Airport Screeners could see X-rated X-rays 1407
AdamBomb writes "Think airport security is bad enough already? Well, the Department of Homeland Security is now planning on rolling out new machines that will allow screeners to actually see through clothing. Could be bad news, though privacy advocates are obviously fighting it."
Thomas Jefferson saw this coming (Score:5, Insightful)
Two sides (Score:5, Insightful)
However the human side wins out here , this is totaly unacceptable . they will have to have seperat entrances for men and woman as people are uncomfy with a member of th oposite sex seeing them in the all together(not everyone mind you)
If i want sweaty security gaurds seeing me in the buff i will get a website for it , I don't want to have this foist upon me by over zelous national security.
Can I see you naked please? (Score:5, Insightful)
No?
How about if I screen you every time you walk through my front door with something that allows me to see you essentially naked, no matter what you feel about that?
Forget asking nicely, get fucking naked, now. I need to make sure you're not carrying anything like a nail file, or a pen.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's great. Meanwhile, the rest of us are trying to enjoy what rights we have left, ok?
Re:Don't worry folks (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:4, Insightful)
What then would be unacceptable?
It is thinking like this that would amount to a slippery slope when it comes to fighting the great (and greater) govt.
So today it is more intrusive searches on 100% of all passengers for the sake of reducing body cavity searches for that unfortunate few, does that mean that tomorrow it'll be ok to have cameras in every single home just because "some home is harbouring terrorists"?
Re:Regular people (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you know how many websites there are that are exclusive content for mature women, or grandpa's fucking? You might not like the scooer mom, but check out how many MILF websites there are. Lots of people like these 30-50 year old women in pantyhose.
Don't be suprised if these x-ray naked pictures make it to the web. If someone can steal Star Wars Revenge of the Sith, before it made it to theaters, then someone will get these pics on the web.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally don't care if it goes as far as to show nipples. It's already bad enough if it allows you to see through clothes that people specifically put on to cover body parts they're not willing to show in public.
By that definition, I don't even want them to see through my watch. If they really want to have a look, let them come and ask me to take it off. They already do that with shoes, belts, jackets, hats and whatnot, what's the problem with that?
I'm a frequent flyer and I'm already pissed with the current security measures. They should make those more efficient before thinking on implementing new equipment under the same, flawed policies.
If you drive on the highway... whats an airplane (Score:5, Insightful)
What keeps people from filling the metal tubes of their cary on luggage (shoes anyone ?) with explosive, pointy weapons. Lets outlaw any metal framed carry on luggage!!!
There are lots of ways around this and so the advantage is minimal, and the disadvantage is screeners seeing your wife/girlfriend/daughter naked...
No thanks. I take my chances driving on the highway, which is more dangerous than a plane trip, I think we are more than safe enough. Thanks but no thanks.
I don't care (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't even perceive this as invasion of privacy. If airlines (or TSA) were smart, they'd run both "old fashioned" and "X-ray" things in parallel. X-ray line would move much faster, so people would be going there even though this means showing someone their hairy asses.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
Guns + Planes = Cabin depressurisation
Specialised weapons are required for planes. So letting every dirty Harry wanabee to take a gun on board is hardly sensible.
How do you tell who is a terrorist and who are the "good people". Better to get rid of all the guns. That is why I feel safer in the UK.
Privacy should always be a concern... (Score:3, Insightful)
--Abraham Lincoln
Re:Thomas Jefferson saw this coming (Score:1, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:1, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
But can I take these four bottles of duty-free vodka which can be turned into extremely sharp weapons in about five seconds in my hand luggage? Of course you can sir.
Re:Are you suprised? What did you expect? (Score:4, Insightful)
Some points to consider:
1) It's true, sheeple - IIRC, the majority of (all?) examples given are actually real.
2) Given it's true, it's a fucking disgrace. It's cause for armed rebellion in the streets, not a few confortable chuckles.
I always avoid content-free posts from people carping about the moderation system, but Jesus Fucking Christ on a crutch.
Re:No free pr0n (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because it's another guy who's looking at me, doesn't mean it's OKAY. Some people may be very uncomfortable with their body. Why should they have to get naked every time they go on a flight?
