backtop


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 Reclaimer77 on 12/31/2009 5:27:06 PM , Rating: 0
quote:
There are 1.5 BILLION Muslims worldwide, do you really think screening for a few bad apples is justified?


Yes. Profile isn't about all Muslims. All Muslims aren't terrorist, not even close, nobody is saying they are. But these terrorist all fit a profile, ALL of them, and being Muslim is part of that profile.

quote:
every race, religion etc etc has an extremist wing.


Yes because we see Catholics and Mormons etc etc pulling crap like this all the time, right ? Besides, your premise is false. Muslim's, the true ones, aren't the ones doing this stuff. Stop making this about religion.

These aren't "extremist" ok, let's get that clear. This is a highly organized and motivated ORGANIZATION of terror. They have a goal, they have a plan, and they have proven they have the will to carry it out. They are motivated and EXTREMELY well funded. They have a network spanning several countries. These are not a few wackos with bombs.

Stop referring to these people as individuals. They are soldiers in an army, in THEIR OWN MINDS and words, we know this to be true.

quote:
Anyone can be a terrorist


Let's cross that bridge when, and if, we get to it. Right now "anyone" is not being a terrorist. It's the same group, that fit the same profile, and there is nothing racist about it. Profiling doesn't mean you take all the "brown" people and harass them you know.

quote:
wouldn't you think they would just find Muslims with lighter skin to do the dirty work?


Uhh I'm sorry but it doesn't work this way. You aren't just going to "find" people willing to blow themselves up and murder innocent victims for a cause. You are talking about a VERY exclusive organization here, by the way, they aren't running Club Med, and they don't take applications. And while YOU might not believe in profiling, they sure as hell do.


RE: No Way
By n0ebert on 1/1/2010 11:11:50 AM , Rating: 4
Please, please, PLEASE stop posting on this site. Between your Fox News level 'facts' and you berating and insulting everyone because you cannot think of a more intelligent quip are making my brain cells beg for mercy.

You do realize that every one of those racist groups in America (such as the KKK) are christian based terrorist groups who bomb churches and other buildings, right? That's only one form of the extremist christian groups out there. Try doing a simple Google search before making a post that it's only Muslim. They are considered EXTREMIST groups by the US Government.


RE: No Way
By thurston on 1/1/2010 1:05:28 PM , Rating: 3
With all the fear-mongering you do, you should be labeled a terrorist.


"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki