Print 124 comment(s) - last by hashish2020.. on Jan 9 at 3:39 PM

  (Source: Associated Press)
Full-body scanning may be increased after terror attack on U.S. bound flight

With the failed Christmas Day attack fresh on the mind of many Americans, many are calling for increased security in our airports. Security is already increased in the post 9/11 world of air travel, but many Americans still don't feel safe.

Some lawmakers in Congress are calling for increased use of full body scanners that some claim would have detected the non-metallic explosive used by the Nigerian terrorist aboard the Detroit-bound flight on Christmas day. Reuters reports that Dutch authorities have announced that the Schiphol airport in Amsterdam -- where the terrorist boarded the flight bound for America -- will be using full body scanners within three weeks.

In America, President Obama could decree that the deployment of similar scanners in airports around the country be installed. At this point, only 19 airports around the country are using the full-body scanners and the use of the scanners is optional by the traveler. They can opt for pat down instead of using the full-body scanner.

No legislation from Congress is needed for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to deploy full-body scanners into the remainder of the 560 airports around the country that have scheduled airline service. Reuters reports that the terrorist attacks coupled with the call for increased security and additional full-body scanners in our airports is boosting the stock of some companies that build the scanners and related technology.

Whether or not passengers will be forced to go through the full-body scanners remains to be seen. That decision is not up to the TSA. TSA spokesman Greg Soule said, "That [mandatory full-body scanner use] would be a DHS decision. Clearly we would work with DHS, the White House and our congressional partners on security decisions."

Legislation limiting full-body scanning to secondary searches has passed the House of Representatives but has not passed the Senate. The ACLU says that it does not trust the safeguards in place to protect the privacy of passengers subjected to full-body scanning. The ACLU believes that unaltered images showing the shape of a person's body and genitals would still exist.

One ACLU privacy expert said, "If a celebrity goes through a scanner that kind of image could end up on the Internet."

The full body scanners blur the face and genitals of the person in the scanner and only the operator can see the images. The benefit for passengers to using the scanner opposed to a pat down is that the scanner takes 15 to 30 seconds while the pat down takes 3 to 4 minutes.

Chris Calabrese, an attorney with the ACLU, said in May 2009 when talking about using the scanner or a pat down, "A choice between being groped and being stripped, I don't think we should pretend those are the only choices. People shouldn't be humiliated by their government."

There is much research being put into developing better scanners today. Researchers at MIT have developed technology for a new breed of airport scanners that can tell the difference between items in luggage. The new scanner could for instance tell if a pill bottle holds over the counter pain medications or methamphetamines.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: No Way
By callmeroy on 12/31/2009 11:32:18 AM , Rating: 0
Profiling is an EXCELLENT idea...but the soft care bear and nausea inducing PC world we live in today is more concerned about hurting someones feelings than being secure and erring on the side of caution.

Let's face it -- numbers have no emotions, statistics don't care what race or gender you are. If a FBI crime database states that a particular crime was perpetrated 86% of the time by male [insert race here] between the ages of [insert age range here].....that's factual(*). Its not being racist, its being smart.

Life is nothing but odds and percentages...everything single thing you do every second of every moment you are alive -- its a constant running game of odds.

For starters anybody, of any age or any health condition, can drop dead at any moment --- the odds of that is influenced by how healthy a lifestyle you live or how lousy you are to your body---you increase or decrese your odds accordingly of dropping dead on the spot.

Likewise if a certain type of person meets a specific criteria , or a profile if you will, and the collected crime data shows people fitting a given profile have a greater chance of perpetrating a certain crime.....*lightbulb* here's a wonderful idea...why don't we start are search THERE first. :)

RE: No Way
By room200 on 12/31/2009 11:42:28 AM , Rating: 2
Well since we're talking about numbers; your plane, statistically, is not likely to be attacked by terrorists. So why check people at all since the chance of your plane being blown up is so miniscule?

RE: No Way
By jRaskell on 12/31/2009 12:21:15 PM , Rating: 5
Your entire post represents a serious lack of understanding the entire point of this country's Constitution. No surprise really though, since most Americans (or most people in general) lack that understanding.

RE: No Way
By Nfarce on 12/31/2009 12:44:30 PM , Rating: 3
No surprise really though, since most Americans (or most people in general) lack that understanding.

You can include politicians in that group of Americans as well - especially lately.