If they're naked too, and it's not recorded (Score:3, Insightful)
Releaving themselves of it (Score:3, Insightful)
WTF... why is holding a stinky bomb in your hand better than having it stuck up your ass? (I mean, not that I want it up my ass)
Unless it is a hijack not a suicide bombing...
bah, planes suck.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:4, Insightful)
Look, I've already been subjected to the security gropefest a couple times. I'd take the X-ray *any* day over that. In my mind, this is a restoration of some of my rights ... I don't have to worry about being fondled.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:5, Insightful)
You say 'However, turning down a scan you would probably get a strip search'
Did you ask what your options were, or did you meekly walk into the mmw radar unit ?
As for the gender issue, how do you know the person looking at you naked is not gay? How do you know they are NOT getting a sexual kick from this ? How does that possibility make you feel?
Before you stepped into this thing, did you find out what the long term and medium term effects of millimeter wave radar are ? Are you aware of any public studies that verify the safety of these scans on humans ?
Or did you meekly go the way the shepherd told you to ?
Furrfu!
Safety? (Score:3, Insightful)
As far as I know, pregnent women may opt to NOT go through the trial devices at heathrow. This to me implies that there is a level of risk involved that I am not prepared to accept.
There are also no clear guidelines on vetting the staff that will use these. Sure, you can only scan people of the same sex, but that doesn't exclude homosexual screeners. The whole point of same-sex screeners is to remove any sexual element from the scan, but it doesn't do that at all.
And let's not forget the 'Think of the children' angle of course
I guess this is just one more reason for me to keep my foreign investment out of the USA and take it somewhwere else. This does completely fuck up my 30th birthday plans of course, but I'll find somewhere else to go.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
I guess there's a reason in the US that the postman doesn't walk up the drive.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't really think that do you? Seriously, there's traffic between the cockpit and the cabin all the time - so there has to be a communications link
How many people that you really want flying an airplane would be able to handle the execution of dozens or (on large planes) hudreds of people? How many eight year old girls would it have to have their throats cut before you or anyone else opened the door?
Sure, it might be the best thing for the country to prevent the hijacking of a plane like that - but the country and any victims in question are far away and poorly defined in our minds. The little girl with a razor blade to her throat standing in a pool of her fathers blood is right outside the door.
I'm not sure I'd want to be able to condem her to death to save the aircraft. I'm not sure I'd want someone with that level of detachment flying my plane.
This is hard stuff - and no simple solution is going to solve it.
And That Buys You What, Exactly? (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides which, the golden age of hijacking planes is now over. No group of passengers or crew is going to allow it anymore. Pull any shit on a plane and you'll get your ass tackled by every person on the plane. If they somehow still succeed, the government will have no problem blowing a civilian aircraft out of the sky now that they know what their alternatives are. I got even money on any single fighter pilot being able to pull the trigger on civilians, which is one of the reasons they scramble two.
The more I see stuff like this, the more I'm inclined to believe that no one in the government has any idea how to actually keep its citizens safe. I'm think that this, like many other "security measures" since 9/11, is a placebo designed soley to comfort an ignorant population by making them think that someone is actually doing something useful. Certainly a naked X-ray is a much more comforting thought than is the idea that you could be on the receiving end of an air-to-air missile if someone does actually succeed in hijacking your plane...
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
Go read the CIA world fact book on crime numbers, especially those like robery and (attempted) murder for the USA and for example the UK, you may be in for a surprise.
The reasoning you follow sounds oh so logical and is used a lot by proponents of 'the rights to bear arms', but it has one simple flaw that seems to rather be confirmed:
More guns means more people get killed by them, no matter who have the guns, it ALWAYS results in more people getting killed. It is people who do this and not the guns, but the guns enable it.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:1, Insightful)
U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:5, Insightful)
One example, plucked right out of the air (pun intended), is the right to travel freely. You don't have to present documents or internal passports to move within the US.
So, not do you only have the right to fly, technically, it is a violation of your rights to make you present identification.
But it gets better. You have the right to enter into contracts as you see fit, as an adult, but not into contracts that violate any of your rights... you can't sell yourself into slavery. One example of a contract you can enter into is paying $500 to fly to some city on the other side of the country. An example of a contract that is invalid, giving up your right to very intimate privacy such as revealing your nipples and buttcrack to a airport screener in return for being allowed to board.
you don't have to fly if it's that big of a deal for you.
