In response to Fugsnarf
Actually, the new scanners have already stopped a few people from bringing weapons and other bad items onto planes. Saying it won't do any good is like saying reading a book won't help you learn anything from the book.
In response to Fugsnarf
I don't know, I would imagine that to any religious fanatic planning to blow up a plane, a large scanning device that encompasses their entire body would cause them considerable anxiety, and maybe help airport staff identify them.

In the end, it's an arms race. Even so, I think some of you are making light of their potential effectiveness. Will it stop all terrorists? No. Will it stop more than the old methods? Probably. Really, it's too early to be making broad statements as the technology is still going through test runs.

Also, just to play devil's advocate to my own argument, this situation could also be compared to DRM: it only takes one to get through before everyone knows how to do it.

<font style="font-size: 8px;">But then again, if they're suicide bombers, they won't exactly get to tell anyone ;) </joke></font>
In response to Fugsnarf
Only way to sure-fire, 100% stop terrorists is to just kill everyone in existence. There, no terrorists.
In response to DarkCampainger
Their purpose in life is to kill the infidels and fullfill their purpose for the Jihad. They will get more creative and do whatever it takes to cause damage. They will always find ways around our security. I guarentee you and this will not stop the terrorists in any way.
In response to Nadrew
Sure, it stopped people. I don't doubt that it will continue to. But the terrorists will get creative. They'll find ways to do what needs to be done in their eyes. They won't stop because they can't. It's their life, it's their religion, it's necessity to them.
In response to Fugsnarf
No matter what happens terrorists will come up with new an exciting ways of doing things, we're not just trying to stop "terrorists" we're trying to stop as many of the crazy retards who try to get on a plane as possible. More ways of doing that isn't going to hurt more than it helps, not even close.
In response to Fugsnarf
Guarantee? Based on what? Are you a renowned security or terrorism expert?

<font style="font-size:8px">And appearing on Fox does not an expert make... </joke></font>

Not all terrorists are Muslim, by the way.
In response to DarkCampainger
The jihadists are the biggest issue. They aren't just evil, they believe they need to kill the infidels to go to heaven. It's their religious duty, and the government isn't doing anything about them. They have openly declared war on us. Even the President of Iran said he would not only wipe Israel off the map when he gets his nuclear weapons in 10 years (which he said 10 years ago) but attack the U.S. as well. Guess what, we've hardly done anything about that stuff. Bumping airport security up is not going to solve the issue with those terrorists in any way.
In response to DarkCampainger
DarkCampainger wrote:
Not having people see your "junk" an outline of your "junk" is an essential liberty now?

Also, this system is supposed to be faster than metal detectors. I assume you won't have to take off your belt, shoes, ect; as they can x-ray them while you're wearing 'em.

Better security, less inconvenience. Win-win if you can get over the sensationalism.

Privacy is an essential liberty. These scanners show things such as piercings, implants, etc. It'll be a big issue when (note: when, not if) the first batch of photos starts showing up on line.

In a couple months once they've figured out how to bypass it the extra security won't mean much of anything (Not that it isn't already possible via x-ray proof boxes in carry on (or hell, just checked luggage).
In response to Xioden
If you got piercings or implants and feel embarrased about it I question why you got them.
In response to Xioden
Xioden wrote:
Privacy is an essential liberty.

I want to point out that, while you're probably going to refer to the Constitution or Bill of Rights for this, nowhere in either is there a right to privacy, nor is there in anything like the International Declaration of Human Rights (IIRC), or any international treaties.
In response to Fugsnarf
Fugsnarf wrote:
Sure, it stopped people. I don't doubt that it will continue to.

Could you explain the mind-bending logic behind the notion that, because something will almost certainly fail at some point, it should never be used at all, ever? I would like to hear you expand on and defend this.
As far as rights issues are concerned, I don't belivee this would violate anything. I remember hearing about these before, and they seem to make your appearance somewhat cartoony, essentially obscuring any genitalia or what have you. This isn't something I'm much concerned with anyways, given that I don't believe that using airplanes are an essential right, and that to use them it's perfectly reasonable to be subject to what would otherwise be a rights violation.
In response to Popisfizzy
Not to mention that as soon as you step foot into an airport (a PRIVATE company) you agree to follow all of their rules and regulations. The rules and regulations of a private establishment supersede any privacy laws and whatnot. That's why it's legal to have cameras inside of places like that without posting any notice, however if there are outside cameras a notice must be posted on the outside of the building and the cameras can only cover the property.

