honeytoes

Sorry for a dumb question here, but why don't they just get rid of the offensive Nude-o-scope™ and use bomb-sniffing dogs? Have I missed something here?

flpab

Dogs are the best! There are those sniffer wands also.

doober

You handle used tampons, panty liners and colostomy bags? No you don't, Ronnie.

BubbaLoop

Even if I accepted your premise that images and chemical detection are equally dependent on human intervention to be effective, why would your organization prefer the methods that are disgusting and morally unacceptable for many of us, versus the methods that are not objectionable?

Have you seen the terrorist“s underwear? Unless WBI has the resolution necessary to, say, show the contours of you pubic hairs, there is no way it could have differentiated between underwear bomb and a maxipad, adult diaper, or any number of intimate necessities you do not need to know about. How do you expect to "resolve" such situations when using the WBI? Physical inspection of pads used by menstruating women? I can tell you ahead of time that will backfire very quickly.

ORDflyer

I know this will run against the grain of this thread and this forum, but if TSA wants to assign someone to view my 62-year-old penis, I really don't care. Why are some folks so concerned if some anonymous stranger sees their body? Have they never been to a hospital? Never been to a high school or YMCA locker room?
I would rather quickly walk through a machine than submit to the pat-down. I just don't think the "aversion to nudity" phobia evidenced in this Forum is as widespread as one might think if one lives here only.
I do not deny that the involuntary aspects of the machines are objectionable, but why do so many seem to object?

polonius

I believe dogs would do a better job of managing the TSA as well.

Dresden

For those of us with impanted metal body parts the WBI is a terrific improvement over the penalty box and pat searches where you must interact with screeners who either don't give a ()&(& or those who use the opportunity to act like the gestapo.

Flying out of Denver I never miss the opportunity to use the WBI lane, just so I can keep screener's funky hands off my body. I wish every airport had them. I just came back from HNL and then LGA last week and hated every minute of it at their security checkpoints.

BubbaLoop

I don“t think anyone here is against the use of WBIs as secondary screening devices, as an option instead of a pat down. We object to its use as a primary screening mechanism, and without clear explanations to the public regarding what it does and the option of a pat down.

I don“t have a penis, but I still generally have nothing against nudity, when and where appropriate. I do however stand against the principal that we must all be seen naked to fly. I also have a serious problem with the fact that I can“t see the person doing the screening, nor the image generated.

jkhuggins

And I get the impression that if this one thing were changed about WBI procedures, about half of the opposition to WBI would dissipate. Secrecy breeds suspicion.

doober

Reasons why so many people object:

1. The TSA is operating this technology and people just do not trust the TSA.

When one goes to a hospital and submits oneself to x-rays, being seen naked, whatever, it is done only after a thorough explanation of the procedure and giving written consent.

With WBI, we do not have the ability to determine if the person viewing the scan might be getting off on seeing our naked bodies (and the naked bodies of young children). In a hospital setting one gets to meet and interact with the person doing the examination and one has the opportunity to refuse a procedure if one becomes uncomfortable with the individual.

2. As many of the experts are saying, WBI might have caught this guy, not WBI would have caught him. To be subjected to a virtual strip search because a machine might catch something is demeaning and useless.

3. The risk is so minimal of a plane being blown out of the sky, that it is totally unreasonable to demand all passengers submit to be virtually strip searched or given a very invasive pat down in order to fly.

As much as I don't like the guy, I heard Peter King say this a.m. that we have to stop giving as much security screening to Scandinavian grandmothers as others might warrant.

halls120

If a TSA pervert wants to get off looking at my nude image (highly unlikely, given my shape, but you never know), I couldn't care less.

The single objection I have to the device is that it creates an electronic image that can be saved. You can tell me all day long about all of the procedures that TSA has implemented to prevent the storing and misuse of these images, and I won't believe you, because any system of safeguards can be overcome, and any computer can be hacked.

TSORon

Because there are things dogs cannot detect, they cant work 24x7, they are only as good as their training, and they have a fairly high miss rate.

GUWonder

But they detect explosives that strip searching machines do not.

jkhuggins

Serious question here: what is the miss rate for a highly trained dog versus the miss rate for a highly trained WBI operator? Is there any hard data available?

TSORon

When I was in the military dogs were certified at 70% or higher.

The dog and the handler work as a team, the dog can do absolutely everything correct per its training and the handler can still miss it. But if the dog misses the item then there is no way that the handler can tell.