'Naked' scanner in airport trial

Quote:

---

A trial of a scanner that produces "naked" images of passengers has begun at Manchester Airport.

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8303983.stm

im against this, think its terrible.

dont know if it has already been posted, if it has ill close.

I want one.

Oh yeh because it matters if someone sees a monochrome image of you naked, with no names next to it. Who cares, even if imges did leak, no one knows who's who..

In any case, people would praise it if it actually found a terrorist

To be honest the images are hardly that revealing in relation to what you see when looking at a person. They are much like ones you have in the hospital. The operator does not see who is being x rayed and therefore cannot judge or get any sense of satisfaction over it and at the end of the day it's quicker, less hassle and security is improved.

It's gotta be the way forward, many would prefer to a pat-down anyway, and if it's going to stop terrorists then hell yeah.

I see no problems with this at all. It will improve security and keep us safe from terrorists. :)

One more step towards a police state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

One more step towards a police state.

---

Oh my lord.

It's a great tool and a step in the right direction :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Invent

Oh my lord.

It's a great tool and a step in the right direction :).

---

I'll apply for the job.

OT: Good step up against threats.

If I walked through that machine I'm sure it could be seen as showing off ;)

Anyway I think it's a pretty good idea, it saves time and offers much more security.

Quote:

---

Ms Barrett said the black-and-white image would only be seen by one officer in a remote location before it was deleted

---

Gary Glitter :O

This is a great idea, should be put in all airports. :)

what they don't tell you is im watching all of them :eusa_whis

it's the way forward imo, and should be put into force permanently!

When I first saw it I thought hmm, but actually I think it's a good thing. It's much more thorough than a pat down and it would be a fun job. Win-win.

When I first heard about it (Loose Women ftw!), I thought it would produce detailed nekkid images, but it doesn't seem all that bad really... There's some detail, but it doesn't look all that bad... Then again, when you think about it, there's no way they could produce a machine that didn't make nekkid images like this :P It sort of comes with the functionality of the machine :P
Then again, terrorism isn't that big an issue at the moment, and the normal scans work just as well, plus the whole "frisk" thing. People won't complain if technoglogy advanced in such a way that skin and bones don't show up, but plastic and metal does :P

a bit controversial but i think it's a good idea.

well it's better than when i got caught in the bleep thing because i had metal buttons on my jeans - had to be searched lol

I don't have a problem with it, if they want to see me naked and they have the technology to do it, go for it!

we also have gok wan for that lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Invent

Oh my lord.

It's a great tool and a step in the right direction :).

---

The issue with this country is that everything is recorded, people are treated like criminals and everything is turning into a police state culture. The United Kingdom has more CCTV than the Peoples Republic of China despire a fraction of the population, fraction of the size and finally we are supposed to be the democracy and not the communist dictatorship, or is it the other way around it makes me wonder with stories like this.

I'm not reall bothered about this. Much better than being felt up imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The issue with this country is that everything is recorded, people are treated like criminals and everything is turning into a police state culture. The United Kingdom has more CCTV than the Peoples Republic of China despire a fraction of the population, fraction of the size and finally we are supposed to be the democracy and not the communist dictatorship, or is it the other way around it makes me wonder with stories like this.

---

We have a lot more crime though? I'd rather be treated like a criminal rather than just letting criminals do what they want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jxhn

I'm not reall bothered about this. Much better than being felt up imo.

We have a lot more crime though? I'd rather be treated like a criminal rather than just letting criminals do what they want.

---

I doubt we have more crime than the Peoples Republic of China who have a population of 1.3+ billion, if we do however that only shows that CCTV culture is failing if anything.

if you have nothing to hide, what's the issue? probably quicker.

That image made me vomit.
Not really but if A guy or girl that was hot went past it

Lets say it would make it slightly more interesting for me..

I don't really care about this I'm just afraid for the grannies away to turkey... they might see their werthers originals
And anyway ;)
I wanna work there :L:L

The issue is that i'm not a criminal and neither are the majority of the country, so why is the governent treating us like that. A good quote i've read before to put it simply, is "It is the duty of Her Majesty's government neither to flap nor to falter." - Harold MacMillian

..meaning the government should not interfere where it does not need to interfere.

