Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Reload this Page >

Those of you who don't mind nude scans -- where DO you draw the line?

Those of you who don't mind nude scans -- where DO you draw the line?

Old Jan 2, 2010, 11:13 pm
  #91  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by Gargoyle
Bizarre. He should know that young Muslim men come in every shade of skin tone, and every race. And they can easily change their last name to Johnson or O'Hara, or buy a high quality fake passport for $200. So, how will "profiling" find them.

As to the nude-o-scope, purely in the eyes of the law, what is the difference between a child pornographer viewing images on their home computer and a TSO looking at 12 year old girls being scanned by that machine? (I'm not talking about how much they enjoy what they're doing; only about the dispassionate view under the laws of our nation of what they are actually doing).
The dispassionate view of the law is the perceived intent of the image. If a Judge feels the image was intended to arouse the image is child porn. In this case you would never win because the purpose of the image is not to arouse.

Now if a TSO captured an image of a child and then gave the image away or kept it for himself, that same image could now be child porn as the purpose has changed.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2010, 11:18 pm
  #92  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by GUWonder
... cavity and digestive tract concealers of explosives will be even less likely to get subjected to means that actually detects explosives .
I may be veering badly off-topic with this question, but would it be possible to blow up a plane with swallowed explosives? One problem, I think, would be that stomach acid would immediately start working on the containers; but while you could not obtain a precise time for the explosion, if the flight were a long one and the container material and thickness were properly chosen you could be fairly sure that the explosive would be released during the flight. But are there substances that would become explosive in the presence of stomach acids? And would it be possible to swallow a container large enough to contain a sufficient quantity? or, if numerous smaller containers were swallowed, would the content of each be released after a sufficiently uniform time so as to permit the critical mass of explosive material to be reached to permit a detonation adequate to the purpose?
williamsg4713 is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2010, 11:24 pm
  #93  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 464
Originally Posted by williamsg4713
I may be veering badly off-topic with this question, but would it be possible to blow up a plane with swallowed explosives? One problem, I think, would be that stomach acid would immediately start working on the containers; but while you could not obtain a precise time for the explosion, if the flight were a long one and the container material and thickness were properly chosen you could be fairly sure that the explosive would be released during the flight. But are there substances that would become explosive in the presence of stomach acids? And would it be possible to swallow a container large enough to contain a sufficient quantity? or, if numerous smaller containers were swallowed, would the content of each be released after a sufficiently uniform time so as to permit the critical mass of explosive material to be reached to permit a detonation adequate to the purpose?
You would have to be one screwed up, sick puppy to swallow explosives and detonate them. Really, how many people in the world would be capable of doing this?
oldjonesy is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2010, 11:41 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by oldjonesy
You would have to be one screwed up, sick puppy to swallow explosives and detonate them. Really, how many people in the world would be capable of doing this?
All that are wanting to die for their cause.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2010, 11:48 pm
  #95  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by williamsg4713
I may be veering badly off-topic with this question, but would it be possible to blow up a plane with swallowed explosives? One problem, I think, would be that stomach acid would immediately start working on the containers; but while you could not obtain a precise time for the explosion, if the flight were a long one and the container material and thickness were properly chosen you could be fairly sure that the explosive would be released during the flight. But are there substances that would become explosive in the presence of stomach acids? And would it be possible to swallow a container large enough to contain a sufficient quantity? or, if numerous smaller containers were swallowed, would the content of each be released after a sufficiently uniform time so as to permit the critical mass of explosive material to be reached to permit a detonation adequate to the purpose?
If you look at the recent attempt on the Saudi Prince, the would be assassin had secreted the explosive in his body. When he touched of the explosive, his body took the force and greatly diminished its destructive power.

I would be less worried about someone that kept the bomb inside them than I would be about someone that expelled the bomb before touching it off.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 3:22 am
  #96  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ANC
Programs: AS MVP
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by onlyairfare
Many of us are not concerned with exposure of the genitals, but rather (or in addition) with the unknown risk of long-term, repeated exposure to radiation, known to be carcinogenic, or radio waves, of uncertain health risk. This is particularly of concern regarding children, pregnant women, and those who have undergone cancer therapy, as they may be more susceptible.
I have significant concerns about this as well.

Maybe it's perfectly safe. If so, there ought to be some research documenting this. Can anyone point me to some objective (by which I mean non-TSA and non-manufacturer sponsored), peer-reviewed, published scientific research exploring the risks of repeated WBI exposure to pregnant women (and the fetuses they carry)? To babies and young children? To persons with suppressed immune systems?

I'm not being facetious -- honestly, I'd be quite interested in reviewing the scientific literature, if it's out there. And it SHOULD be out there. If it's not out there, if there is no such research at all or if it's all secret, how do we know the technology is safe for everyone to use?
Ruthalaska is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 5:11 am
  #97  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by williamsg4713
I'm in over my head in this thread. What's an SPO-7? What do you mean by taking it from passive to active?
It's one kind of strip search machine, except you don't have to step into a machine for it to do its thing.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 5:26 am
  #98  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by williamsg4713
I may be veering badly off-topic with this question, but would it be possible to blow up a plane with swallowed explosives? One problem, I think, would be that stomach acid would immediately start working on the containers; but while you could not obtain a precise time for the explosion, if the flight were a long one and the container material and thickness were properly chosen you could be fairly sure that the explosive would be released during the flight. But are there substances that would become explosive in the presence of stomach acids? And would it be possible to swallow a container large enough to contain a sufficient quantity? or, if numerous smaller containers were swallowed, would the content of each be released after a sufficiently uniform time so as to permit the critical mass of explosive material to be reached to permit a detonation adequate to the purpose?
There are products -- medical or even foodstuff -- that can expedite the emptying of digestive tract-concealed contraband from the mouth or the rectum. But they wouldn't have to go even that far. Vaginal or anal suppository concealing explosives can be removed with greater ease and are either not going to be detected by strip search machines and/or are going to result in more and bigger and uglier haystacks in which to loose a needle as the "tampon paradox" would come into play.

