Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Nude-O-Scope Objections

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 7:24 am
  #1  
Original Poster
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,736
Nude-O-Scope Objections

I'm curious about the nude-o-scope objections, and particularly what concerns people have.

The issues seem to be these three:

1. It slows things down
2. It's an invasion of privacy
3. There's a potential radiation risk

To me, #1 is the biggest issue.

Over the weekend, Total Recall was on, and I found myself thinking, during the scene in the subway, when Ahnuld runs past the scanner, which sees the gun on him, "would I object if there were a walkthrough nude-o-scope which meant I could just keep my belongings with me, no need to go through the WTMD, or put anything through the x-ray?" I don't think I would, even if there was a TSA minion in a booth somewhere who could see my personal bits.

How do others on this board feel? If 1 and 3 were resolved, and, in exchange for the nude-o-scope imaging, security became a smoother, faster, simpler process, would that be worth it? Genuinely curious.
cestmoi123 is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 7:42 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OOL/DOH
Programs: QF LTS WP, Avis Pres Club, HH Diam.
Posts: 3,190
no...
VH-RMD is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 7:50 am
  #3  
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
50 Countries Visited
5M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
Originally Posted by cestmoi123
How do others on this board feel? If 1 and 3 were resolved, and, in exchange for the nude-o-scope imaging, security became a smoother, faster, simpler process, would that be worth it? Genuinely curious.
Absolutely not.

It is unnecessary.

The only check should be:

WTMD
ETP/ETD
x-ray bags

and nothing else without clear, probable cause to do so.
Spiff is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 7:57 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,972
Do we really need another thread on this ? It's been done to death, everyone has his/her own opinion and nobody is likely to be swayed by the other side.

Anyway it just gives YKW another chance to spew his drivel. Who needs it ?
Wally Bird is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 8:52 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: SW Rapid Rewards, Hilton Honors, Marriott, Avis First
Posts: 4,831
Nope.

One point you missed in your analysis is that there is genuine concern that the scanners are not effective or are no more effective than the WTMD and ETP/ETD.

If that is the case, why spend the money to install these things that only add concerns?
PhoenixRev is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 9:14 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Originally Posted by Spiff
It is unnecessary.

The only check should be:

WTMD
ETP/ETD
x-ray bags

and nothing else without clear, probable cause to do so.
The people with the most security are in prison. Thats why its called MAXIMUM security.

The more security you have, the less freedom you have.^
Wimpie is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 9:34 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,259
Originally Posted by Spiff
Absolutely not.

It is unnecessary.

The only check should be:

WTMD
ETP/ETD
x-ray bags

and nothing else without clear, probable cause to do so.
What SPIFF said, NO WAY am I going through one of these & let some TSA pervert see me
coachrowsey is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 9:44 am
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
20 Countries Visited
500k
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 30,986
Why should anyone need to justify their opposition to being treated like a criminal just to get on a commercial aircraft.

What other business do you or anyone else trade with that shakes you down like a criminal?

Being treated like that seems to show that the business doesn't want my trade.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 10:21 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: IAD
Programs: *wood Gold
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by cestmoi123
How do others on this board feel? If 1 and 3 were resolved, and, in exchange for the nude-o-scope imaging, security became a smoother, faster, simpler process, would that be worth it? Genuinely curious.
To me, no amount of convenience is worth giving up the privacy that is lost when going through one of those things.

At a minimum, I'm willing to wait in line longer and spend more time at the checkpoint if it means that my privacy isn't invaded. At a maximum, I am prepared for the inconvenience of driving from coast to coast and not flying in commercial aircraft again if these body scanners become mandatory for all passengers.

Perhaps my views are a bit extreme in this instance, but that's simply the way I feel. TSA is an agency that thinks about invasiveness and self-propagation first, with nary a thought toward how their position effectively tramples the Fourth and Fifth Amendments until forced to by the Courts or Congress. So far neither of those institutions have seen fit to rein in TSA in their activities to terrorize the flying public while looking for relatively non-existant and sometimes imaginery threats-- and that's unfortunate.
clrankin is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 10:34 am
  #10  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
1M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 72,279
Originally Posted by clrankin
TSA is an agency that thinks about invasiveness and self-propagation first, with nary a thought toward how their position effectively tramples the Fourth and Fifth Amendments until forced to by the Courts or Congress. So far neither of those institutions have seen fit to rein in TSA in their activities to terrorize the flying public while looking for relatively non-existant and sometimes imaginery threats-- and that's unfortunate.
^^
halls120 is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 10:42 am
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
20 Countries Visited
1M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,811
Originally Posted by cestmoi123

1. It slows things down
2. It's an invasion of privacy
3. There's a potential radiation risk
Rounding out the top ten objections:

4. It's not effective
5. It's corruption / nepotism in action (Chertoff connection)
6. It's already been lied about by TSA
7. High potential for abuse re: image retention and tramsmittal
8. Prurience, e.g. TSOs herding cute girls / women to NoS, shrugging at others
9. Concealment of opt-out option
10. Increased chance of theft with prolonged separation from all personal items

Need any more?
BearX220 is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 11:25 am
  #12  
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA Plat/1MM
Posts: 546
Originally Posted by cestmoi123
I'm curious about the nude-o-scope objections, and particularly what concerns people have.

The issues seem to be these three:

1. It slows things down
2. It's an invasion of privacy
3. There's a potential radiation risk


How do others on this board feel? If 1 and 3 were resolved, and, in exchange for the nude-o-scope imaging, security became a smoother, faster, simpler process, would that be worth it? Genuinely curious.
No. I am an American. I object to being strip searched without probable cause.
VonS is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 1:06 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Republicans request review of airport scanner safety

Finally, somebody is questioning Nappy!
(Not likely to go anywhere, but a good start)

http://www.securityinfowatch.com/node/1317131
Wimpie is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 1:21 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,972
Republicans request review of airport scanner safety

These the same Republicans whose silence on the issue was deafening while there was a Republican administration ?

Safety isn't the number 1 concern for a lot of objectors anyway.
Partisan silliness, nothing will come of it .
Wally Bird is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2010 | 1:47 pm
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
20 Countries Visited
1M
40 Nights
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marriott or Hilton hot tub with a big drink <glub> Beverage: To-Go Bag DYKWIA:SSSS /rolleyes ☈ Date Night:Costco
Programs: Sea Shell Lounge Platinum, TSA Pre✓ Refusnik Diamond, PWP Gold, FT subset of the subset
Posts: 12,523
Originally Posted by cestmoi123
Over the weekend, Total Recall was on, and I found myself thinking, during the scene in the subway, when Ahnuld runs past the scanner, which sees the gun on him,
OK, I'm not much for action flicks so I've never seen the movie. IMDB has this in part of the synopsis:

Doug narrowly gets to Mars, which is a domed colony. Many of the people on Mars are mutants with deformed features and psychic abilities caused by the mixture of radiation and shoddy air quality provided by Cohaagen. After a close encounter at the airport, Doug befriends Benny, a mutant taxi driver, and meets Melina (who strongly resembles the woman he requested at Rekall), who doesn't believe his story and orders him to leave at gunpoint.

Uh, I think I'll pass on that dystopian future. Did the mutants get irradiated by the Nude-O-Scopes?
N965VJ is offline  


Contact Us - 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 © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.