TSA L-3’s XXX-Rated Airport Scanner Pictures
I know that I have blogged about this before, and I would like to clarify that I am in favour or good airport security; but I am not in favour of being personally ‘virtually strip searched’. Whilst I applaud the fact that airports like LAX do not enforce this as a mandatory security scan (yet)… I do wonder why they have not posted the following pictures in the scanner area of the airport where they are asking people if they would prefer the scan or a pat down search.
I personally think that if people actually knew what they were agreeing to, the TSA would see a sharp decrease in the number of people who are agreeing to be scanned. It seems that these ‘volunteers’ aren’t actually making a fully informed choice.
I mean, lets face it… If someone asked you in the airport if you’d mind stepping in to this machine instead of a pat down search, you might agree right?
But what about if they then told you that the person scanning you would see an image similar to this one?
Also, before you say they’re not too bad… Apparently the scanners pictures appear at a higher screen resolution than these!
I wan’t to make clear that I don’t completely object to these… I just think that:
a) People should Be shown good example pictures first, so that they are making an ‘informed’ choice.
b) personally believe it is a slightly unnecessary invasion of privacy though… Because I don’t think that all scans should be personally viewed-I mean; these scanners are searching for an unusually dense mass, right? Surely, the sotware can be trained to recognise this abnomality; and select only these scans to be more closely scrutinized by human security workers?
More information from The official TSA blog can be found at this link: You asked for it… You got it, Millimeter Wave Images
So now for a quick poll…
Loading...
I don’t see why not. In the interests of tighter security I think it’s great. You’ll never see the security men/women again and hopefully they’d be professional about it. What’s a moments embarrassment when you know your plane is safe?
RB - October 22, 2008 at 10:14 pm
A month back, I volunteered to use the machine at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor Airport. I blogged about my experience with the machine – http://airlinerblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/my-experince-with-the-virtual-strip-search/
It is interesting since I would rather have a stranger look at my x-ray pictures than a person patting me down
.
Airline Blogger - October 22, 2008 at 10:30 pm
RB, you probably not travel often enough… I see some security staff so frequently that I know their names…
I would agree with, such searches only if there is a medical diagnostic done at the same time
PlasticPilot - October 23, 2008 at 6:49 am
I completely agree with RB. I get nervous about terrorism and anything they can do that further eliminates this risk is fine by me!
I might add also – the last time we flew, OH and I were both ‘patted down’ searched. As we walked into the departures lounge my OH had a funny look on his face. When I asked him what was up, he said his “goods” had just been blatantly felt up by the security guy!
Scan away…
Flyme - October 23, 2008 at 9:15 am
No, I don’t fly much but if I did I would be in favour of the scans and would fly often if it included a medical at the same time – that is a genius idea!
RB - October 23, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Amsterdam Schipol this morning.
A collegue of mine and myself, WITHOUT ANY PREVENTATIVE INFORMATION on X-Ray emission, are “invited to pass through the L3 Proscan security system.
This is unfair! Moreover, it is AGAINST all European Directives and local laws!!!
Also, think about women that could be pregnant… DNA damage of the embrions!!!
We all MUST complain with KLM and other Companies.
Personally, I will avoid shipol airport forever!!!
Please extend the complain!
I hate terrorists, but this is another type of terrorism too!!!
Pino - November 13, 2008 at 7:59 am
You guys are all retarded if you don’t realize that this is nothing but a show to make you feel safe. Taking your shoes off, no liquids above a certain amount, a strip show now! For one they don’t do it to everyone so quite a few get by. Two, terrorist are not stupid. You think they are going to go to an airport with one of these machines? Fuck no! They will find ways around this. Because of a few incidents they make traveling miserable, but people like you think this is for our safety. They have done studies and had people try to sneak things through, and guess what, they get guns, knives, anything through. This will catch a kid smuggling a small bag of weed at the most. This is a violation of our rights, not a safety precaution. I have even gotten away with sharp objects I forgot to take out of my bag. Maybe you should think for yourselves instead of what the TV tells you is a good thing. I guess that is asking too much from an American these days.
LV - November 13, 2008 at 7:45 pm
LV, I think you’ll find that not one of the commentors above is actually American, although I’m not entirely sure what that has to do with any thing.
Plus I think it’s a bit rude to call people retarded simply for stating their opinions. We’re each entitled to an opinion.
I for one do not like these scanners, but more because I think that the participants are not fully informed as to what they’re consenting to, and because I believe that most of these scans could be monitored by an automated system rather than a human.
I think you’d get a better response, and that people might listen to what you have to say more if you don’t sling abuse at them
Partner of a Pilot - November 14, 2008 at 8:31 pm
I’m so glad I found this page. A friend of mine suggested that I look it up because in the El Paso County Courthouse in Colorado Springs, Colorado, this is how everyone gets through security. I’m a female Iraq war veteran and six of the security officers for the court are my old platoon members so this is somewhat embarrassing for me especially because I’ve had to visit the court house on numerous occasions over the past few months. If the court/airport security officers job is to detect metal objects that can be used as weapons and explosive devices that can also be detected though a hand held wanding device, than the nature of this so called “security” scanner should be available to anyone “volunteering” to go through it.
lynz - March 5, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Sorry to burst everybodies paranoid bubble!!
The scanner uses millimetre wave technology….completely inert.
The ’sensitive’ areas of the body are blurred out, so are not seen by the operator.
And only females can scan females etc.
This scanner will pick up any type of weapon so is a bonus.
Metal detectors have a hard time picking up plastic exposives so get used to these scanners they are the only way forward.
And just for info…..LV you are a mong
steve - July 2, 2009 at 1:47 pm
My wife and step daughter (aged 11, though has the looks of a teenager) and I, went through security in Atlanta, Georgia.
Only the females were “invited” to go through the L-3 system.
My wife was not asked to remove wrist bangles and therefore caused the machine to ‘bleep’ and a scan was made.
I, the male, was not invited to be scanned.
When my wife came out of the machine, I asked what it did. We were told, “It looks under clothing”, an office was pointed out were the viewing screen was and the official added, “that’s where the guy sits”.
As we left the area my wife told me that she felt violated.
Despite all the arguments for and against the system, please remember it is viewed by human beings and, as such, the system is open to misuse and abuse.
If the authorities want the blessing of the public, which they must have before this goes any further (we live in a democratic society), the screen must be viewed by another machine and, if the system is misused, stiff penalties, that are introduced by the public, should be in place.
This ensures responsibility for our personal privacy.
If any officials balk at this, they must come up with alternatives that we can willingly accept.
I invite their comments.
Dean Harris - August 11, 2009 at 6:51 pm
I’m strongly against male officers looking at the pictures. I’m a male myself. If a female officer was to see them I actually wouldn’t mind. That is for myself and my wife too. And most of all for children; women are the child bearers anyway so it matters less that they be the ones that see the images. I’ll vote for female only security officer viewing pictures and for much better software to blurr out properly the private parts.
I will NOT fly if the officers are male.
This system would anger the religious societies alot too. There is no end to technologies advancements and so the requirment for this isn’t so great.
The Man - October 13, 2009 at 9:31 pm