Re: The end is in sight
- From: Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 01:54:19 +0100
Martin Brown wrote:
News123 wrote:
The guy or gal doing the watching doesn't get to see the person in real
life. And most people are not readily identified by their genitalia.
There may be a few notable exceptions among the porn stars, but I can't
imagine that they would be especially bothered by it.
They can just walk away from their screen, out to the check point and
'grin' directly in the real face of the person.
The monitor displays are deliberately out of range of the scanner (or so
they tell me). And the image is more like a cylindrical projection of
the body rather than a photograph. They are looking for hidden weapons
and bombs.
The setup is way more sophisticated than basic X-ray or metal detector
grids. I always test those to see how good they are (and the standard is
still pretty rubbish except in a few airports like Heathrow).
Either people have to accept being 'pseudo-naked' in front of the
security team or this new system shouldn't be installed
Blurring the face is 'just a joke'
I honestly don't care. I would prefer to have a security system that
worked. In the US it was almost trivial to defeat domestic airport
security prior to 9/11.
Does it avoid having to take your shoes off ? I always thought that was stupid.
Visual inspection will identify shoes than can or cannot contain any explosive
from the thickness of the sole and heel.
raam
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The end is in sight
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: The end is in sight
- References:
- Re: The end is in sight
- From: News123
- Re: The end is in sight
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: The end is in sight
- Prev by Date: Re: The end is in sight
- Next by Date: Re: Sources for enamel magnet wire in Canada
- Previous by thread: Re: The end is in sight
- Next by thread: Re: The end is in sight
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|