whole argument of terrorism being a threat with their boms and the what if's and all that is moot. They have already won when the country effected gives up rights in the name of securities "just in case". Terrorism's whole purpose is to terrorize ie. to fill with terror or fear thus changing the way they live and to become a recognisable force. They won. Period.
    Everyone is so caught up in this that they are afraid of their own gov't trying to protect them. If that is the reaction of a terrorized country. Don't trust anyone. Everything is out to get you!! Even the pictures!! Oh god the pictures!!! Not the pictures!!!
    Last time I checked the internet was full of naked people. If i ran across some negatives of an airport security scanner I would give 2 s#!ts, rub one off and move on (jokes). I seriusly would have no idea who they were and why I gave two s#!ts. Hell I wouldn't even be able to recognize myself if I saw one.
    So when the cards are played and I am traveling by plane through a terrorized nation trying to atleast rule out plane bombings, I am given the choice between anonymity or getting the tingly thrils of being entered by a srtranger, I will gladly take the one that ensures that I am the only one feeling my luggage and poking my holes.
    I got nothing to hide except my fears because in this day and age we should be less showing to those terrorists. Sure you have the right to privacy. You also have the right to stay home. If you go in public you are going to be looked at, judged, mocked and a number of other things that you don't want done to you. But you still go out. Right? Good. Don't let the teroorists win and make the world a scary place to live just because something might happen. Because in reality you have just as much chance of something bad happen when you avoid danger as you do when you embrace it. Fact.
    They gov't shouldn't be so affraid to begin with. Niether should it's citizens. But since they all are and every one and their neighbour needs to keep everything from everyone like their whole life is under the radar, who is anyone even secure to begin with? Would it be better if the gov't just lied to every one and say there is no threat and everyone is perfectly fine to fly without worry? I think it would be good to not lie but to reasure everyone that it is still safe to fly and that the country won't be terrorized so easily. "Go nuts! Blow some more planes up! We got lots and we can always build more! We won't let the loss of a few determine the condition the many!" That would be better. Honestly. IMHO But what do I know? I hate traveling anyway. :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2010
  14. Dustpuppy

    Dustpuppy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    integrated - fffffffuuuuu
    Mistrust of government and 'fear' of terrorism are independent ideas. There is at least a continuous six hundred year history behind the conservatives mistrust of government.

    eta: Even some of the most paranoid rants can have basis in history. For example people "terrified" of the UN might cite the Dover pact as an object lesson.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2010
  15. Sprecker

    Sprecker Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Zotech 680 4g
    True except the action they are taking in the airports today in the name of security is directly related to acts of terrorism and the fear of it happening again. Fact.
     

  16. cartdog

    cartdog Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    90
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti H20
    ok, so most of us have voiced our opions, be it for or against. For those that are against, what would you surgest as a alternative to scanners and body pat-downs? What other alternative would offer the same assurances?

    For those supporting the anti-terrorism measures, would signing some kind of authorisation form make things abit more legit, as opposed to just turning up to the gate and having someone spring this on you. I mean, they should give people a clear option, if you choose to fly, this is what the procedure is.

    No ones being forced to fly, however telling people they cant fly because they didnt submit to the search or scan..is in my opinion pretty volatile. I also like how someone pointed out that terorist's dont just use planes anymore, theres alot of alternatives...and in my opinion, planes are probably the most risky type of terrorist attack.

    What happened to airmarshels? are they still on flights? I see that as a good deterant. Doors to the pilots carbins are now locked and with airmarshels on every flight not only would we create jobs but also provide a deterent to anyone using somekind or weapon to take control of an aircraft.

    Now in terms of explosives, how about a machine that doesnt show pictures, but rather scans the body for traces of explosive or other harmfull chemicals. Now id rather have that done then a body scanner. Still have your standard metal detectors but add the explosive detector ( You cant use dogs becuase they may frighten people ) and air marshels and I think your pretty safe and sound....dont you?

    EXTRA: And with the air-marshels, why not have them in uniform? I dont mean like full black swat gear to frighten the hell outta people, but to let any wood-be nutter or terrorist that any attempts they may wish to use, will be futile. I think seeing is believeing....in this case anyway
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2010
  17. seaplane pilot

    seaplane pilot Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,295
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2080Ti Strix
    : ) : )
     
  18. Dustpuppy

    Dustpuppy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    integrated - fffffffuuuuu
    I don't contest that "Fact" insofar as it is one reason *WHY* this is being done.

    That the government would do this and other things with good intentions (at first) bears only a marginal relationship as to whether or not this should be permitted.

    This is because certain powers are prohibited not because the government wouldn't use them for good, but because it inevitably abuses them provided time and opportunity. You guys may not have a problem with somebody seeing you naked. However a CEO or foreign dignitary may inadvertently reveal potentially embarrassing information (eg a missing testicle due to cancer) that could be used against them. That a CEO has testicular cancer could decimate the companies stock if the information were used improperly.

    We have machines that sniff out chemicals presently. They are very effective but will often get false positives. For example medicinal nitro-glycerin.

    Thing is, there's simply no technological search that can stop a bomber who has concealed an explosive in his stomach or rectum. So you have to do behavioral profiling similar to what Israel does if you truly want to detect such things. Otherwise you will always get hit every time a hole is found in your tech, there is simply no replacement for people.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2010
  19. cartdog

    cartdog Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    90
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti H20
    ok, now ts getting abit weird. Just reading that NYC NYPD will be allocated "iris scanners". Man, these corporations that produce these terrorist and crime prevention devices are milking the fear every government hs, no doubt there making a killing offa it.
     
  20. mmicrosysm

    mmicrosysm Master Guru

    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Cirrus Logic GD5430 1Meg
    The same thing Israel does, by profiling passengers! And seems to be working fine for them.

    There are plans on placing these devices and tactics in American malls, sports stadium/arenas and amusement parks. They even have a backscatter mobile unit the drives down major city streets scanning all in its vicinity.

    http://www.autoevolution.com/news/mobile-backscatter-scanners-roaming-the-streets-23954.html

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axa3LDIU71U&feature=player_embedded

    Follow the money trail...
     

Share This Page