I don't really know what I think of that to be honest, I can see both sides of this. I think it's a step too far, but I wouldn't be bothered really as I have nothing to hide. Saying that, the Government have mucked up with people's details and data before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The issue is that i'm not a criminal and neither are the majority of the country, so why is the governent treating us like that. A good quote i've read before to put it simply, is "It is the duty of Her Majesty's government neither to flap nor to falter." - Harold MacMillian

..meaning the government should not interfere where it does not need to interfere.

---

Technically the government HAS to interfere when it comes to the safety of its citizens.

I don't mind these scanners, I'm never gonna be carrying a bomb onto a plane

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeyseph

Technically the government HAS to interfere when it comes to the safety of its citizens.

I don't mind these scanners, I'm never gonna be carrying a bomb onto a plane

---

There is no danger, if a terrorist is going to blow up a plane it most likely will be through gaining a job at an airport. The terrorist excuse is used to impose all of this on us, when in truth, the chances are that you will die in a car crash than a terrorist attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

There is no danger, if a terrorist is going to blow up a plane it most likely will be through gaining a job at an airport.

---

IS this is a fact or are you just making **** up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The terrorist excuse is used to impose all of this on us, when in truth, the chances are that you will die in a car crash than a terrorist attack.

---

Your point is what?
In that case we shouldn't try to prevent anything because there will always be something else that can kill you.

im a bit worried they might think i have a dangerous weapon, but its attatched to my body :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeyseph

IS this is a fact or are you just making **** up?

Your point is what?
In that case we shouldn't try to prevent anything because there will always be something else that can kill you.

---

It is also known as common sense, with the level security at airports and the fact there has been no terrorist attack on a plane in the United Kingdom in recent years proves it is working, so why would the government take very extreme steps to protect us when there is very little to protect us from. The government allows criminals into the country, along with allowing islamic extremists to preach hate in the country and not be deported - so ask yourself are they genuinely protecting us or what.

My point is that democracy should be preserved and that we should avoid using the tools and techniques that Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Chairman Mao could only of dreamed of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

My point is that democracy should be preserved and that we should avoid using the tools and techniques that Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Chairman Mao could only of dreamed of.

---

You're seriously comparing anti-terrorism tools to this? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeyseph

You're seriously comparing anti-terrorism tools to this? :rolleyes:

---

Kind of you to reply to my other points, but yes I am as history is key to everything. We are a democratic country, apparently fighting for freedom against the terrorists i yet at the same time we treat the population as suspected terrorists, peadophiles and criminals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeyseph

You're seriously comparing anti-terrorism tools to this? :rolleyes:

---

Indeed he is. I don't know why you need to begin comparing us to elsewhere, it's also worth noting in China there's not a sustained threat of terrorism but frankly I'd rather we moved off naming countries, forms of government and dictators as it's totally irrelevant (and very typical of someone who is far right).

The point is it's not recording people nor is it doing more than any of the older airport scanners did. It's just more efficent and quicker, it doesn't actually have any new features.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8242238.stm

I'm sure there'd be questions asked if they blew up airlines over the Atlantic. Our so-called "Police state" has saved the lives of thousands and there's the evidence. There's no evidence that any of this is a threat, the only evidence is that it saves lives and captures criminals. It's not 100% efficient as most CCTV cameras are useless but it's better than nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordy

Indeed he is. I don't know why you need to begin comparing us to elsewhere, it's also worth noting in China there's not a sustained threat of terrorism but frankly I'd rather we moved off naming countries, forms of government and dictators as it's totally irrelevant (and very typical of someone who is far right).

The point is it's not recording people nor is it doing more than any of the older airport scanners did. It's just more efficent and quicker, it doesn't actually have any new features.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8242238.stm

I'm sure there'd be questions asked if they blew up airlines over the Atlantic. Our so-called "Police state" has saved the lives of thousands and there's the evidence. There's no evidence that any of this is a threat, the only evidence is that it saves lives and captures criminals. It's not 100% efficient as most CCTV cameras are useless but it's better than nothing.

---

Well said Jordy. I don't remember anyone from the 9/11 attacks working at the airport? Anyway. This is a good system; it will be quicker than the actual system at the moment with us taking our shoes off etc. It will also ensure the safety of us in the air from anyone trying to blow us up. I really don't mind about this and won't have any grudges if I have to go through one. Same with CCTV, you get used to cameras being everywhere and that doesn't bother me either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordy

Indeed he is. I don't know why you need to begin comparing us to elsewhere, it's also worth noting in China there's not a sustained threat of terrorism but frankly I'd rather we moved off naming countries, forms of government and dictators as it's totally irrelevant (and very typical of someone who is far right).

The point is it's not recording people nor is it doing more than any of the older airport scanners did. It's just more efficent and quicker, it doesn't actually have any new features.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8242238.stm

I'm sure there'd be questions asked if they blew up airlines over the Atlantic. Our so-called "Police state" has saved the lives of thousands and there's the evidence. There's no evidence that any of this is a threat, the only evidence is that it saves lives and captures criminals. It's not 100% efficient as most CCTV cameras are useless but it's better than nothing.

---

It is not democratic or right, it is not justified when we allow criminals and extremists to openly settle in this country. Infact, if we did correct criminal checks on who and who isn't in this country and who is coming in to this country, then the threat would be basically removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattGarner

Well said Jordy. I don't remember anyone from the 9/11 attacks working at the airport? Anyway. This is a good system; it will be quicker than the actual system at the moment with us taking our shoes off etc. It will also ensure the safety of us in the air from anyone trying to blow us up. I really don't mind about this and won't have any grudges if I have to go through one. Same with CCTV, you get used to cameras being everywhere and that doesn't bother me either.

---

That was because before 9/11 airport security was nothing like it is now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

It is not democratic or right, it is not justified when we allow criminals and extremists to openly settle in this country. Infact, if we did correct criminal checks on who and who isn't in this country and who is coming in to this country, then the threat would be basically removed.



That was because before 9/11 airport security was nothing like it is now.

---

Hence why it has improved and has to keep up with the ever changing world to keep people protected so that a repeat of 9/11 doesn't happen. People already in the country who may be a threat is another issue that is been tackled by certain departments and yes it may be so that they have no place here but by increasing security they have a highly reduced chance of succeeding. If they were that adamant on causing threat to people in the first place they would try it no matter were they are or be any means possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

It is not democratic or right, it is not justified when we allow criminals and extremists to openly settle in this country. Infact, if we did correct criminal checks on who and who isn't in this country and who is coming in to this country, then the threat would be basically removed.

---

I'm afraid that simply isn't true, the 7/7 bombers etc have all been British Citizens from what I remember. Admittedly they had spent time in Pakistan but so do a lot of British Muslims due to their families being over there and the popular Muslim education centres over there. Keeping proper checks of who's in the country is needed (And almost impossible) but it's not going to stop all that much, there's no need to stop everything else as well.

This guy isn't a terrorist but he's a purely British serial killer:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/7256402.stm

If he wasn't on the national DNA database it's likely he would of never been caught.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshimitsui

Hence why it has improved and has to keep up with the ever changing world to keep people protected so that a repeat of 9/11 doesn't happen. People already in the country who may be a threat is another issue that is been tackled by certain departments and yes it may be so that they have no place here but by increasing security they have a highly reduced chance of succeeding. If they were that adamant on causing threat to people in the first place they would try it no matter were they are or be any means possible.

---

The Bush administration and the Blair-Brown government both pushed through so called 'anti-terrorism' legislation which has now been used in both countrys by the government to spy on people, as said in Farenheit 9/11 by a congressman, they had been waiting for years to pass these powers through and when 9/11 came they thought, heres our chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordy

I'm afraid that simply isn't true, the 7/7 bombers etc have all been British Citizens from what I remember. Admittedly they had spent time in Pakistan but so do a lot of British Muslims due to their families being over there and the popular Muslim education centres over there. Keeping proper checks of who's in the country is needed (And almost impossible) but it's not going to stop all that much, there's no need to stop everything else as well.

This guy isn't a terrorist but he's a purely British serial killer:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/7256402.stm

If he wasn't on the national DNA database it's likely he would of never been caught.

---

The people who preach this hate must come from somewhere else, and that is the root cause of the problem - terrorism is here, and will be here until the world ends so the majority should not be punished, because of a very low threat level from these people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The people who preach this hate must come from somewhere else, and that is the root cause of the problem - terrorism is here, and will be here until the world ends so the majority should not be punished, because of a very low threat level from these people.

---

Yes, because walking through a scanner to make sure we're not carrying anything dangerous is really punishing us.

You seem to like overreacting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeyseph

Yes, because walking through a scanner to make sure we're not carrying anything dangerous is really punishing us.

You seem to like overreacting.

---

I agree with scanners, but not scanners such as these, the databases, criminal records for small offences, people being fined for leaving wheelie bins out a day too late, CCTV being rampant everywhere - this is treating us like criminals.