body scan - airport

[VickiB]

I'm angry.

Years ago I was one of the lucky ones singled out for a 'pat down frisking' in airport security. It was a lady who did the honors, and that really didn't bother me too much.

Yesterday I was picked for the body scan, a machine that creates a naked image of your body 'in graphic detail'. I was not happy and all I could think of while I stood in that machine, legs spread, arms over my head, was that quote "Those who will give up liberty for security deserve niether" (Was that Ben Franklin?)

From this point on I will choose to drive rather than fly if possible.

For those who aren't aware of this new security process here's a short article from the Chicago Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/chi-airport-bd20jul20,0,2583531.story

Vicki

[waterflow]

I wouldn't fly if they paid me. Did once a very very long time ago but had to and that was back when things were normal for airports. You know that sounds really sort of like rape or is it me? Is it really a naked picture of you? Was it a woman at least doing the scan? I don't see how they could get away with that one. Pretty soon they will make people strip while waiting in line for their tickets. Why do they always pick on you too? Think I would walk 1,000 miles before going through that again.

[VickiB]

Yes, it really does create a 'naked picture' of you, though they say they blurr your face. Gee thanks! And no, they do not have males to view males, and women to view females which would make it a little bit better.

Why me? Who knows,...just rotten luck I suppose. (Kind of ironic as both times happened on Las Vegas trips!) I believe they just randomly pick people.

I guess I'm a prude, but this really bothered me and I've had trouble sleeping ever since. (How dum is that?) I mean, if this is really necessary for security, do it to everyone. But picking out every 10th or 20th person to humiliate this way? Seriously, that's awful bad odds for finding something if you're screening for an explosive device taped to someone!

My gut feeling is they're only doing it to a small percentage in the beginning. That way only a few complain. The vast majority of travelers stream on through, relieved they weren't the one singled out, and at the same time are exposed to the thinking that this is "a good security measure". But in time, I expect this will be done to everyone, though I don't believe for a moment this will make us "safe" when we fly.

My personal belief is they have gone too far. I'd rather drive from now on.

Vicki

[Briza]

oh, that would make me incredibly uncomfortable! :( Poor you! :grouphug: It would be at least somewhat better if the viewer was the same gender.

[ICNDonna]

I think everyone should be screened. There are just too many possible ways to do damage and in the air is a good place to do it. I'd much rather have someone view my body image in a security area than to have someone trying to identify me by viewing body parts.

Just my thoughts.

Donna

[Claredale]

I am with Donna, anything to make traveling safe, I am for. Wasn't it just recently that a man got onto a bus and stabbed another passenger multiple times and even ended up cutting off his head.

I remember when I flew a few months after 9/11 when I had to fly to Pennsylvania when my dad didn't have much longer to live. I had just had my 2nd interstim surgery a couple weeks prior and I was chosen to be patted down and scanned with the wand. I was so glad I had my card from Medtronics already because of my "butt implant". The guard was very nice when I told her that I had just had surgery and it was very tender. Another lady was picked out of the line after me and she had a raging fit when all she had to do was take off her shoes. She happened to sit across the aisle from me and cried almost the entire trip. I know we are all different when it comes to our privacy, but I would much prefer knowing that my safety is more important than anything.

I am sure I wouldn't feel comfortable, but, I would just close my eyes and get it over with.

[VickiB]

I think everyone should be screened.

I remember one of the security personel stepping alongside me right as I reached the metal detector and saying "Number 10". That's when I was re-routed to the scanning booth. I'm assuming every 10th passenger was being screened in this manner. I asked the fellow doing the scan two separate times if this was one of those machines that created a naked image of the person and he was very evasive, never answering my question.

I was very nice, and co-operative the entire time. It was not his decision and he was simply doing his job.

If they did this to everyone, I may have felt a little better about it. This was one in ten odds of finding the security risk, which seems pretty pointless to me. If one of us were up to no good, odds are very likely it was one of the other nine who sailed right on through.

I also believe they should also be up-front that this screening device is in use so that those who find it offensive can choose another method of travel.

Vicki

[waterflow]

I think people have gotten overly worried about things. If someone really wants to kill people they will find a way. Look at how many people get through security and right out to the plane itself. They've had that on the news many times. I heard on the news or read in a paper if you use money to buy a plane ticket you will be searched for sure. They suspect people who use cash are up to something. I don't even own a credit card. Never have. I say if the world has really gotten to the point of this then no more traveling by plane, bus or train. Only for medical reasons. Travel by car or families would have to stay near each other.

