Full body scanners for YYC

[HOZ]

Nothing like punishing the masses to make it look like you are protecting people, when you are not. A perfect example of this stupidity is Michael Yon was arrested for not divulging his personal income.

Nothing like shaking down Granny from Saskatchewan to make it look like you are trying to catch guys like the Eunuch-bomber. Other head shakers

1. forcing people to sit in their seats for the final hour of the flight.
- that will keep the terrorists at bay!!! No peeing.
2. No blankets for the last hour of the flight.
- freeze them out!

9/11 and the Christmas attempt was not about security at airports and all the other stupid things they are making people do now. It was ALL about people who were supposed to be protecting us doing a half-assed job of it. Both times the intelligence people failed.

At least Obama's administration has taken off one glove and has decided to profile people from certain regions of the world, even though they don't call it that. Still they do it stupidly, haphazardly, idiotically.

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration has announced new security rules that include a directive for full-body pat-downs and carry-on luggage checks for people travelling from or through the following countries:
Afghanistan
Algeria
Cuba
Iran
Iraq
Lebanon
Libya
Nigeria
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Yemen
Other passengers will see additional screening measures. It is now up to an aircraft's captain whether to require passengers to put away electronic devices during the flight and to remain seated for the final hour before landing, a TSA source told The Associated Press.

[FurnaceFace]

Originally Posted by HOZ

1. forcing people to sit in their seats for the final hour of the flight.
- that will keep the terrorists at bay!!! No peeing.
2. No blankets for the last hour of the flight.
- freeze them out!

I don't believe I've witnessed either of these things or these things done in the name of counter terrorism.

I think if they do keep the seatbelt sign on its to help keep the aisle clear so the stews have an easier time to clean up and I would imagine there is more potential turbulence as the plane goes through different cloud, wind, and atmospheric layers.

Blankets are cleaned up because it was one of the things which the airlines want to keep instead of being a souvenir. Also blankets block the visibility of bags and seatbelts. I don't think you need to worry about them anymore as the airlines (or at least Continental) no longer provides them thanks to Swine Flu. The blankets (and pillows) aren't cleaned all the time so you could get a "dirty" blanket as goofy as that sounds.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Cell phones don't emit ionizing radiation. Granite counter tops on the other hand....

I was under the impression from a US news show with someone from the manufacturer on to do a propaganda piece that these were non-ionizing. They didn't specifically state it, but implied it (Something along the lines of "these are totally safe"). Apparently a pretty big lie. Not cool for pregnant/elderly/sick people who are heavy travelers, or anyone really.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

I was under the impression from a US news show with someone from the manufacturer on to do a propaganda piece that these were non-ionizing. They didn't specifically state it, but implied it (Something along the lines of "these are totally safe"). Apparently a pretty big lie. Not cool for pregnant/elderly/sick people who are heavy travelers, or anyone really.

Not sure what you're referring to here, are you talking about the full body scanners that do use x-rays? Even if those were being employed, the radiation dose per use is absolutely negligible compared to background radiation. Some perspective on radiation dose:

1 Full body airport scan = 0.0001 mSv
1 year of living in Calgary = 5 mSv
1 Hour in an airplane = 0.005 mSv

In otherwords, you are getting about 50,000 body scans for each year you live in Calgary, or 50 body scans for each hour in an airplane.

[Yeah_Baby]

Guess I have to stop stuffing socks down my pants now.

[Azure]

My issue isn't with the actual scan, nor with the radiation but with how much one single event can scare the US government.

We're not going to win the war on terror by living in fear.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Not sure what you're referring to here, are you talking about the full body scanners that do use x-rays? Even if those were being employed, the radiation dose per use is absolutely negligible compared to background radiation. Some perspective on radiation dose:

1 Full body airport scan = 0.0001 mSv
1 year of living in Calgary = 5 mSv
1 Hour in an airplane = 0.005 mSv

In otherwords, you are getting about 50,000 body scans for each year you live in Calgary, or 50 body scans for each hour in an airplane.

I'm confused. First you were saying they weren't like cell phones, that they were ionizing and now you're saying they aren't but some other ones are? What kind do these new scanners use? I'm confused. I thought it was radio waves, but some googling indicated x-rays.

[NuclearFart]

Sorry, that's not what I meant.

Cell phones don't emit ionizing radiation (ie are not carcinogenic), they operate using the radiofrequency spectrum.

