Yes or No to Backscatter Machines at airports??

9supratt4

9supratt4

Active Member
Since this latest terrorist on the plane to Detroit, the controversy of using "Backscatter" machines at airports is on full blast!!
I want to know what everyone here thinks about the use of them.
For those who don't know what they are, bhe backscatter is an X-ray machine the size of a refrigerator that can see through your clothes, down to your birthday suit. It also can detect metal, plastic and organic materials hidden beneath your garments or between folds of skin.
The controversy is that people feel it is a violation of their privacy. What they don't want to hear is that only one person in a closed off room or area would see these pictures. The pictures cannot be stored, printed or transmitted.
Personally....as a person who flies about 30,000 miles a year and also a person who helpped with the rescue at ground zero....people need to get over this "invasion" of privacy. Is it better to be safe?? I think so!! And if a plane were to be blown up while not using the machines, the first thing people will say is we should have been using them!!
Having an X-Ray taken for saftey is a VERY small price to pay in order to be safe!!
Whats everyone else think??
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
You don't have a right to fly. I giving up a little privacy is the price you pay for being granted the privilege then so be it.
 
cranberry

cranberry

Active Member
But then I couldn't sneak on my illegal Orange Juice.
I'll agree to it only if I get to dance while they are taking the shot.... and if I get to keep my Orange Juice.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
I am for the use of these. Its only a violation of your right to privacy if you are unaware of it or you dont give consent.
 
9supratt4

9supratt4

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3198453
I am for the use of these. Its only a violation of your right to privacy if you are unaware of it or you dont give consent.
See that's my thing too...everyone will know they are there and they can request a physical pat down instead!! I really do hate the whiny ACLU.
 
meowzer

meowzer

Moderator
Originally Posted by Cranberry
http:///forum/post/3198403
But then I couldn't sneak on my illegal Orange Juice.
I'll agree to it only if I get to dance while they are taking the shot.... and if I get to keep my Orange Juice.

I would have no problem with them....especially since it appears the scanning they have now is worthless....
 
coral keeper

coral keeper

Active Member
Originally Posted by 9supratt4
http:///forum/post/3198297
Since this latest terrorist on the plane to Detroit, the controversy of using "Backscatter" machines at airports is on full blast!!
I want to know what everyone here thinks about the use of them.
For those who don't know what they are, bhe backscatter is an X-ray machine the size of a refrigerator that can see through your clothes, down to your birthday suit. It also can detect metal, plastic and organic materials hidden beneath your garments or between folds of skin.
The controversy is that people feel it is a violation of their privacy. What they don't want to hear is that only one person in a closed off room or area would see these pictures. The pictures cannot be stored, printed or transmitted.
Personally....as a person who flies about 30,000 miles a year and also a person who helpped with the rescue at ground zero....people need to get over this "invasion" of privacy. Is it better to be safe?? I think so!! And if a plane were to be blown up while not using the machines, the first thing people will say is we should have been using them!!
Having an X-Ray taken for saftey is a VERY small price to pay in order to be safe!!
Whats everyone else think??
I'm for it.
 
soviettaco

soviettaco

Active Member
So pregnant women would have to go through a mandatory pat down along with anyone else that can't have x-ray exposure right?
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by SOVIETTACO
http:///forum/post/3198488
So pregnant women would have to go through a mandatory pat down along with anyone else that can't have x-ray exposure right?
Probably,there are also chemical sniffing devices and other methods...... the x-ray is the most effective though. There will be exceptions but there is no reason why someone should be getting on a plane with explosives or weapons with the technology available.
 
9supratt4

9supratt4

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3198494
Probably,there are also chemical sniffing devices and other methods...... the x-ray is the most effective though. There will be exceptions but there is no reason why someone should be getting on a plane with explosives or weapons with the technology available.
Not sure about the pregnant women....The Backscatter X-Ray is supposedly such a low level X-Ray that it does not cause any harm. But I would assume they wouldn't have pregnant women to go through the scan. They also would allow a pat down if you refuse the machine.
I just don't get Congress!! In June they voted 310 to 118 to ban the use of the machines as Primary scans!!
 
kingsmith

kingsmith

Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3198494
Probably,there are also chemical sniffing devices and other methods...... the x-ray is the most effective though. There will be exceptions but there is no reason why someone should be getting on a plane with explosives or weapons with the technology available.
Unless of course its an inside job by the PTB?
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by 9supratt4
http:///forum/post/3198510
Not sure about the pregnant women....The Backscatter X-Ray is supposedly such a low level X-Ray that it does not cause any harm. But I would assume they wouldn't have pregnant women to go through the scan. They also would allow a pat down if you refuse the machine.
I just don't get Congress!! In June they voted 310 to 118 to ban the use of the machines as Primary scans!!

100 of those no votes came from republicans if I remember right....
 
cranberry

cranberry

Active Member
Originally Posted by KingSmith
http:///forum/post/3198484
The best part will be when those images get out on the net we'll see some changing minds the

If ya look hard enough... there's already pics of me out there. I was young and crazy once :)
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
I don't think it's a privacy issue so much as a health issue. Radiation is always hazardous, even a very low doses because the dosage is cumulative. So I would perhaps be worried if I were a frequent-flier.
 
cranberry

cranberry

Active Member
That would be a lot of frequent flying to meet life time exposure limits. I did, however, know a 9 year old that had met her lifetime limit. I guess ya could keep track of it with your frequent flyer points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top