Maybe he does have to fly. I can think of any number of contrived scenarios where there is no other option, really. Some quite plausible. A parent is dying on the other coast, and you only have a few hours left. Rocketcar Taxi Services is out of business for breaking speed laws...
But it does not matter. It could be the shallowest reason, or no reason at all. The entire point of having rights, is that you don't need to ask for permission to exercise them, or justify their use. And even if we're going to get into tired arguments about abuse of rights, if such a thing is possible, not wanting to be digitally undressed by a TSA mouthbreather just to go on a trip is not one of them.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
How many of these have to happen, how often, before Mullah Jihadster can slip right through because they are wasting time checking toddlers for C4?
Re:Yes, it is called PARANOIA (Score:3, Insightful)
You're making sweeping generalizations here. I can think of some that are commonly made about Mexico and its citizens that you would probably refute as well.
Re:U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on, nail clippers "banned"? Because you might threaten to clip somebody's nails on the plain? (They're not sharp enough for anything else).
Four matches is OK, but FIVE!! OH NO, that's a potential terror risk!!
And as a bonus, I saw on the news that they're now arbitrarily fining people when they find something on their "do not bring list" with a minimum $250 fine (because the law allows them to). The amount of the fine is based on what you had confiscated and "your attitude toward the screeners". Then your name is put in a secret database and you may be subjected to more security searches indefinitely (in other words, persecuted). And no, you are not allowed to know if you are in the database or what information is stored about you in that database.
TSA is doing exactly what many of us have feared, they're flexing their muscle in the name of "better security" and stealing away our rights in the process. The x-rated x-ray machine is yet another example of this.
Of course, the only reason we're "safer" right now is because the terrorists haven't decided to strike. So what will happen when they do? Just start writing down your rights so you can remember what you used to have!!
Welcome to Germany, 1943! Enjoy your flight!
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
Except the probability that terrorists are on a given plane is extremely small, where as every plane would have a large number of armed people on board.
Even if we accepted that the situation would always be better off with armed people, in the case of a terrorist attack, you have to factor in the possibility of injury or death, due to anything from accidental firing, a paranoid "vigilante" who mistakenly thinks someone is a terrorist, or people who cause trouble or get into fights (just because a person isn't someone we would consider a "criminal" doesn't mean they're not some random nutter, or never turn angry and start a fight or whatever).
I can't say which situation would be worse, but then neither can you. You have to look at what will happen on any flight, not just flights with terrorists on board. Personally I'd rather risk it with no guns.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
Jeremy
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, of course not picking on your 2 y.o. son with a one way ticket and instead picking on a 20 y.o. man with a one way ticket would be discriminatory. Thank your local ACLU chapter for the treatment your received. Instead of profiling suspicious characters, the screeners have to pick on everyone, even if 2 y.o. or 90 y.o. or they'll be in serious trouble. If they hadn't done picked on your child, they'd have been fired.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think any healthy person has anything to hide. But...
For all those who've had major surgery, wear adult diapers, colostomy bags, have stomas, preoperative transexuals, hemaphrodites and other private matters of which they may not want their travelling companions or the minumum wage "security" guard at the airport to know about, I can see some good reason to be concerned about their privacy.
Doctors take oaths and take patient privacy seriously. Airport security?
And there's nothing to stop a suicidal nutcase from packing their chest cavity with explosives. Should this be a full x-ray?
If this goes anywhere, I bet the company selling this junk has some relationship with a politician.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is old (Score:3, Insightful)
For example I shudder when I see the huge snaking queues caused by heightened security at most airports. It would be absolutely trivial to take out a hundred people and severely injure several hundred more in any major US airport. How so? Wait for some popular holiday (e.g. this weekend) and walk in the front door with a suitcase full of high explosives and nails. Then locate the huge winding security line and detonate the bomb.
Once that becomes ineffective, shift to other venues where people gather - malls, cinemas, concerts, nightclubs etc.
Re:U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, we have the right to bear arms, but that doesn't mean I can walk up to a gun manufacturer and demand they give me a gun. If you want to use their service, you have to be prepared to pay for it, and suffer through any restrictsion they see fit to demand. Otherwise, WALK.
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:2, Insightful)
"Look, I have to abridge everyone's rights, the ACLU made me do it. So strip, grandma, so we can all be safe."
