I don’t know if X-ray searches are a good or a bad thing, especially if this is only added to the current near-strip search we have to put up with. If this were all onehad to submit to it would be tolerable. Prudes can insist on same-sex screeners.

Sky Harbor International Airport here will test a new federal screening system that takes X-rays of passenger’s bodies to detect concealed explosives and other weapons.

The technology, called backscatter, has been around for several years but has not been widely used in the U.S. as an anti-terrorism tool because of privacy concerns.

The Transportation Security Administration said it has found a way to refine the machine’s images so that the normally graphic pictures can be blurred in certain areas while still being effective in detecting bombs and other threats.

The agency is expected to provide more information about the technology later this month but said one machine will be up and running at Sky Harbor’s Terminal 4 by Christmas.

According to the article, it will initially be used a a secondary search with passengers being given the choice of X-ray or pat-down.



  1. Mike says:

    Great! As if we don’t already encounter enough radiation in our daily lives. I’d hate to be a frequent flyer once these things become compulsory.

  2. Raff says:

    So who’s going to be the first to start a lawsuit over this one? Don’t x-rays cause sterility or brain tumors? Or will everyone get a lead cap and cod piece?

  3. Mark says:

    Screw this.

    I’m lucky enough to not have to fly for business anymore. So since I only fly for pleasure, (there is NO pleasure in flying anymore) I will not be flying unless its overseas. For 3 years I have been driving this beautiful country and enjoying every minute of it. And as it turns out, its cheaper, more comfortable, and since I dont live near a major airport, its faster in a lot of ways, (no connecting flights). It helps to have someone to share the wheel time. The best part is, I get to see the country up close and personal.

  4. gquaglia says:

    Total Recall, anyone? I think its a good idea.

  5. Arbo Cide says:

    You guys complain about TSA and government intrusions on privacy, but then you’re OK with this? Where’s Pat?

  6. RBG says:

    Well, if it’ll only be the prudes who are upset about this, let’s do it. Right?

    RBG

  7. Venom Monger says:

    Looks like a new source of material for cameltoe.org

  8. Mike Voice says:

    The technology already is being used in prisons and by drug enforcement agents…

    So, how often are prisoners being scanned? Daily? After every visitation?

    Prisoners aren’t filing suit about the mandatory radiation exposure?

    Prudes can insist on same-sex screeners.

    Yeah, right!

    Prudes would be concerned a same-sex screener was gay/lesbian… 🙂

  9. JimR says:

    I’m opting for the pat down by an opposite gender… um under 30, less than 140 lbs and moonlights at Hooters.

  10. ECA says:

    this wont work..
    Just cause a device looks like a cellphone dont mean IT IS…

  11. Uncle Dave says:

    What happens if they find something non-dangerous, but still illegal. For example, if you were carrying a bong for that nice girl ahead of you in line (you, of course, would NEVER have one of your own, assuming you even know what it is) would they be able to arrest you for having it even though they weren’t looking for such?

    BTW, since places like London have cameras everywhere and some locations in the US do, too, how long will it be before these are set up on street corners? To make us safe, of course.

  12. JimR says:

    Uncle Dave, they blur the location where bongs are found…. so ostensibly you could carry a stick of dynamite (or firecracker) in that area as long as you could control yourself.

    On the other hand, if you were standing behind a guy you might experience some discrimination.

  13. Mucous says:

    I’m going to eat a bunch of tinfoil. Let ’em try to figure that out!

  14. Todd Henkel says:

    “Prudes can insist on same-sex screeners.”

    What if the screener is gay? Prudes still face a risk…

  15. ECA says:

    This would only be worth while for subdermal implants..
    To not HURt anyone it will not be very penitrating, so it WONT HELP.

    QUOTE:
    But the TSA said the X-rays will be set up so that the image can be viewed only by a security officer in a remote location. Other passengers, and even the agent at the checkpoint, will not have access to the picture.

    Is this a good idea??

  16. Raff says:

    12.. we already have cameras on every street corner around here.. they are at all the major intersections..

    Not really sure who gets to view them though..

  17. V says:

    Dentists and doctors leave the room to perform X-rays. If these machines are purely passive sensors, that might be okay if you’re looking for gun/knife-shaped metal objects only. If they project any radiation whatsoever that’s unacceptable.

    Kip Hawley is still an idiot.

  18. GreenDreams says:

    Isn’t all this a bit ironic? The 9/11 hijackers didn’t carry guns and did not sneak anything past airport security. Remember? The box cutters were sneaked onboard by ground personnel working for the airlines, caterers, janitorial services, etc.

    I sure hope someone files suit. I try to avoid unnecessary X-rays. Why not just make everyone strip and wear a robe and slippers on the plane? This is an electronic strip search. And some people are quite opposed to the thought of showing even an ankle, others would not want anyone to see their abdomen or thighs. It’s not just the private parts people are shy about. I do not feel safer. I feel violated.

  19. Sparky says:

    God, that photo is soooooo damn hot. Where is the next machine going in? I got to get there.

  20. This would be great at singles parties!
    Never second guess who’s packing what ever again.

  21. ECA says:

    If we all stripped to get on the plane, we would know EVERYTHING you got…

  22. Reality says:

    I like this idea, but then again, I have a big tool so I don’t really care anyway.

  23. Rich says:

    I just can not wait to see/hear the flack from the first muslim woman who is subjected to this. Next we’ll be hearing about lead-lined burquas.

  24. Rich says:

    Hey, this should give new meaning to the word “profiling”.

  25. Jägermeister says:

    #15 – What if the screener is gay? Prudes still face a risk…

    Use Catholic priests for screening the prudes… after all… they only get turned on by altar boys…

  26. Arbo Cide says:

    Who would’ve thought you would care less for privacy than Bill O’Reilly?

  27. 26.
    The Airport Screener seem to be allot more professional than they where a few years back however,
    Your Right,
    what if the screener is some big fat ugly person.
    What if they live in your community and you bump into them in the supermarket.
    I find the whole process extremely annoying.
    In line with the prostrate exam.
    We have lost many of our freedoms in the past five years and brace your self, its going to get worse before it will get better.

  28. Gary says:

    I think this is mm Wave rather than X-ray, different frequency similar effect.

    But her is an Issue, ‘Same sex screener’, OK I can go with that because I don’t want nude pictures of me to titillate unless I chose to allow it. But even with same sex, surely the issue is ‘opposite sexual orientation’. I.e Gay guy or Hetro-girl screener for women, and Lesbian or hetro-man for screening men.

    And if so how to prove it, perhaps discrete electrodes on the screener’s genitles wired to the power supply of the scanner. One hint of arousal and POW! power goes off and third degree burns of ofending area.

    Thoughts anyone.

  29. GreenDreams says:

    Another wrinkle. Everyone ok with children getting “exposed” to the eyes of the TSA, and to excess radiation? Well, why couldn’t the children carry the contraband or weapons? It’s as obvious as letting Muslim women in head-to-toe attire carry them. And many of those ‘jihadists’ are teens, as are some of our school shooters. So obviously we have to have federal agents looking at our children nude. Wow. Just how much will we tolerate?


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4514 access attempts in the last 7 days.