RE: No Way
By Lerianis on 12/31/2009 3:18:52 PM , Rating: 1
Actually, no, you cannot... the fact is that while SOME people say that what the feds are doing is 'unconstitutional', the fact is that the lawyers, judges, etc. have said "Hey, it's fine by the Constitution!" when they were asked 'off the record'.

That applies to mandating that people have to have health insurance and mandating a lot of other things as well. It falls under that whole 'to promote the general welfare' clause of the Constitution, which can basically be expanded to cover nearly ANYTHING that the lawmakers wish to do.

RE: No Way
By Nfarce on 1/3/2010 12:13:53 PM , Rating: 2
It falls under that whole 'to promote the general welfare' clause of the Constitution, which can basically be expanded to cover nearly ANYTHING that the lawmakers wish to do.

And that is entirely my point. Many of today's politicians have NO CLUE what the original interpretation of the Constitution is. Words in 1787 had a different meaning than today, including "general welfare."

But don't let that stop the fascist and Marxist movement in America we are witnessing now.

RE: No Way
By rmclean816 on 12/31/2009 1:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
you realize you just did the same thing he was doing right?

RE: No Way
By retrospooty on 12/31/09, Rating: -1
RE: No Way
By cmdrdredd on 12/31/09, Rating: -1
RE: No Way
By Lerianis on 12/31/2009 3:25:44 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, they do deserve the protections of our constitution. Our constitution specifically says that any foreign nationals in our country or on our soil (our planes would fit into this category) are treated the same as citizens under our Constitutional protections.

As to profiling 'working'.... no, it doesn't. Background checks on all Muslim people coming from known 'terror supporting' states work.... profiling does not.

Just because someone is a Muslim does NOT mean that they are a suicide bomber, and even if you catch one... it is SERIOUSLY unfair to the other 10,000 who were inconvenienced to catch that one person.

RE: No Way
By Ard on 12/31/2009 1:42:14 PM , Rating: 3
You can try to paint racial profiling in the guise of statistical analysis all you want but the fact remains that it is still racial discrimination. You're targeting a specific group of citizens in this country based solely on the actions other members of their race have, largely, committed in other countries. Why don't we profile all the Timothy McVeigh looking white men while we're at it? Would that be fine with you as well or would you suddenly have a chance of heart if you fit that mild-mannered description? Why don't we just take this to its logical conclusion and search anyone in the same race as someone who has tried to blow up something or commit an act of terror? That would give us Middle Easterners, white men and teenagers (McVeigh and Columbine), Koreans (VA Tech shooting), black men (since the most recent bomber was Nigerian). Let's just profile them all.

RE: No Way
By callmeroy on 12/31/2009 2:40:19 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not hurt that everyone (or at least a lot) are railing against my post on this. I don't change my view 1% -- profiling when based on facts is good law enforcement work. Period.

Btw, I accept that door swinging both ways -- if the crime stats and all the known facts and evidence point towards someone of my race, height, age, etc. I'll accept a cop stoping to profile me.

The constitution says NOTHING against profiling, it speaks about discrimination --- profiling is NOT discrimination. That's the fact YOU folks don't understand.

Also what you don't understand is some of you are just being silly --- profiling should be done only on DATA, collected data -- WTF you think wanted posters are based on? Should we stop posting those too?

Anyone commenting "well then let's just pull every asian over, or stop ever black, or muslim or whatever" -- understand that if THAT's what you think I'm saying then you do NOT understand what I'm saying.

Don't be dumb. Pull over all the asians -- in an area IF THAT'S WHAT CURRENT INTEL IS POINTING AT...

Profiling also doesn't mean ONLY look at where the data points --- again you folks are thinking FAR FAR FAR too simply.

Profiling is nothing but being smart.

Again -- if you think its against the constitution its not me that doesn't understand it -- its YOU!

PLEASE PLEASE rate me down on this more -- I actually smile because it means I hit a nerve and on this one the "disagreement" confirms I'm right. :) its great.

RE: No Way
By Lerianis on 12/31/2009 3:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, the 'disagreement' does not 'confirm' that you are right.... if anything, it confirms that you are WRONG. The touching a nerve thing is right... the proving you right just because you are 'touching a nerve' is not correct, period and done with, argument over, SHUT UP!

