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

Physical Security....
By TheEinstein on 1/2/2010 1:16:45 PM , Rating: 3
I am an expert here, even in court I would have to testify as an expert. Enough said there.

To make an aircraft impossible to blow up you would need to stop shipping air freight, passengers, and even crew members. Even stop flying.

Aircraft are remarkably fragile targets, and remarkably easy at certain altitudes. There is no innate safety to be expected on them, just quick transit (I would add comfortable except anything but first class anymore is not comfortable!)

You can reduce the risk of air travel, but then people start thinking 'what if' type stuff. 'What if I go through that full body scanner?'

Well what if that scanner sent data to a enclosed room where prior to entry the employee had to show they had no communication or recording devices, where they receive data and cannot understand who they are seeing, where they can green light a given full body scan or red light it, or yellow light for a 'pat down for cause' (Red light being gun, bomb, or obvious illegal item).

But people who think they can make a stir will not accept this, people who are uncomfortable being seen 'electronically naked' will have issues with this (even if there are gender specific entrances with a same sex monitoring person in a separate room from the other sex monitoring center), people who have illegal motives will also make a stink as much as they can without giving away their hand, and so forth.

Yet this is only part of the solution and part of the problem.

Some say 'sniffers' will find anything. I can make a package, use a secure system (I wont post here how unless truly pushed by respectable questioning), have a sealed bomb that is in no way tracable via a sniffer attached to my 'peace loving brother', and watch as people wonder how he did it.

The ultimate problem is if we actually hired someone like me, spent the hundreds of billions it will require to make security as effective as it can be, there will still be a plane going down one day... the first of many I am sure.

Lets see future means:

1) Surgical insertion of bombs (provided we do cavity searches often enough to make cavity carrying dangerous)

2) Missiles for dummies... Yeah you can fire a bunch of those Palestine rockets in a semi-random pattern and have a good chance to hit something, like a shotgun at the sky, and they eventually come down, for a two-fer.

3) Smart missiles gone wild (Goto Denver, have fun in the future wondering if you will get shot down with 10 other aircraft in one volley!)

4) UAV havoc... Buy a little remote controlled aircraft, plan your effort well and you to might do severe damage to the engine of a 747!

5) Use your Iranian nuclear warhead... oh maybe thats a little overkill

Regardless... my sayings will always hold true:

"You can never have perfect security, you can just have affordable security".

"The only way to truly be safe from a fanatic is to show him you truly will destroy him, his family, his friends, his home, his valuables, his culture, his nation, his religion, and anything else he holds dear."

RE: Physical Security....
By hashish2020 on 1/9/2010 3:39:47 PM , Rating: 2
"The only way to truly be safe from a fanatic is to show him you truly will destroy him, his family, his friends, his home, his valuables, his culture, his nation, his religion, and anything else he holds dear."

A fanatic holds nothing dear, because he assumes he has lost everything already

And if you think destroying a fanatic's culture is ok, please exit my country and go to places in the Balkans or Africa where cultural.race wars are part of the makeup

I'd rather have a .0001% chance of dying on a plane than sacrifice the basic meaning of what it is to be free in the West

"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs

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