1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Naked airport scanner

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by zooankski, 13 Oct 2009.

  1. zooankski

    Hitman

    Joined: 6 Dec 2007

    Posts: 706

    Location: cambridge

    I saw him the other day i am sure:eek:
     
  2. meghatronic

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Nov 2002

    Posts: 16,379

    Location: 38.744281°N 104.846806°W

    Anyone that thinks pictures aren't going to be leaked to the press, the internet, or amongst friends is naive at best. Not as porn, but as 'haha's.
     
  3. zooankski

    Hitman

    Joined: 6 Dec 2007

    Posts: 706

    Location: cambridge

    I suspect that taking a risk in leaking them would put most people off. I would not risk my job for a laugh. However i would be surprised if no pictures made it on to the net.
     
  4. knowledge123

    Mobster

    Joined: 4 Nov 2004

    Posts: 4,222

    Location: Seattle area, USA

    perhaps, but it's very doubtful that a positive identification could be made from the images, at least from the quality i've seen from the shots.

    edit: Unless (of course) they have a unique marking on their body that the scanner would pick up on.
     
    Last edited: 14 Oct 2009
  5. BigglesPiP

    Capodecina

    Joined: 8 Mar 2006

    Posts: 13,293

    Location: Near Winchester

    It's a government project, so the statement that the images cannot be captured is false. The image is sent to a remote location... How long before we find someone has managed to capture them?

    I'll take the pat-down.
     
  6. chrisd

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 20 May 2004

    Posts: 1,740

    No, it details the risks associated with paediatric CT scans. You can't apply those statistics to any type of body scan. :confused:
     
  7. Basher

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,608

    Where does it say they cause more of a risk than terrorists?
     
  8. Basher

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,608

    In children.
     
  9. Energize

    Caporegime

    Joined: 12 Mar 2004

    Posts: 28,958

    Location: England

    How many commericial aircraft were brought down by terrorists last year?

    Exactly, scans that involve radiation have to be risk assessed, if you give routine ct scans to everyone from birth the lifetime risk of cancer significantly increases, scans must be tailored to particular risk groups to be beneficial in reducing cancer deaths.
     
    Last edited: 14 Oct 2009
  10. Basher

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,608

    How many terrosists were stopped/'put-off' by the scans?

    How many died from a direct result of cancer caused by the scans?

    Over 10 years (1 year is a poor sample), how many more people have been killed by terrorists than the above?
     
    Last edited: 14 Oct 2009
  11. Energize

    Caporegime

    Joined: 12 Mar 2004

    Posts: 28,958

    Location: England

    The scans haven't started yet so neither question can be answered.
     
  12. Hequn

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 4 Jan 2003

    Posts: 1,609

    Location: Oldham, Gtr Manchester

    super safe? oh well thank god for that, haha, what kind of professional says 'super safe'? :rolleyes:
     
  13. BigglesPiP

    Capodecina

    Joined: 8 Mar 2006

    Posts: 13,293

    Location: Near Winchester

    The idiot from PR.

    Regardless, you'll get a bigger dose at 35,000ft.
     
  14. Bobcat

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 19 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,551

    Location: Swansea

    Got scanned by one of these coming back from Amsterdam last week, don't see what the problem is, if there is nothing to hide, there is no problem.

    Why should kids be exempt from this, if we do that, the next thing that terrorists will do, is use kids to carry things, as it will be a weakness in the system.
     
  15. Totality

    Mobster

    Joined: 5 Jul 2007

    Posts: 2,571

    Location: NZ

    The people plotting the liquid bombs a few months ago were planning on taking their adopted kid along with them to seem more "normal" when getting on the plane so terrorists will indeed use kids as they don't care about anything.

    We should have a poll! 1) I read the Daily Mail so am offended by the scanners and 2) I don't care about the scanners and don't read the Daily Mail.

    Only two answers are needed really.
     
  16. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: 30 Jun 2007

    Posts: 66,594

    Location: Wales

    You missed the third option

    3) I like fireworks, so ban all scanners
     
  17. megakid

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 6 Jun 2004

    Posts: 2,389

    Location: London

    This.
     
  18. P-man

    Associate

    Joined: 25 Aug 2006

    Posts: 64

    Location: Stoke-on-Trent

    Two options for me:

    1. Chance getting blown up at 20000 ft.
    2. Someone sees your small willy, you have a great holiday and live to tell your friends and family.

    While there is any sort of 'chance', I will go for option 2.
     
    Last edited: 15 Oct 2009
  19. Chimerical

    Soldato

    Joined: 21 Jul 2007

    Posts: 5,487

    Safety is a complete illusion. If a terrorist is really going to hijack a plane, this type of thing isn't going to stop them.
     
  20. BeeP

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 9 Feb 2009

    Posts: 2,143

    Location: A cold place

    Making it more difficult for them is always a good thing though isn't it?

    Not fussed about being scanned myself.