Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

epic.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 91 posts

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#41

Post by jberryman »

incomethax wrote: post #38
jonnathanson wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not even the nudity that bothers me, personally. It's the radiation. I didn't sign up for unshielded exposure to dangerous levels of radiation when I bought my airplane ticket. Ultimately, I think a public health angle would have been a far more effective tact to take in the lawsuit or in the arguments against these scanners. It's the trump card. Privacy always loses an argument to fear and "security" in our pos…

From Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray ) The Health Physics Society (HPS) reports that a person undergoing a backscatter scan receives approximately 0.05 μSv (or 0.005 mrems) of radiation; American Science and Engineering Inc. reports 0.09 μSv (0.009 mrems). At the high altitudes typical of commercial flights, naturally occurring cosmic radiation is considerably higher than at ground level. T…

...which (if I'm not doing it wrong) is about about equivalent to eating 1/2 a banana:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#42

Post by Zak »

eli wrote: post #29
sstone wrote: post #2

Almost no politician would ever vote for removing this awful "security" measure. They would risk being blamed when another incompetent terrorist mastermind passes security and hopefully gets stopped by, now much more vigilant passengers. Going to the courts seems like a good way around that - sue the TSA. If someone with experience on these types of issues could comment I would be very interested to learn if this has…

A good first step would be to eliminate separate security lines for First Class/VIP and everyone else. I suspect security lines would end up being shorter if our elected officials had to go through exactly the same process as the rest of us.

As a hack, just go through the first class line regardless of the class you're flying in. I know several people who do this, and none have been questioned about it. The obvious response is: "Why should paying the airline more money get people better treatment from the Federal government?".

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#43

Post by ryoshu »

mhb wrote: post #32
geuis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make a list of congressmen and senators that require you to let nude photos of your children to be taken by government employees. It's all about how you frame the argument

That's good for the thin end of the wedge, but it might suggest that if the children are exempted from this nonsense, then the problem is solved. Also it sets up what could be spun as a bargaining chip. Exempt the kids and they can scan the adults.

It depends on how you position the wedge. You start by asking officials why they want to take naked pictures of innocent children. Once they are sufficiently embarrassed about the notion of taking naked pictures of children, you ask why they want to take naked pictures of innocent adults. Every time a TSA or DHS official talks about how they don't store the pictures, bring up the US Marshals Service storing naked pictures of children and adults (http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html) using the same technology, despite providing the /exact/ same assurances the TSA is providing now.

When the TSA officials talk about the opt-out process and the subsequent genital groping, ask about the TSA agent that was charged with raping a kid (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20100310child...) and wanting to keep that child as a sex slave. Do parents really want strangers feeling up the breasts and genitals of their underage children? What type of person applies for a job where they are allowed to grope children? Is it any better when those same agents want to grope adults?

It's not advanced screening technology, it's a machine that takes naked pictures of children and stores them.

It's not a thorough pat down, it's having your genitals groped by strangers.

Control the language and you control the discussion.

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#44

Post by evgen »

plmiujhbvnh wrote: post #37
mhb wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the amount of radiation is dangerous?

Why do you think it isn't ? There are over 800 million airline passengers in the US each year. If this radiation causes cancers in 1 in a million thats 800 people/year.

If this procedure causes 800 cancers per year then the flights themselves would be causing nearly a hundred thousand cancer cases per year. The radiation from the scanner is far, far safer than the exposure you receive during the flight that caused you to get scanned in the first place.

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#45

Post by wjy »

daimyoyo wrote: post #33

I want the airlines to pay attention to what I'm about to say: Until these electronic strip search machines are taken out, I will NEVER fly again. I've done nothing wrong and I will not tolerate being treated like a criminal simply because you think you can get away with it.

With all due respect, if you want the airlines to listen to you, you should say it to them, not HN.

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#47

Post by camiller »

kia wrote: post #20

From my experience full body scanners are much faster and more convenient compared to traditional system when you take off your shoes and go through metal detector. If you are unlucky an airport worker additionally scans you with a hand metal scanner. With full body scanner you just enter the cabin and voila! The scan takes 3 seconds.

1776: "Then it's agreed, gentlemen, in order to secure our rights as a free people, we will risk embarrassment, imprisonment, expropriation, bankruptcy, bodily harm, exile and hanging."

2010: "Of course I'll waive my rights. I don't want to miss my connecting flight."

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#48

Post by wrs »

random42 wrote: post #46

As an Non-American, While reading the article, I got the vibe, that the ideology at the TSA security check is, Unless proven otherwise, everyone is a terrorist (criminal) IANAL, but where does US constitution/judicatory stand on it?

The purpose of this lawsuit is to answer that question. Though I have to say that for the past 9 years, the constitution, judiciary, and legislative branches of the U.S. haven't seemed to have much influence on anything that is supposedly "needed to fight terrorism".

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#49

Post by tptacek »

random42 wrote: post #46

As an Non-American, While reading the article, I got the vibe, that the ideology at the TSA security check is, Unless proven otherwise, everyone is a terrorist (criminal) IANAL, but where does US constitution/judicatory stand on it?

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of "administrative searches", which aren't targeted, don't require a warrant, don't require individual suspicion, and which are used to protect public safety and not to conduct criminal investigations.

Re: EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Deployment of Body Scanners at US Airports

#50

Post by tptacek »

wrs wrote: post #48
random42 wrote: post #46

As an Non-American, While reading the article, I got the vibe, that the ideology at the TSA security check is, Unless proven otherwise, everyone is a terrorist (criminal) IANAL, but where does US constitution/judicatory stand on it?

The purpose of this lawsuit is to answer that question. Though I have to say that for the past 9 years, the constitution, judiciary, and legislative branches of the U.S. haven't seemed to have much influence on anything that is supposedly "needed to fight terrorism".

That's not true. The lawsuit doesn't challenge the doctrine of administrative searches, and goes as far as to concede that full-body scans are constitutional as a secondary screening measure (for people who set off the metal detector, or who can't go through the detector, or have prosthetics, or are on a watchlist, or become random selectees).

At issue in this lawsuit is the specific question of whether an electronic strip search can qualify as an administrative search, which must balance the public interest against the intrusiveness of the search.

Post reply on HN