You're either a cretinous Fox News slave or you're knowingly mendacious. Either way, fuck you. I've become a permanent member of the ACLU along with other whining pansies like Bob Barr and Dick Armey.
Re:U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeh. You have to pay for it. What you don't have to do, is allow some TSA asshat to undress you.
They are businesses, and they have the right to restrict access to their property any way they want to.
That's funny, I never heard that Delta and United are the ones doing all this. Isn't it some federal agency?
Re:How is crossing the Atlantic a "right?" (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure most people would. It's not like they're going to X-Ray only the people who would have been strip searched though, they're doing it to everyone. Maybe if they only did this to people who failed at the metal detector and/or did something else to spook security then they would be subjected to the X-Ray people might have fewer problems with it.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny, both these precautions are routine in El-Al flights. There was one El-Al hijacked plane. In 1968. Never since. And it has been tried [thisistravel.co.uk], and foiled by these exact measures.
That said...
First, it costs.
Having a few highly trained armed guards in each and every flight... this isn't cheap. Now imagine you are a commercial American airline. Who would pay for that? Locking the door to the cockpit only works as long as people on both side of the door are willing to die - or see others die - to keep it closed. Now, imagine that was a prequisite to being hired as air crew in a commercial Americal airline. Would you find enough employees? How much extra would you need to pay to those you do find?
Second, security meausures in El-Al flights are even tighter than the new security routines in American flights since 9/11. The main difference is that El-Al security is free to focus on effectiveness as opposed to political correctness. This means that profiling is used heavily to achieve the same level of security with the minimal hassle.
I believe that for legal reasons, American security is barred from only giving the 3rd degree treatment to an angry-looking 25 year old Arab-descent man who has spent several years in Afganistan with no family in the USA, while ignoring a 70-year old grandmother flying with her grandchildren back to their parents from Disney world. The current solution is to give everyone the 3rd degree - so you see the man, the grandmother and her grandsons taking off their shoes together so some poor soul can sniff them for explosives.
In an Israeli airport, the grandmother would sail through security, while the man's luggage would go under a microscope while he is being thoroughly questioned to see if he really is what he claims to be. And before someone draws the racist card - when I flew from Athents to Israel in the late 70s, everyone went through the same 3rd degree, without any exceptions. And today, if you are a 25-year old WASP idealistic female who has spent the last 6 months volunteering in the occupied territories and is carrying some presents from her new found boyfriend there to his family back in Europe, she'd get the same 3rd degree. And it just might save her life, even if she's newly pregnant by him (what, you thought someone willing to blow up a plane full of innocent people would care? Guess again - this did happen [bearpit.net]).
At any rate, anyone who complains about how harsh the new security checks is should read the enraged accounts of people who raised too many "suspect" flags in an Israeli airport. The reason the country puts up with it is because it works, and the public is indifferent to the hardship suffered by a negligible fraction of mostly foreign passengers. You have to admire the fact the American people put up with this "equal mistreatment". Good for you, really. I just wonder how long you can keep it up. It is a horribly inefficient way of going about it.
I think it is great that once the Americans have been put in this awkward position, they are throwing technology (that is, money) at the problem. For example, see explosive sniffers are now standard, which saves a lot of "open your luggage, please". Having machines that see through clothes would be a great way to give everyone equal treatment while minimizing the hassle. As for privacy issues - even assuming the pictures are playboy-perfect (which they aren't), what exactly is the problem? Believe it or not, but we are all rather alike.
I predict you wouldn't even see whoever is looking at the pictures (for an additional $0.02, it would be a "she" for women and a "he" for men - there, feel better?). They'd be off at some booth to the side, so all you will experience is "stand here for a second, please... bzzzz... thank you, move along, nothing to see here".
U.S. Constititution 102 (advanced version) (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:4, Insightful)
Feel-good Security (Score:2, Insightful)
What worries me far more than the terrorists is the continual erosion of civil rights that far too many seem happy enough about: A free society bent on cooperation has at most to worry about psychopathic freaks in the world; an oppressive state that curtails freedoms and imposes its will with increasing force breeds discontent and enemies.
Is it just me or is all this fear over security a sign that we are stuck in a vicious circle of paranoia that's becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy?
