The federal government is starting to put out full body scanning machines to 11 airports across the US, said Janet Napolitano with the Homeland Security Secretary's Office Friday. The machines are being placed in the airport as a trial to check for any concealed weapons or explosives. These machines are being funded through the Obama administration's $862 billion economic stimulus plan. The TSA has spent years testing these full-body imagers, and plan to deploy 450 units by the end of this year. They were given added urgency after the arrest of a Nigerian man, who has been accused of attempting to detonate an explosive sewn into his underwear on a December 25 flight.
Forty of these machines have already been placed at 19 airports nationwide as part of a field test. The first of the new units are being installed Friday at Boston's Logan International Airport."By accelerating the deployment of this technology, we are enhancing our capability to detect and disrupt threats of terrorism across the nation," says the Homeland Security Office.
The list of other airports set to receive these scanners by the end of summer are, Chicago O'Hare International, Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International, Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International, Mineta San José International, Los Angeles International, Port Columbus International, Oakland International, San Diego International, Kansas City International and Charlotte Douglas International. Under existing protocols, full-body scans are optional at airport checkpoints. Travelers who decline the scans are funneled to a location where they may be given a pat down and subjected to other tests such as swabs that can detect minute traces of explosives on hands or luggage. Most passengers prefer a body scan to a pat down. Yet others have objected to the body scans, calling them electronic strip searches. Even though the passenger privacy is maintained during the scanning process by blurring all images, deleting images after they are viewed and placing the screener viewing the images in a remote location. This process should not slow the passenger screening down. It will be done at the same time as carry-on baggage screening.
Two women were stopped from getting on a plane at Manchester Airport in the UK for refusing to submit to a full body scan. The women were selected at random and told to go through a new body scanning machine on February 19. One woman refused on religious grounds. She is believed to be a Muslim. The other cited health reasons. The machines show clearly one’s body shape and vague impressions of one’s private parts. They have been deemed an invasion of privacy. The women were not allowed to fly. Due to finding unknown products
Field testing of full-body scanners already is under way at the following 19 airports:
• Albuquerque International Sunport Airport
• Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport
• Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport
• Denver International Airport
• Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport
• Detroit Metro Airport
• Indianapolis International Airport
• Jacksonville International Airport
• McCarran International Airport
• Los Angeles International Airport
• Miami International Airport
• Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport
• Raleigh-Durham International Airport
• Richmond International Airport
• Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport
• San Francisco International Airport
• Salt Lake City International Airport
• Tampa International Airport
• Tulsa International Airport
To me this seems like a good idea, doing more to protect our safty while flying. At the same time though, I'm not sure that I like that fact that its pretty much porn. Because there will be color added to the photos. Even though the airport screeners will not be able to save the images. Who's to say they can't snap a picture with a hand held camera for their enjoyment later!! Apologists for the scanners have described the images they produce as “ghostly” or “skeletal” in an effort to downplay the intrusion of privacy they really represent. So all in all, I feel like they have good intentions but I think this could be a little to far... What do you think?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment