"Naked" scanner to go on trial at airport

[Waxen_Pith 10]

If it stops one it's worth it.

 

If someone is determined enough to blow up a plane, they will find a way round this. Or they'll go and blow something else up, like a train, or a bus, that doesn't have all these 'security measures'.

[Waxen_Pith 10]

When you break your arm please ask the doctor to twist it and poke it until he finds the fracture as those machines are really expensive too.

 

Yeah, but the machines at the doctors have a point.

[Pidgeon 10]

It's still down to the skill of the operator to interpret the images to determine any danger. They have had xray machines on baggage for years and yet bombs still get through.

[WYEXILE 10]

When you break your arm please ask the doctor to twist it and poke it until he finds the fracture as those machines are really expensive too.

 

I'm not sure I get your point. I'm not against the machines, just that it is claimed they save time, and they don't.

[beer 10]

They may well not be erotic, but they are pornographic. Pornography in its basic visual form is nothing more than sexually explicit pictures and as nudity is banned in public the images on this scanner can be deemed indecent at the very least.

 

I don't think they are intending to broadcast them on their own TV channel.

[Waxen_Pith 10]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/al-qaeda-to-recruit-fatties-200910132132/

[Berberis 10]

It isn't meant to close a loophole but to offer an alternative to frisking which some people find more intrusive. It's a choice!

 

If you don’t want to go through security, don’t fly. Why should the rest of us be forced to pay for these scanners?

 

Are they really being looked at as a security requirement based on evidence of specific failings in current security or are they being installed at a huge cost to appease a tiny minority.

 

Yet again the tail is wagging the dog!

[Berberis 10]

I don't think they are intending to broadcast them on their own TV channel.

 

So pornography only becomes pornography when its broadcast now? My, how things have changed.

[Shoesme 10]

I think most people will be against the idea because they don't their genitals to be 'seen'.

[Berberis 10]

I don't care in the slightest.

 

a) the picture isn't in enough detail to be pornographic

b) they will be changing quickly, no time to photograph them

c) do you really think someone looking at thousands of neon green naked outlines of mostly ugly people every hour is going to be getting off on it?

d) you can choose not to go through it

e) oh no. A security man might see an outline of my penis. He might realise I'm a freak for having a penis. No other men have penises. What will he think? etc...

 

If it gets me through the line quicker and I don't have to mess about removing belts and shoes then I really don't care if a bored man briefly sees a faint outline of my genitals. In fact, if it knocks ten minutes off the time I have to wait in a security line behind families of scousers flying to Magaluf then I'd quite happily remove everything and he can examine my **** personally.

 

You have obviously not worked in an industry that comes into contact with a large number of the general public.

 

I have and the code words and notifications used between staff members whenever a good looking member of the general public is encountered is pretty common practice.

[Richeh 10]

So pornography only becomes pornography when its broadcast now? My, how things have changed.

 

So in our basest form, we are unbroadcast pornography. That's deep, man. This wouldn't bother me personally unless I wasn't allowed to strike a cheeky peek-a-boo pose while they're doing it - though it's still grossly invasive.

[Shoesme 10]

So in our basest form, we are unbroadcast pornography. That's deep, man. This wouldn't bother me personally unless I wasn't allowed to strike a cheeky peek-a-boo pose while they're doing it - though it's still grossly invasive.

 

That's how i feel, why can't the fight against terrorism be fun?