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't allow ourselves to be randomly strip searched at the mall, in bars or before entering our cars, yet we're far more likely to be murdered in those places than on (or by) a plane. Why do we look at run-of-the-mill murder as something that we can't afford to give up our rights to prevent, but terrorism as something that is so fearful that almost anything is fair game.
I don't think I'm in a position to not travel on a plane, but I can still protest if they impliment this. I will find a non-metalic substance that's high contrast to one of these machines and I'll spell out the words "go fuck yourselves you nazi whores" on my chest or back, but under my shirt. The only people who will see it will be the screeners. I will continue to be completely cheerfull and cooperative in every other way. After they get finished looking at my cock and my ass cheeks with their machines, I dare those mother-fuckers to accuse me of being crude or mean to them.
TW
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
What a sorry little world we live in. Who wants to hitch a ride outta here, the next spaceship is flying by next Thursday.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, I can stop every rapist too.
Ok, sure, I get to violate the rights of a lot of other people, and lock up lots of innocent people, but I can stop every rapist.
IMHO, Israel does the same thing, perhaps to a less extreme degree than my example.
Problem is, we have a society that predicates itself on treating people equally. We don't (or at least our ideals/constitution say we shouldn't) single out particular individuals for "special" treatment, good or bad - unless we have reliable information that this specific individual poses a significant risk.
Likewise, we'd rather let a few murderers go if getting every one of them requires locking up (or executing) innocent people too.
Look how many false "confessions" there are. You think airport screening is any different?
Issue is, that super invasive security measures at an airport will simply force those people to attack at another weak spot. You guys have done real well against the suicide bombers too huh? (Oh, I forgot, you are moving on and violating a whole lot of more people by putting up your "security" fence now...)
So, with enough loss of rights, privacy and drag-netting a lot of innocent people I can stop all crime too. However, I'd really rather not exist in such a society. It's only a matter of time till you yourself become one of the "suspects" and life really sucks then.
No thanks.
This is the real reason we have a government/republic that's designed with inefficiencies that are supposed to guarantee equal treatment of all individuals. (And yes, I know full well it's not actually that well done in practice - and it anguishes me on a regular basis...)
Cheers,
Greg
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:4, Insightful)
You know...I'm worried abit about all this X-Ray exposure...it isn't like this is a really SAFE technology. For someone that travels a lot, this could potentially be dangerous. I worked in radiology for awhile, and it is serious business. Are the going to outfit the TSA agents with full lead aprons? I prefer to only be irradiated when absolutely necessary for medical reasons....
Wonder when the first airport security cancer lawsuits will take place?
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:4, Insightful)
In an Israeli airport, the grandmother would sail through security,
Sounds like a loophole to me.
Consider the grandmother who has had all of her children killed by the Israeli army and their home bulldozed. She is too old to work, her life and the lives of her grandchildren depended on the support of her now deceased kids. Without them, her grandchildren will probably end up on the Palestinian street and dead before they reach 20, she'll be dead in two years because she can no longer afford the treatment for her diabetes.
They've got motive and with the help of Hamas they've got the means and enough false id to pass as jewish. They can sail right through those profile-based security checks carrying enough sarin in mickey-mouse thermoses to kill everyone on that plane in minutes.
Profiling works by focusing your attention on people with certain characteristics and by necessity relaxes your attention on the people who don't fit the profile. As soon as your enemy figures out how to avoid your profile, his job gets 10x easier.
Re:What are you talking about? (Score:3, Insightful)
The government has no rights. None whatsoever. Absolutely not one right at all.
The government has only limited powers granted it by the people through the Constitution.
A fundamental misunderstanding of this issue is a common problem, apparently it is not taught well in general education. No one can make educated and rational decisions about the government if they do not understand this fundamental underlying concept.
If the People wish to limit the Government's actions, even in national defense, because of infringements on personal rights and liberties, it is the People's prerogative to do so.
Jim
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated...Cancer (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:2, Insightful)
Because the purpose of these security measures isn't actually to make people safe, it is to make people feel safe and happy with government. Image matters more to Americans than does substance. The more of a pain in the ass they can make airport security, the greater your sacrifice, the more real the illusion and the safer Joe Sixpack feels and the more likely he is to vote for and go along with the current administration. Okay, so maybe I haven't hit the nail square on the head, but it is my best guess as to why it is being done so stupidly.