Back to contraband that goes into the mouth and/or stomach and acid concerns, those are not necessarily going to spare us from such a means of terrorist attack because there is material that can be used and will hold up well enough against stomach acids and other bodily actions upon consumed items.

Enough contraband can be smuggled on board this way to down a plane. It becomes far less likely to succeed when using explosives-detection means rather than wasting resources on strip searches that don't detect explosives.

Terrorism is an awful nuisance, and more people will have to learn to live with that reality just like they've managed to live with road accidents. The best bomb-makers can already and will usually be able to circumvent whatever security measures are in place or will be put in place using currently available technology. That just reinforces that terrorism is an awful nuisance and people will have to live with it because there is no such thing as 100% security for the living.

Last edited by GUWonder; Jan 3, 2010 at 5:34 am
GUWonder is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 6:47 am
  #99  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by oldjonesy
You would have to be one screwed up, sick puppy to swallow explosives and detonate them. Really, how many people in the world would be capable of doing this?
Any more screwed up than those who strap on explosive vest and detonate them?

These people are out there!
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 7:49 am
  #100  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by williamsg4713
I'm in over my head in this thread. What's an SPO-7? What do you mean by taking it from passive to active?
This thread on the TSA blog may help.

Think of the MMW devices as video cameras. Where video cameras capture visible light and some infrared, the MMW captures "light" (radio waves) outside the visible spectrum.

To use the camera analogy, the SPO-7 uses available "light" where the Whole Body Imagers use a lamp (emitter) to generate the "light".

The SPO-7 does not create an image of the subject like the WBI device does. The SPO-7 takes a "light" reading and from that light reading a computer generates a generic image with the possible trouble areas highlighted. This allows the operator to target the "alarm" area with other screening methods like a pat-down.

They key to the SPO-7 is the software, the rest of the system is very similar to the WBI. To take the SPO-7 from a passive system to an active system you basically need to control the "light". Or port the software over to the WBI. Either way, the technology is there so the TSA does not need to see anyone's privates.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 7:58 am
  #101  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by GUWonder
There are products -- medical or even foodstuff -- that can expedite the emptying of digestive tract-concealed contraband from the mouth or the rectum.
This would suggest prohibiting lavatory use earlier in the flight rather than later, would it not?

But would it be necessary to expel the explosive to make it work? Could a suicide bomber literally be a walking (or seated) bomb?

Originally Posted by GUWonder
But they wouldn't have to go even that far. Vaginal or anal suppository concealing explosives can be removed with greater ease and are either not going to be detected by strip search machines and/or are going to result in more and bigger and uglier haystacks in which to loose a needle as the "tampon paradox" would come into play.
Yes, but while those would not show up on a WBI scan they could, in principle, anyway, be discovered by a physical examination of the anus, and of the vaginas of those who have them. But you couldn't discover stomach
content this way. Therefore, if in principle a person can turn himself into a bomb by swallowing explosive, would it, again in principle, require a higher-powered xray of the stomach and digestive tract to find this out?

Originally Posted by GUWonder
The best bomb-makers can already and will usually be able to circumvent whatever security measures are in place or will be put in place using currently available technology.
I recall many years ago reading, in a piece about Presidential security, that preventing assassination is much more difficult if the perpetrator is indifferent to his own death, whether in the act or by subsequent execution. I recall this article coming to mind after 9/11. What you can do is make the crime more difficult for the suicidal assassin, but while you can improve the odds
you can't absolutely prevent it, at least without making it impossible for a President to do his job. The question, then, for the Secret Service as well as for airline security becomes, as you point out, a trade-off.
williamsg4713 is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 7:59 am
  #102  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,605
Originally Posted by oldjonesy
You would have to be one screwed up, sick puppy to swallow explosives and detonate them. Really, how many people in the world would be capable of doing this?
Plenty of them are in jail after swallowing cocaine to smuggle it
alanR is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 8:02 am
  #103  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Originally Posted by oldjonesy
You would have to be one screwed up, sick puppy to swallow explosives and detonate them. Really, how many people in the world would be capable of doing this?
There seems to be an endless supply of suicide bombers.
mre5765 is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 8:05 am
  #104  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
If you look at the recent attempt on the Saudi Prince, the would be assassin had secreted the explosive in his body. When he touched off the explosive, his body took the force and greatly diminished its destructive power.
OK; I feel a little better. :-)

Originally Posted by Trollkiller
I would be less worried about someone that kept the bomb inside them than I would be about someone that expelled the bomb before touching it off.
Or maybe I don't.
williamsg4713 is offline  
Old Jan 3, 2010, 8:07 am
  #105  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,605
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
The dispassionate view of the law is the perceived intent of the image.
Not in the UK where possession is illegal
alanR is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.