TSA Must Halt Airport Body Scanners

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against the TSA's use of airport body scanners. The judge stopped short of banning the devices, instead saying the agency must "promptly to proceed in a manner consistent with this opinion." Whatever the hell that means.

"It is clear that by producing an image of the unclothed passenger, (a full-body) scanner intrudes upon his or her personal privacy in a way a magnetometer does not," wrote Judge Douglas Ginsburg for the three-judge panel.
Click to expand...
 
The harder they make it to fly, the less people will do it. Tourism and service is a big industry in the US, we shouldn't crush it because of the 0.003% chance you might die.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
The harder they make it to fly, the less people will do it. Tourism and service is a big industry in the US, we shouldn't crush it because of the 0.003% chance you might die.
Click to expand...

This. The wonders of the TSA make the US a scary place to come to for tourists. The people intent on damage still wont care.
 
Exitwound said:
Read the headlines again.

MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43773344/ns/travel-news/

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the machines, known as Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT), were *not* an unconstitutional search and *declined to halt* their use despite TSA's failure to follow proper procedure.
Click to expand...

So even though they don't know how to follow procedure, or even sought public comment before deploying them, the appeals court allowed them to continue using them?

God bless America, and the authorities that make a mockery of the law.
 
so we have two different news sources seemingly reporting on the fact that the court either did or did not uphold the TSA's use of body scanners!

I read both articles and what seems to have happened is that the court did not rule that the scanners were unconstitutional and instead ruled that they were significant enough intrusions that they require public comment on their use.

Therefore the judge ordered the matter back to the TSA for consideration (that means they need to comply with the judge's orders) without placing an injunction against their use (that means they do it within a reasonable timeframe rather than ending the searches immediately).
 
mope54 said:
so we have two different news sources seemingly reporting on the fact that the court either did or did not uphold the TSA's use of body scanners!

I read both articles and what seems to have happened is that the court did not rule that the scanners were unconstitutional and instead ruled that they were significant enough intrusions that they require public comment on their use.

Therefore the judge ordered the matter back to the TSA for consideration (that means they need to comply with the judge's orders) without placing an injunction against their use (that means they do it within a reasonable timeframe rather than ending the searches immediately).
Click to expand...

This...
 
And when the next would be bomber has a device in a body cavity will we have to submit to a body cavity search? I will not subject myself nor my family to needless radiation exposure nor TSA molestation. My family and I will not be flying until the TSA changes these procedures.
"They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays," Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP."No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner,"

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/20/aol-investigation-no-proof-tsa-scanners-are-safe/

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/body-scanners-dangerous-scientists
 
Oh who gives a damn! I just want to get on the plane without standing in line for an hour and unpacking 2 bags of electronics (and wires) only to pack them all back up again after putting my shoes and jacket back on. Whatever makes it faster and less annoying. I could care less if someone gets a pretty shot of an unidentifiable humanoid image.
 
TheWeazmeister said:
This...
Click to expand...

This...

I see this more and more in these threads. People, that instead of sharing their opinion, just quote someone and essentially say "ditto". Thanks for your contribution to the thread. :rolleyes:

I think telling airports to turn the body scanners off is too little, too late. Being 1 Million a pop, the company that made them is rolling in the dough, and its out of the taxpayers wallet.
 
Kelby said:
This...

I see this more and more in these threads. People, that instead of sharing their opinion, just quote someone and essentially say "ditto". Thanks for your contribution to the thread. :rolleyes:

I think telling airports to turn the body scanners off is too little, too late. Being 1 Million a pop, the company that made them is rolling in the dough, and its out of the taxpayers wallet.
Click to expand...

Blame Kyle or Steve for not having a +1 function built in :D Rehashing the same thing that someone else said plenty well enough, waste of my time. I am glad that you're willing to contribute your opinion, as I do on many threads, but I am sorry to have not "contributed" in the phenomenal way that you have to this thread.
 
I'm weary of this debate over things like the Patriot Act and TSA, considering I was against most of these security measures back when it was actually being debated. However, those of us who fought for more personal freedom lost the debate. Liberty and privacy were casulties of security. I don't really care that much anymore. It's time for people to reap what they've sown.
 
Marlfox said:
I could care less if someone gets a pretty shot of an unidentifiable humanoid image.
Click to expand...
Really.