Even with no new measures, do you really think a 9-11 style hijacking could work again any time soon? IMO, if a terrorist pulls a box cutter, that guy is going to have a dozen passengers subduing him in nothing flat. (Didn't something like this happen to the "shoe bomber?" There would possibly be only minor injuries. The reason it worked before was that everyone expected to come out of it alive if they did nothing.
Re:U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:5, Insightful)
No: Airlines are limited in how they may restrict access. The basic idea is this - you have the right to travel freely within the US (this is basic constitutional law - that which is not specifically illegal is legal, Bill of Rights, etc). You also have the right to enter into contracts with private parties - i.e. with Airlines to transport you within the US. Airlines are also bound by 'common carrier' legislation, but that's not directly applicable here.
However, you are *not* allowed to enter into an illegal contract - you can't sell yourself into slavery, for example. So if your contract with the airline is illegal/unconstitutional (for example, violation of privacy rights, discriminatory, etc) then it's not a valid contract. So the Airline can't say "You can't fly with us if you don't consent to stripping naked for our screeners", as that would be an illegal contract. At the moment they're getting round some of this by having the TSA do the screening, so it's not the Airlines that are making these demands, but the Government. That actually makes things worse, in my opinion.
That's the theory. It's not been tested in the courts yet, although Gilmore's giving part of it a good try.
Re:Who wants to see everything? (Score:2, Insightful)
If I was a terrorist, who could stop me from entering a plane, a bus, a supermarket, an underground parking lot and blowing up the building thus killing a lot of people? It is impossible to stop people if they want to hurt other people. The only way is to reduce the number of people that would want to hurt you.
A good strategy in order to achieve this is to:
- Stop killing people for oil.
- Stop supporting juntas in south america and Middle East.
- End the warmongering
- Stop funding extremists in the world. Most of the terrorist aattacks in the US were made by ppl that used to be funded by the us goverment a few years back (e.x. Talibans)
Re:Hardly X-Rated. Maybe R-Rated... (Score:3, Insightful)
As to relative odds, your chance of dying in an accident in your own home is far greater than your chance of being murdered (in your bed or elsewhere). So with safety in mind, lets ban individual houses, and all live in nice safe enclosures
As to your high-contrast message (an excellent idea! Do come back and let us know when you do it!) I suggest putting it square across your ass, so they're forced to take a good close look if they want to read it.
[Wondering if metallic "temporary tattoo" ink would work]
Re:U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:3, Insightful)
BUT -- it's not the *airline* making the rules; it's the *government*.
Since we have the implicit right of freedom of movement, if the gov't imposes rules on airlines that restrict freedom of movement, then the airlines are being used as the government's hand in restricting our rights, and the airlines' ownership of the planes becomes irrelevant to the argument.
If there were no federal rules about what people could carry aboard, and it was all done entirely at the airlines' behest, *then* I'd agree with you that if a person doesn't like it, they can travel by some other method.
Assuming that all other methods won't eventually be subject to scrutiny. One can easily imagine a future version of this tech being used to scan vehicles entering a freeway. Hell, why not just put scanners on the doors of every private residence, so there's no chance that you can carry a weapon out the door at all?!
I see a market (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly... This is fundamentally *bad* technology. If it can easily be manipulated, it is even worse technology.....
Honestly, we are setting ourselves up to be more vulnerable rather than less. A tightly organized terrorist group could cause *more* damage to the US using very little force than they could prior to Sept 11th. Consider the following scenario:
1) Terrorists engage in a large number of fake plots. Maybe leaving luggage stuffed with weights and paper in airport restrooms, giving annonymous tips about ships importing produce being contaminated with chemical and/or biological agents, etc. As a result air traffic is largely shut down in this country, as are produce imports.
2) Once people discover that these are all hoaxes, a real attack is set off somewhere. Security is either distracted or not taking it seriously. So the damage is greater. THis could be kept up for a while. Bear in mind that the goal of terrorism is to scare us into being manipulated. We are well on the way to giving them that.
What we need to do is focus on how to minimize the impact of attacks and then work carefully to find political ways to cut terrorists off from their support base. Prevention is less important than containment.
Re:U.S. Constititution 101 (Score:2, Insightful)