There are two types of full body scanners:

1) One type uses x-ray spectrum, relying on your body absorbing radiation. It creates a "silhouette" of your body as non-absorbed xrays (ie the ones that passed by you because your body part wasnt in the way) are picked up by a detector on the other side. Because the body absorbs the energy, it has the potential to be ionizing/carcinogenic, but the dose given, relative to normal background radiation, is negligible in this regard. These are not the type mentioned in that article.

2) The second type uses radiofrequency spectrum, but relies on the body bouncing the signal back, creating a "true image" of bounced back signal to a detector. Just like the cell phone, these do not use ionizing radiation. These are also the type mentioned in that article.

[drewboy12]

I am glad to see this is happening. I fly a lot, and no harm done to me to ensure a little more safety. Canadian security is so lax at our airports...

[BuzzardsWife]

Originally Posted by photon

My wife and kid were flying the day after the attempted attack, I guess going through security they were trying to get my kid to take of his shoes and go over with the wand and stuff and he was flipping out (he has a real thing about his shoes), and the stupid security guard was getting really mad at my kid.

Finally his supervisor had to intervene to calm the guy down.

Anyway, for the radiation, the amount these things use is super low, you get exposed to probably thousands of times the radiation by actually flying or getting an x-ray.. but x-rays are usually medically necessary and the radiation from flying is voluntarily chosen.

Another funny aspect, in the UK these might be illegal to use on children due to child porn laws.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100105/...o-45dbed5.html

For some reason this post makes me reallymad! People that have no patience for little kids shouldn't work with the public. Kid's are people too, and should be treated with respect. I don't have little kids anymore, but I can remember being at East Side Marios one time and this dickhead waiter actually threw our dirty plates back on the table because our 4 year old didn't make an instant split decision on wether to have the strawberry or the vanilla ice cream. As far as being on topic..I find, as a woman, this new xray system very invasive..buzzard said he doesn't care if some guy sees his ball for 20 seconds but i do care ..but..what people dont understand is 99.99 percent of the time these guys doing the screening are not going to single on person out..get a boner because they can see some girls boob outline for 30 seconds..they are just trying to push us all through like cattle and get us onboard..if this means flying more safely im all for it..i may not feel comfortable with it..but id rather be flying safer

[Canada 02]

this is an example of what it will reveal.

[Wookie]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

this is an example of what it will reveal.

Ewwwww. That's not what it will reveal when I'm at the airport. Poor workers.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Originally Posted by fotze

What I can't understand is why terrorists are hell bent on committing terrorist acts on the most security laden places, airplanes.

Because it's still possible. Once flying has become expensive, cumbersome and helped further erode civil liberties, they'll switch to another method.

I'm gonna throw on my "Crazy but not entirely impossible prediction hat" for you all.

By the end of this new decade, terrorists will have started walking into office random office buildings are blowing themselves up. The response will be to have this see-through type scanning at the entrance to every office building in America.

As a bonus "Crazy but not entirely impossible" prediction....high value targets (Wall Street, Tourist Attractions, Government buildings, etc) in the US will have their CCTV systems replaced with new cameras that can see through clothing.

[Regulator75]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

this is an example of what it will reveal.

What if they have that liquid bomb making materials stuffed in their pooper?

[WilsonFourTwo]

Expensive high-end technology operated by people making $10.00 an hour. Does anybody else see the flaw in this logic?

Business leaders and Government officials constantly justify their salaries with the "Top dollar for top quality" argument, yet we seem entirely OK with turning our (supposed) national security over to the working poor.

If we were serious about security (and I'll mention that fear based destruction of civil liberties isn't security) we'd make security a CAREER and not a McJob.

[Nufy]

Watch all the hot ladies having to spend an extra bit of time in the scanner...

"Hey George...come check this out...Don't worry ma'am...its a matter of security"

Then grabs his hand lotion and goes on break...........

[Canada 02]

Originally Posted by Regulator75

What if they have that liquid bomb making materials stuffed in their pooper?

they open your luggage and carry-ons and take a swab to test for drugs and explosive residue. They could do they same to you. Rectal probe perhaps

seriously, however, the TSA has been experimenting with a device that blows a puff of air at you, then collects and analyzes the trace molecules. they could test everyone as they walk thru the metal detectors

[Azure]

I don't trust the TSA to not screw that up somehow.

[CGYTransplant]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

seriously, however, the TSA has been experimenting with a device that blows a puff of air at you, then collects and analyzes the trace molecules. they could test everyone as they walk thru the metal detectors

They have those at the CN tower, you have to go through them if you want to go up to the top.

[yads]

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/...ne-terror.html