John_Wild_1_270x202.jpg


Looks pretty identifiable to me.

I just wish they would stop lying about them. They say that the machines are incapable of retaining the image. So how would you use the scan against them in court if it is never saved? :rolleyes:
 
tigerade said:
I don't really care that much anymore. It's time for people to reap what they've sown.
Click to expand...
I'll continue to fight anyway. If nobody speaks up, the powers that be go unchecked. Even one person screaming "THIS IS MADNESS" is far better than none.

The government needs to know that they're not The Invisible Man that nobody can see.
 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-Benjamin Franklin

I thought it would suffice in this discussion
 
The TSA is a sick joke.

What is to stop a terrorist from bombing a school or a mall? Should we put scanners everywhere?

Let get real. This is a violation of rights and yet another notch in the slow rise to an orwellian world.
 
let's get real. something that isn't forced upon you can't be a violation of rights. not only can you opt out of the scan but you can opt out of flying altogether. a violation of rights requires no opt-out option.

this is as much a violation of rights as a blood bank requiring your blood to be tested. no discussion necessary beyond that obvious truth.
 
fattypants said:
I'll continue to fight anyway. If nobody speaks up, the powers that be go unchecked. Even one person screaming "THIS IS MADNESS" is far better than none.

The government needs to know that they're not The Invisible Man that nobody can see.
Click to expand...

10 years ago I'd be fighting right along with you

However now I think about all those people who told me I was wrong, and the Patriot Act was necessary and TSA has do this and that to keep us safe. I wonder how many of them are having their crotch felt up by old men.

Karma.
 
tigerade said:
However now I think about all those people who told me I was wrong, and the Patriot Act was necessary and TSA has do this and that to keep us safe. I wonder how many of them are having their crotch felt up by old men.

Karma.
Click to expand...
LOL this is right on. I'm going to borrow it and use it elsewhere on the internet if you don't mind :p
 
If these scanner actually made us significantly more secure I would say there would at least be an argument for them, but they don't increase security. They are a colossal waste of taxpayer money and time. This is all just theater to make people feel safe.
 
They say there was paper work to suggest 9/11 before it happened. But in all honesty there's probably so much paper being passed around the white house it's hard to track it all. So why not pass the work onto the taxpayers at the expense of their time, money, and privacy. I mean if it saves politicians an hour or so a day of work and allows them more facebook and campaign time... why not?

I don't really know though so don't take my comment to heart.
 
tigerade said:
10 years ago I'd be fighting right along with you

However now I think about all those people who told me I was wrong, and the Patriot Act was necessary and TSA has do this and that to keep us safe. I wonder how many of them are having their crotch felt up by old men.

Karma.
Click to expand...

Nah they have private airplanes. They can't bother thinking of normal individuals that would be absurd for a politician to think that.
 
BGK said:
If these scanner actually made us significantly more secure I would say there would at least be an argument for them, but they don't increase security. They are a colossal waste of taxpayer money and time. This is all just theater to make people feel safe.
Click to expand...

now, THIS is a valid argument.
 
demografik said:
let's get real. something that isn't forced upon you can't be a violation of rights. not only can you opt out of the scan but you can opt out of flying altogether. a violation of rights requires no opt-out option.

this is as much a violation of rights as a blood bank requiring your blood to be tested. no discussion necessary beyond that obvious truth.
Click to expand...

So you have no right to travel?
 
Eisenblut said:
Really.

John_Wild_1_270x202.jpg


Looks pretty identifiable to me.

I just wish they would stop lying about them. They say that the machines are incapable of retaining the image. So how would you use the scan against them in court if it is never saved? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm not defending the use of these things, but that image is not real. It was confirmed that the image you linked to, and a lot of others, were just created by news agencies (by taking a picture of someone, inverting the colors, and then desaturating the image) because they did not have access to the actual images. The real images are not that clear (they also have a lot of overlay information, which these fake images never have). There are plenty of reasons to be against body scanners, but producing fake images can only hurt your case.
 
Also, they have no need to use the images in court. Its not like surveillance where they have to prove you did something. If the scan shows you have a gun on you, they arrest you and take the gun, the image is useless.
 