Once you enter these places you're basically at the whim of the company who runs the service. There are common sense things like not filming toilets but it's perfectly legal to film the rest of the bathroom.

It's not like these machines take high-def pictures of your body, they take an outline that detects things out of the normal, get over it.
In response to Nadrew
Nadrew wrote:
we're not just trying to stop "terrorists" we're trying to stop as many of the crazy retards who try to get on a plane as possible. More ways of doing that isn't going to hurt more than it helps, not even close.

Now that's the most intelligent thing I've read all day.

So far, the majority of the complaints I've read have summed up to "Airport security is clunky slow and annoying to all passangers whaa!", "It wont stop terrorists whaa!" and "Invasion of our civil liberties whaa!". The last of which makes my brain hurt so much, I might just have an aneurysm from the absolute stupidity of it.

Let me break this down a little. This technology is both - A: Faster than metal detectors, as it doesn't require the removal of metal objects. And B: A replacement for metal detectors. - And you're all complaining that airport security is a hassle for the customers and whatnot? Contradiction anyone? How dare they introduce something that speeds up the whole process! Those monsters!

Now for the whole Terrorist bizzo. Since when were terrorists the only people we're trying to kick off planes again? "That guy is a terrorist! Get him! Ohh no, wait, he's just a guy with a really big shotgun who just intends to murder the pilot and cause the entire plane to crash. He's not associated with any terrorist organisation and his main goal isn't to cause terror, let him pass!" Someone said earlier, crime is crime. They're not trying to prevent just terrorists, they're trying to prevent crime.

"It's an invasion of our civil liberties" ... Are they broadcasting it to the entire airport with a big announcer saying "Come one! Come All! See {whoever complained about this}'s penis! Compare yourself to this person, then prepare to laugh or skulk to the back without anyone seeing you! Come one! Come all!"? Give me a break...
In response to Moonlight Memento
Moonlight Memento wrote:
If you got piercings or implants and feel embarrased about it I question why you got them.

Yes, because people who get piercings/implants in locations that for any other situation they have an expectation of privacy about should not feel embarrassed when people are suddenly able to see them.
In response to Popisfizzy
Popisfizzy wrote:
Xioden wrote:
Privacy is an essential liberty.

I want to point out that, while you're probably going to refer to the Constitution or Bill of Rights for this, nowhere in either is there a right to privacy, nor is there in anything like the International Declaration of Human Rights (IIRC), or any international treaties.

Fourth amendment; People have the right to feel secure in their person. It's akin to being taken to a back room and strip searched. The only difference is this is being used on the masses under the guise of security. If people were being put behind a curtain and being told to strip prior to being allowed on a plane they would be outraged... But then again probably not since like everyone else they'd just bend over and take it as their rights are being taken away under the guise of security.

Once Again:

"Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -Benjamin Franklin
In response to Tiberath
Tiberath wrote:
"It's an invasion of our civil liberties" ... Are they broadcasting it to the entire airport with a big announcer saying "Come one! Come All! See {whoever complained about this}'s penis! Compare yourself to this person, then prepare to laugh or skulk to the back without anyone seeing you! Come one! Come all!"? Give me a break...

No one is broadcasting it to anyone... At least not until the first batch of photos from it gets released to only, you know, the entire world via the internet.
In response to Xioden
Xioden wrote:
No one is broadcasting it to anyone... At least not until the first batch of photos from it gets released to only, you know, the entire world via the internet.

Really? It's a good thing you'll be entirely identifiable. I mean, looking at the photos in the link above, I could easily tell that was Josh Moore, a middle aged american man with ties to the KKK.
In response to Popisfizzy
Popisfizzy wrote:
As far as rights issues are concerned, I don't belivee this would violate anything. I remember hearing about these before, and they seem to make your appearance somewhat cartoony, essentially obscuring any genitalia or what have you.

I haven't seen any from the "improved" version. The original machines often had issues seeing through some material, people's underwear were often plainly visible while not being actually able to see through it. This "flaw" was since fixed and the images *are* exact and defined prior being blurred down by the software.
Page: 1 2 3 4