Could you refuse to do the scan? I say it's no different then a peeping tom. Now if it was in a private room with a woman for a woman, man for man then maybe and that's if the person ok's it. If they stick to the every 10th person then that's just stupid. There is protection that is needed I under stand that but freedom needs to be kept also.

[ICNDonna]

You could refuse to do the scan, but you might not be able to board your flight. I haven't been selected as one who gets extra scanning, but I wopuldn't mind at all. Members of my family fly frequently in their jobs and I want them to be as safe as possible.

So far all I have had to do was to remove my shoes and run them through the metal detecting machine.

Donna

[kadi]

I think eventually we'll all have to just fly naked & without luggage....

[mary124]

I think this is a good thing. I know that when my son and I was flying earlier this year this he had to do this, I got lucky(?) as I can't be scan due to a heart valve replacement so all they did was use the wand on me.

[vm]

Just saw this on CNN and thought of this thread:

STRASBOURG, France (AP) -- EU lawmakers have joined U.S. civil liberty campaigners in criticizing a new scanner that allows airport security to see through passengers' clothes, calling it a virtual strip search that should only be used as a last resort.

The new system, which the European Union plans to authorize at the bloc's airports, allows guards to see an outline of passengers' bodies beneath their clothes, making it easier to detect any concealed objects.

It already is being introduced in several U.S. airports and has been tested in other countries around the world, including EU nations such as Britain and the Netherlands.

However, EU officials said it could face a ban if the 27-nation bloc does not include it in a new regulation listing acceptable airport security equipment.

"Many travelers will consider these scanners an enormous intrusion" on their personal privacy, Philip Bradbourn, a British Conservative member of the EU assembly, said Tuesday.

Bradbourn said the technology should not be used routinely on passengers, but could be introduced when suspicions are raised.

"There may be some benefit in having body scanners in our airports, but they should be a last resort and a substitution for a strip search, not a random sample of innocent holiday-makers," he said.

The plans have provoked concern from across the political spectrum, and many EU lawmakers issued statements ahead of Tuesday night's debate about the matter in the European Parliament, which is based in the eastern French city of Strasbourg.

The EU's executive body, the European Commission, says the legislation under consideration would respect safety and privacy rules, adding that passengers who objected could be offered an alternative form of security check.

The American Civil Liberties Union has long campaigned against use of the scanners for routine checking at U.S. airports, saying they should only be used in place of an intrusive search when there is probable cause.

After the machines were introduced at Amsterdam's Schiphol airport last year, officials there said they had few complaints from passengers, saying most approved because lines moved faster.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/10/22/eu.airport.body.scanners.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

[VickiB]

Snipped from the article Kim posted: "....allows guards to see an outline of passengers' bodies beneath their clothes...."

That sounds harmless, like the chalk drawing left behind at a murder scene on TV, but what they're seeing is far more graphic than that. There are plenty of samples available on the net. I could post an image here, but it would likely be considered 'inappropriate'. My point exactly!

Yes, the ACLU does not support this and I have sent them an email regarding my experience. The original statements made as to how and when this technology would be used, -only after failing another security measure, -in place of a strip search when there is probable cause, -offering an alternative pat-down if preferred, etc, is not true. They are subjecting random samples of travelers to this peep show, with no alternative option offered.

The ACLU does support other (less privacy invading) technology such as "sniifers". Their concerns are addressed in this article http://www.aclu.org/privacy/35540res20080606.html which also gives a list of the airports that have installed these imaging devices as of 6/08.

US Constitution, Bill of Rights, 4th amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

As far as I know, the US constitution is still supposed to be in effect, and the 4th has not been amended. Ignored maybe.

Yep, I'm still unhappy about this.

Vicki

Edited to add that I can't imagine I'm on any 'watch list'. My life/ acquaintences are extremely boring, and my last brush with the law was a parking ticket that I promptly paid back in 1976.

[vm]

This was the image with the article:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/WORLD/europe/10/22/eu.airport.body.scanners.ap/art.scan.afp.gi.jpg

[VickiB]

From what I've read the image you have posted is a Millimeter Wave Image. There is also a Backscatter version machine which produces this type of image:
http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file371_35506.jpg

I'm guessing it was the backscatter that was used on me because the security officer said I would only be exposed to a small amount of radiation. I'm fairly certain I'd read the millimeter doesn't involve radiation.

[vm]

Oh, good grief. The one you posted is way worse. Wow. :shake:

[hdwadman]

A few thoughts on this... if we have to resort to extreme measures that disrupt our lives, aren't the terrorists winning? And as for modesty, I have been examined and tested by so many strangers in the last year that I'm not sure I have any left!