DeathPrincess said:
So you have no right to travel?
Click to expand...

flying on a plane is not a right. if it were, it would be free.

speaking your mind is a right. practicing religion is a right. owning a gun is a right - note that OWNING it is the right, not acquiring it.

making use of an airline's service is not.
 
demografik said:
flying on a plane is not a right. if it were, it would be free.

speaking your mind is a right. practicing religion is a right. owning a gun is a right - note that OWNING it is the right, not acquiring it.

making use of an airline's service is not.
Click to expand...
Flying is not a right, but to restrict the liberty of a person who has done nothing wrong (i.e. without charge or other due process) goes against the Constitution.
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States said:
No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
Click to expand...
Flying is not a right, but it is liberty.

Just like enjoying a glass of wine, driving a car, watching television, or buttering your bread--were the government to forbid you from doing any of these without due process of law, you could cite the fifth and fourteenth amendments as reasons why they could not.

Unless a person is proven to be a danger to other travelers (just like in the case of driving a car), their liberty should not be restricted.
 
Eisenblut said:
Really.

John_Wild_1_270x202.jpg


Looks pretty identifiable to me.

I just wish they would stop lying about them. They say that the machines are incapable of retaining the image. So how would you use the scan against them in court if it is never saved? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

that's not even real. The images are horrible you cant even see the face, and the sensitive areas blurred out by a privacy filter. Once the image is checked through for any "anomalies" the image is instantly deleted. Computers are not even connected to a network
 
The US government and the US in general is a big joke, and I say this as a US citizen. How can anybody in the US look at how our country is run (in almost all aspects, government, media, etc), and not think that the people who represent us are complete idiots, just jokes of human beings. And a lot of the reason that we are a big joke is because we all let them make us one.


We take ourselves too seriously.
 
BGK said:
If these scanner actually made us significantly more secure I would say there would at least be an argument for them, but they don't increase security. They are a colossal waste of taxpayer money and time. This is all just theater to make people feel safe.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

Personally, I feel people just need to be more vigilant. You see something suspicious? Report it. You don't have to get physically involved, just make others aware of the situation.
 
fattypants said:
Just like enjoying a glass of wine, driving a car, watching television, or buttering your bread--were the government to forbid you from doing any of these without due process of law, you could cite the fifth and fourteenth amendments as reasons why they could not.
Click to expand...

you mean like, having to be over 21 or having to have a drivers license? :rolleyes:

same deal. having requirements to enjoy a service is not unconstitutional.
 
demografik said:
you mean like, having to be over 21 or having to have a drivers license? :rolleyes:

same deal. having requirements to enjoy a service is not unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
Those restructions are due process of law. They were created in the interest of promoting the general welfare. I (actually, the 5th and 14th amendments) said "without due process of law", not with.

If the government revoked your driver's license or forbade you to drink without due process of law, that would be an injustice under the constitution.
 
demografik said:
you mean like, having to be over 21 or having to have a drivers license? :rolleyes:

same deal. having requirements to enjoy a service is not unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
Oh, and I'd agree to the TSA following these examples you mention. One and done, unless you prove you can't handle what you've earned.

What the TSA is doing, according to your example, is making you pass a driver's test every time you get in your car, or making you pass a new age restriction (23? 25?) every time you drink.
 
Lets all just vote Ron Paul for president so we can get rid of the TSA all together.
 
You know what, if they let people bring weapons (not guns as they can cause depressurization) on the plane I don't think that any terrorists would be dumb enough to try and hijack a plane, blow it up maybe, but not hijack. That would bring up other issues but we wouldn't have to worry about a hijacked plane. Hell there are plenty of objects that TSA allows me to bring on a plane that I could use to kill someone with, a nice large hard back book to the head would do it nicely. I might even be able to make a home made taser and get that through security. I would be happy if they even did away with everything but the medal detectors and the carry on bag scanners. Actually a taser would be a great weapon to bring on a plane, you cant kill a person (at least not easily) with them and the put most people to the ground in no time.
 
There is a big difference between saying that the scanners are incapable of saving the image period and the scanner operator deleting the image or him not saving it. It is not simply semantics.

The TSA is also seeking more funding to be able to come up to you anywhere there is public transportation and pat you down and scan you on the spot. They have tasted power and they want more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top