Racial profiling is KNOWN to NOT keep ANY crimes from happening and just inconvenience loads of people. EVEN THE GODDDAMNED POLICE AND FBI say that, that it is WORTHLESS and that it should NEVER be used.

Now, if you have information that 'a black man raped a white girl, he has a long beard, pierced ears, etc.'... then that is NOT racial profiling.

Profiling is simply discrimination, it is AUTOMATICALLY assuming that just because someone fits into a 'category' that someone made up (usually by TWEAKING THE NUMBERS OR IGNORING NUMBERS!) that they are 'criminals'.... doesn't work that way, and that is why the courts are SLAMMING down hard on racial profiling.

RE: No Way
By ClownPuncher on 12/31/2009 3:49:37 PM , Rating: 2
Should we make them sew a star of david into their jackets so we can recognize them, since Islam is not a race, but a faith? Or maybe we decide that it isn't the faith, but rather the ultraconservative radicals who are clearly chemically imbalanced.

RE: No Way
By BikeDude on 1/1/2010 6:29:21 AM , Rating: 2

Christianity and Islam are the two most violent religions out there. I hail from Scandinavia, and like England our state churches are of the Lutheran kind. Martin Luther wrote at least one book about the importance of burning Jewish synagoges. But to "our" defense, very few Lutherans realize this.

The Koran has its roots in the old testament. The muslims accepts Jesus as on of the most important prophets. The differences between Christianity and Islam are not many.

The difference however is that the Koran is quite explicit when it comes to the Jews. "Allah stamped wretchedness upon the Jews because they killed the prophets and disbelieved Allah's revelations. 2:61" (from -- you'll find plenty more).

The muslims are tought to believe that God wrote the Koran. The Koran is God's final word. To speak against the Koran is heresy. The muslims put down a council of learned men (not women of course, we all know that women are no good) to interpret the words of God. Long story short: The muslims KNOW they are right. They also know all of God's intentions and commands by heart. They base all their knowledge and science around the thesis preached by these men more than one thousand years ago. Basically time has stood still for these guys.

There are Christians that behave in similar manner too. Christians who are basically stuck in the bronze age. We all know about those cooks who think dinosaurs walked among men... These guys have mastered the usage of the 24 hour clock, but have problems interacting with a calendar.

If we look at a typical muslim society, even one as westernised as Turkey (a Nato member!), it soon becomes apparent that their level of educaton leaves a lot to be desired. 70%+ of the people do not understand that man shares a common ancestry with apes. (Granted, a great many in the US shares similar views, but many terrorists also tend to hail from the US... No abortion clinic should feel safe over there)

We need to educate these people, but in my country, they seem to stick to their old belief systems and rarely break out of their fantasy world. I've seen med school students who defend "the women's right to wear hijab" all the while refusing to realize that many of these women are beaten by their brothers and dads if they refuse to wear the hijab. It then becomes a great challenge to a somewhat democratic society to protect the rights of the many against the delusions of the few. You'd think that the muslims seeking higher education would realize a few things about religion, but apparently not so. To complete this picture, it must be said that they (in my city) have Koran-schools where children gets administered corporal punishment if they fail to memorize the bloody thing (I'm referring to the Koran).

I am a liberal at heart.


The more I learn about Islam, the more I interact with muslims, the stronger my fears grow. I do not approve of body scans. I do not approve of denying people to bring water onboard airplanes (I've been dehydrated more times than I care to count).

I am tempted to propose that every passenger is subjected to a quiz about evolution. Only those who understand this topic should be allowed to board. Problem solved.

RE: No Way
By Schrag4 on 12/31/2009 3:50:14 PM , Rating: 2
You can try to paint racial profiling in the guise of statistical analysis all you want but the fact remains that it is still racial discrimination....Why don't we profile all the Timothy McVeigh looking white men while we're at it?

I'm merely playing devil's advocate here - if "Timothy McVeigh looking white men" committed the majority of terror attacks then those that "try to paint racial profiling in the guise of statistical analysis" would push for profiling them. I'm not taking sides here, just poiting out why profilers wouldn't target white males.

RE: No Way
By glitchc on 1/1/2010 12:53:18 PM , Rating: 2
Wonderful bit of logic...

And child molesters are mostly white. So pony up your PC(s) because we need to scan it/them for kiddie pr0n. The door swings both ways, doesn't it?

"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Latest Headlines

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki