Originally Posted by
chollie
Cite?
I hardly think a cite is required. You yourself have indicated that BKSX is no longer in use at airports. It seems to be common knowledge in this forum and was widely reported in newspapers.
Originally Posted by
chollie
My understanding is that BKSX is no longer in use at the airports, but IIRC, DHS wants to deploy the units in other government areas where there is a lower (*cough*) 'expectation of privacy', ie, prisons and even high-security government installations.
As this is Flyertalk, I don't think admission to prisons and high-security government installations is germane to the discussion.
Originally Posted by
chollie
Further, IIRC, someone (may not be Rapiscan) already has a BKSX equipped with 'gumby' in development. The alleged reason for getting rid of the current BKSX machines had nothing to do with radiation and everything to do with the inability (supposedly) to retrofit them with 'gumby' privacy protections. (The truth is, someone will make a lot more money by installing all new BKSX machines with gumby than they would make by retrofitting the old machines).
Now we come to something relevant. If indeed someone is developing BKSX with 'gumby' then I would have a problem. When a technology exists which does not use ionizing radiation (i.e. MMW), I see no reason for the government to employ something that does, no matter how minimal the risk.
Please note, that I am only addressing the ionizing radiation issue here. I had other issues with the BKSX technology as it was deployed unrelated to that issue, as well as with MMW.