Turn on thread page Beta

'No scan, no flight' at Heathrow and Manchester! watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SomeStudent)
    :lolwut: so what's the point in using scanners if they can't detect this, they could easily carry these and then make explosives in the plane. :| :|
    i know, its ridiculous.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I dont see the problem, flying isnt a right. If you dont like it stop flying.

    If it speeds up my time getting through security im all for it. For people complaining about it be dangerous it is the same amount of radiation as you are exposed to for 2 minutes crusing at 30,000 feet so you really shouldnt be flying if your that worried.....
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tom//)
    http://www.naturalnews.com/027913_fu...nners_DNA.html

    all you need to do is search "full body scanners damage dna" and youll get a huge list of sources.
    I really wanted a peer reviewed journal article, not some journalistic over-dramatised nonsense from someone who is cherry picking quotes from said article to make it seem scary.

    of course the x-rays could damage DNA, any radiation can damage DNA. The chances of there being a measurable biological effect afterwards though are minimal.

    The dose received from one of these machines is generously given as 0.1 micro Sieverts. Your daily dose from rocks, cosmic radiation and radioactive chemicals in your bones is around 20 times that per day
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I will only fly from small airports as I prefer to do now, where a scanning maching is probably too expensive to bother.
    I will just avoid flying as much as possible, simple. Absurd security measure that doesn't really help. How many planes actually get blown up a year?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by algérie_mon_amour)
    Well, your 'private parts' can in fact be seen! look at the pictures in the link.
    it's not exactly detailed imagery of them now, is it.
    would you rather be quickly scanned, or get blown up on your flight?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamscybot)
    Dont you think these events are odd:

    • Government suggests body scanners - public doesnt like it much
    • Detroit bomber foiled
    • Government says right we are having them now, no questions asked
    Are you suggesting the Detroit bomber was a conspiracy to allow the introduction of full body scanners?

    (Original post by crazylemon)
    How many planes actually get blown up a year?
    An increasing amount.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamscybot)
    Ive read (sorry, lost source) that this whole thing wont even detect the likes of the panty bomber in detroit.

    Dont you think these events are odd:

    • Government suggests body scanners - public doesnt like it much
    • Detroit bomber foiled
    • Government says right we are having them now, no questions asked


    There is SOME scientific evidence that the waves used in the machine could damage DNA strands.

    Its all very vague though.
    This. A thousand times this.

    http://www.americablog.com/2010/01/g...s-of-body.html

    The video is in german but the visual test is clear for anyone to see that full-body scanners are ineffective at best.

    No air passengers will benefit from this 'improved' security. The only people that will benefit are the people who own the patents/contracts for installing and maintaining these.

    I'm not sure what's happened here. Either the government has been tricked into spending billions of pounds by dubious IT consultants (look at the NHS) or the british public have been tricked into spending billions of pounds on technology that doesn't work in the name of 'anti-terrorism'. I suppose both of those amount to the same thing though.

    And for people who seem to take solace in the fact that these images won't be saved or transmitted, then you are mistaken. The scanners posess the means to do this:

    "According to TSA specification requirement documents that have been uncovered by the EPIC, all full-body scanners purchased by the TSA must have the ability to both save and transmit the scanned images of air passengers.

    These documents contradict the claims of the TSA, which include the statement that "the system has no way to save, transmit or print the image."
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    i don't like the idea of 'outlines' etc but as most people have suggested already,it's practically anonymous assuming you don't raise alarm.
    Moreover, it should be noted that the person seeing the image has a 50% of seeing the same body parts as you just by looking down,even just sat watching the scanner. In that respect,it's no big deal lol
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    If you have a boner when you're passing through one, do they see it?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    An increasing amount.
    How many last year? That were successful (Xmas UCL retard does not count)

    Even if no planes blew up safety records would be almost the same. Crashes are far more frequent then Mr terrorist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    Are you suggesting the Detroit bomber was a conspiracy to allow the introduction of full body scanners?
    I think they took full advantage of it to remove more of our rights.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _lauren)
    it's not exactly detailed imagery of them now, is it.
    would you rather be quickly scanned, or get blown up on your flight?
    Do you actually think this is going to make a difference?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    lol at the thread title - as if you cold just say no - I dont want to be scanned an they'd let you on
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamscybot)
    I think they took full advantage of it to remove more of our rights.
    Which rights have they removed?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    Which rights have they removed?
    Privacy.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamscybot)
    Its a physics white paper.

    I doubt the daily fail even knows about it lol.
    having read the article it says that it took a 6 hour exposure to cause genomic instability and that a 5 minute exposure in mice was harmless.

    It seems to be a resonant effect anyway, which is easy to get around by simply changing the frequency slightly
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by isabella)
    i don't think it's ridiculous at all .It's for our safety. 1 scan won't harm you
    1 scan? You're obviously one of these people that "go on holiday" once every three years to spain.. You know there are people that need/want to fly several times a month which 2 scans per "trip" 3 trips a month = 3 trips = 6 scans a month. 6 scans a month = 72 scans a year.. in ten years you would of had 720 scans.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanges)
    Which rights have they removed?
    Its all part of a drive to make us feel powerless/useless against the powers that be.

    The body scanners are useless. And the detroit bomber incident has (some) people crying to have them installed - just the way they like it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamscybot)
    I think they took full advantage of it to remove more of our rights.
    I don't know about that, it seems like textbook government ''closing the door after the horse has bolted'' to me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kittykatkat)
    I may be about to lower the tone of this conversation but would they be able to tell if a woman had a tampon in?
    Not sure about tampons, but apparently they do pick up on colostomy bags.

    http://www.privacyinternational.org/...D=x-347-565802
 
 
 
Poll
Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.