PS. I LIVE IN FLORIDA!!! I'd love to know where this happened.
Police agencies admit to saving body scan images
Capabilities of the checkpoint security machines are still shrouded in mystery
Despite claims by the TSA that electronic body scan images "cannot be stored or recorded," some federal police agencies are in fact saving tens of thousands of images, according to a report by CNET News.
The body scanners, increasingly found in airports, courthouses and other places where security is high, use an assortment of technologies. These include millimeter wave scanners (shown below) — in which the subject is harmlessly pelted with extremely high frequency radio waves which reflect a picture back to the device — and backscatter X-ray (shown above) — which measures low-powered reflective X-rays to produce clearer body shots, shots that can reveal alarmingly precise anatomical detail.
According to CNET, the U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had saved thousands of images that had been recorded from a security checkpoint in a Florida courthouse.
The revelation comes at a tense time. Two weeks ago, when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said such scanners would appear in every major airport, privacy advocates such as the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington D.C. filed a lawsuit to stop the device rollout.
The reason? Because the devices were "designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded," EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg told CNET, adding that this "is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing."
As CNET's Declan McCullagh explains, it's the mystery of the devices' potential that is most unnerving: "This trickle of disclosures about the true capabilities of body scanners — and how they're being used in practice — is probably what alarms privacy advocates more than anything else," he wrote.
The TSA maintains that body scanning is "constitutional" and the CNET report notes that while the machines are built to "allow exporting of image data in real time" and provide networked "high-speed transfer of image data," the system are built with filters to "protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger."
*****~*****~*****~*****~*****~*****~*****~*****~*****~*****
biznine gave a spectacular response:
Here's a solution to all of the controversy over the full-body scanners now being introduced at major airports.What is needed is a reinforced booth that you can step into that will not X-ray you, but will detonate any explosive device that you may have on you.
It would be a 'win-win' for everyone - there would be none of this crap about racial profiling and this method would eliminate a long and expensive trial. Justice would be quick and swift. Case closed!
This is so simple that it's brilliant.
I can see it now: you're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion. Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system, "Attention standby passengers, we now have a seat available on flight number..."
kst62 said:
Here's a new way- when you go to the airport just wear a bathrobe and flip-flops. When you get to security drop the robe and bend over to pick up your shoes to hand them. Have your back to them when you pick up your shoes. No scanners needed. Make a fun day of it, use markers or body paint to send fun messages. Hottie or nottie? Fit or flabby? Not only are you security, you're the judges of the worst beauty contest ever.
zach jacoby said:
@!$%# em, this is america! we're porn stars...i don't giva @!$%#
And Ms. Spirituality replied to zach:
You should at least get paid for it!
Someone pointed out that there was (supposedly) a separate line you can get into if you want to opt out of being scanned. Instead, you are patted down.
I think that the next time I am forced to fly or go through any kind of checkpoint of this nature I'm just going to strip naked and save them the trouble of even patting me down. They won't be impressed. They'll probably be horrified. But you know what? They interviewed for their job, signed the W2 for it, and I guess they'll just have to deal with it. Maybe I'll get some colorful, sparkly pasties for the occasion.
I really like biznine's suggestion, though.
On a more serious note: I do have some concerns not just about the depth of that image but about the precision. As a female this horrifies me in ways I don't think a man could possibly understand understand. There are contraptions available today to deal with a woman's menses which, honestly, on an XRay might set off some security alerts if the person viewing the picture isn't accustomed to seeing this type of thing. The last thing a woman wants to hear is, "Ma'am, can you please step over here. Ok. Now... what is that thing inside you? Because we might have to do a cavity search."
Talk about embarrassing!
I don't think it's any of our government's business what's going on under our clothes unless we're acting suspiciously.
If anyone hears anything else on this issue and the legality of it, keep in touch. This topic is one which bears our attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment