Naked airport scanner

[meghatronic]

Making it more difficult for them is always a good thing though isn't it?

Not fussed about being scanned myself.

It WON'T make it more difficult for them, just us.

Do you REALLY (?!?!?!?!?!?!?) think Mr. Terrorist is going to try and go through security with 17kg semtex up his jacksy? It's about circumventing the whole process. Either by smugling the explosives/BOX CUTTERS onto the plane by someone that cleans, checks, flies or even polices the planes. Etc.

This is all absurd. Being patted down is less invasive than this.

They've made a big boo boo, in my opinion, by having the operator hidden away. Better to have him seen to be honest.

 

[Chimerical]

Making it more difficult for them is always a good thing though isn't it?

Not fussed about being scanned myself.

Its not making it more difficult though. Just as speculation, why would it be so difficult to have parts of a weapon in your hand luggage that could be assembled later?

 

[Totality]

You missed the third option

3) I like fireworks, so ban all scanners

Oooh fireworks! Now that puts me in a serious bit of bother as I like fireworks, but I don't mind the scanner. Maybe it could be and option 3 and a half instead?

 

[naefeart]

If the scanner stops me having to take my laptop/belt/shoes off, I'm all for it.

Still seems a far cry from the scanner they had in the metro station in Total Recall thou

n

 

[Muban]

We should have a poll! 1) I read the Daily Mail so am offended by the scanners and 2) I don't care about the scanners and don't read the Daily Mail.

Only two answers are needed really.

I don't read the Daily Mail, never have and never will. I would also say I generally don't agree with the rubbish they report. However, I do have concerns about scanners and their applications. I would submit to a scan under certain circumstances, but so far from what I have read not under those proposed.

The fact that even when people have been flagged by CAPPS and were sumitted for further scrutiny it still drew a blank (who then went on to commit terrorist attacks) doesn't give me the greatest confidence that this will make a blind bit of difference. In all honesty I'm not sure terrorists will bother going down that route again anyway. They could do far more damage and with less difficulty eleswhere, but that's another discussion.

 

[Bobcat]

I would submit to a scan under certain circumstances, but so far from what I have read not under those proposed.

To be honest, i didn't have an option when flying into the UK last week, there was no 'if you want to' option, it was a case of being told to stand in this machine with my feet in a certain position and be scanned.

It was a case of, if i was going to raise a concern about being scanned, i wasn't going to fly, it was painless, it was no hassle or bother to me or anyone else going through it, nobody raised any concerns and nobody cared, at the end of the day, its for our safety.

 

[chrisd]

Its not making it more difficult though.

Of course it is.

 

[meghatronic]

its for our safety.

Bull.

 

[Russinating]

What's with all the "I'd rather live than get blown up on a plane by terrorists!!!11".

I don't disagree with the scanners, but c'mon... I can think of a maximum of 10 terrorist-caused plane disasters, and how many plane journeys are there everyday?

 

[meghatronic]

What's with all the "I'd rather live than get blown up on a plane by terrorists!!!11".

I don't disagree with the scanners, but c'mon... I can think of a maximum of 10 terrorist-caused plane disasters, and how many plane journeys are there everyday?

Plus, security will never work 100%.

 

[yermum]

I personally would prefer to stand in one of these machines than to be patted down by a sweaty heavy breathing male as I was last time I flew. I felt really uncomfortable and to make matters worse, they never did discover what had set the metal detector off in the first place.

 

[Freefaller]

I personally would prefer to stand in one of these machines than to be patted down by a sweaty heavy breathing male as I was last time I flew. I felt really uncomfortable and to make matters worse, they never did discover what had set the metal detector off in the first place.

Awww didums.

 

[Chimerical]

Awww didums.

You enjoy strangers touching you?

 

[Muban]

To be honest, i didn't have an option when flying into the UK last week, there was no 'if you want to' option

Which airport was this you were flying into? I'm not doubting you by the way I'm interested in which airports are doing this without giving you the option.

 

[starfighter]

Why do you think its now a hard target? Oh yeah, new security measures such as this....

current security measures arn't as bad as this, they bleep if you have metal on you adn they can see in your bag. no one can see your grandads penis currently.

we have enough security measures on planes now, so there is no point putting in even more unless we are going to step up security everywhere else.

it's like having a impentrable bit of fence and the rest is full of gaps.
there is no point.

terrorists will just walk around, ie bomb somewhere with less protection and more people.

 

[Bobcat]

Which airport was this you were flying into? I'm not doubting you by the way I'm interested in which airports are doing this without giving you the option.

I was flying into Cardiff from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport.

 

[D D Danneh]

"So, what do you do for a living?"

"I scan 3D naked pictures of children and adults and inspect them."

 

[Viper²]

I personally would prefer to stand in one of these machines than to be patted down by a sweaty heavy breathing male as I was last time I flew. I felt really uncomfortable and to make matters worse, they never did discover what had set the metal detector off in the first place.

Err, what?

If you are female, you are frisked by female staff and vice-versa.

Maybe it was just a butch woman.

 

[Chimerical]

Why is everyone assuming that bombs will be snuck onto planes though?

All you need is a sharp object.

 

[daz]

This is an interesting point you make about british society.
They immediatly jump on the social-worker/bleeding heart/privacy invasion bandwagon. Having been abroad for several weeks its refreshing to come back to such a closed ignorant and lazy society. I'm proud to pay so much in tax for so many folks to do nothing.

Anyway, regarding the OP.
This will dose people with ionising radiation, as with every other radiograph that is taken, exposing people to xrays must be justified by a medically qualified person signing off on each exposure. These exposures are dosed for specific body areas, and the dose tailors for effect.

This is complete full body irridation, as a low penetration value.

It is worth noting that exposing anyone to ionising radiation is like playing the lottery. It will cause cancer in some people some of the time. You can't determine a safe level as the cancer incidents are random events, so the figures tend to be given as a 1:10000 or 1:100000000 style likelyhood of causing death from exposure. Also it is impossible to prove an inonising event caused a death or a particular cancer, one can only correlate, thus why the figures are based on mass population exposures.

There are things you can do to decrease this chance, lower the dose, lower the amount of exposures, or exclude the exposures entirely.

Have the govt published the figures for this zapping process?
How many travellers per year are liekly to die as a result of the ionising radiation exposures?
I think if I was cabin crew in Manchester I'd request a trasnfer to a different airport for the duration of this study.

I'd hope they're using millimetre wave tech, it's not ionising at all.

A photon with a wavelength of ~1mm has less energy than a photon of visible light (~500nm).