What's so bad about this? Ooooh, someone sees a kind-of naked picture of you, wow. If it means less time emptying out pockets, taking off boots, trying to work out why the sensor still goes off even then, it's all good.
I'm sure the novelty of 'oooh a naked person' will wear off pretty quickly for whoever is paid to monitor it all. Although inevitably pictures of a naked Britney Spears will be leaked.
In Phoenix, TSA has put the backscatter monitors in a sealed room 50 feet from the security checkpoint, so the officers who staff them can't see you. All they can see are X-ray images, which capture density, not pigment. To them, everyone is the same color."[/quote]
So this thing just shows the shape (Yeah, didn't read the article)? What's to stop someone from modelling explosives into bigger tits or abs of steel or something (apart from common sense, I suppose)?
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
So this thing just shows the shape (Yeah, didn't read the article)? What's to stop someone from modelling explosives into bigger tits or abs of steel or something (apart from common sense, I suppose)?
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
I demand nothing less!
Explosives have a different molecular composition and would show up as dark areas compared to human tissue.
What's so bad about this? Ooooh, someone sees a kind-of naked picture of you, wow. If it means less time emptying out pockets, taking off boots, trying to work out why the sensor still goes off even then, it's all good.
I'm sure the novelty of 'oooh a naked person' will wear off pretty quickly for whoever is paid to monitor it all. Although inevitably pictures of a naked Britney Spears will be leaked.
You're aware that the shoe thing is unnecessary as well, right? This is speeding up what should be little more than emptying your pockets. I'm afraid I don't see how that is such a slow and arduous task that it would require such expensive technological innovations.
So this thing just shows the shape (Yeah, didn't read the article)? What's to stop someone from modelling explosives into bigger tits or abs of steel or something (apart from common sense, I suppose)?
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
I demand nothing less!
Explosives have a different molecular composition and would show up as dark areas compared to human tissue.
Damn. Technology has once again foiled my dreams for the perfect naked travel experience!
All this means for me is that I will definitly be hitting the gym before I next fly.
So this thing just shows the shape (Yeah, didn't read the article)? What's to stop someone from modelling explosives into bigger tits or abs of steel or something (apart from common sense, I suppose)?
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
I demand nothing less!
If someone is really determined, they'll hide shit a few mm under their skin in a place where there is no a cavity. I won't feel safe riding on airplanes again until every passenger is skinned alive, cavity-searched and bleached before being allowed on the plane.
So this thing just shows the shape (Yeah, didn't read the article)? What's to stop someone from modelling explosives into bigger tits or abs of steel or something (apart from common sense, I suppose)?
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
I demand nothing less!
If someone is really determined, they'll hide shit a few mm under their skin in a place where there is no a cavity. I won't feel safe riding on airplanes again until every passenger is skinned alive, cavity-searched and bleached before being allowed on the plane.
You just made me cringe. Ugh....that wasn't even cool. The fact that someone sees your body (not your head) and that is it, really isn't a bad deal. I am sure it is much less annoying than say, a pat down, and faster as well.
If someone is really determined they'll use what Allah gave them and beat the pilots, stewardesses, and passengers to death with their bare hands. None of that pussy box cutter bullshit.
The fact that someone sees your body (not your head) and that is it, really isn't a bad deal. I am sure it is much less annoying than say, a pat down, and faster as well.
I would volunteer in a second for this.
Where the hell do you guys fly out of where they pat down every passenger before you're allowed into the terminal?
So this thing just shows the shape (Yeah, didn't read the article)? What's to stop someone from modelling explosives into bigger tits or abs of steel or something (apart from common sense, I suppose)?
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
I demand nothing less!
If someone is really determined, they'll hide shit a few mm under their skin in a place where there is no a cavity. I won't feel safe riding on airplanes again until every passenger is skinned alive, cavity-searched and bleached before being allowed on the plane.
You just made me cringe. Ugh....that wasn't even cool.
If someone is really determined they'll use what Allah gave them and beat the pilots, stewardesses, and passengers to death with their bare hands. None of that pussy box cutter bullshit.
True, we'll also have to cut off their hands and feet from the elbows/knees down. Have to be safe, you know, as there's nothing that could ever possibly be worse than living with the knowledge that there's a remote possibility that someone might try to hijack the plane you're on without a gun, remote enough that even with that chance it's still safer to fly than drive. Let me tell you, I don't know what all these crazy stupid activists are thinking, but when my government tells me to be scared I ask "how high" on the way up.
The fact that someone sees your body (not your head) and that is it, really isn't a bad deal. I am sure it is much less annoying than say, a pat down, and faster as well.
I would volunteer in a second for this.
Where the hell do you guys fly out of where they pat down every passenger before you're allowed into the terminal?
Why is it I have to work my ass off to see someone naked, and some airport guy gets it for free?
That ass is mine dammit. Mine and mine alone. I earned it. If buddy wants a snapshot he can arrange a set of mirrors and cameras in the washrooms like everybody else.
Well I know on the way back from my trip in Europe last summer, 2 weeks after the water bomb scare (we left to europe on the day it happened, oh joy), I got patted down, and so did some other people. All guys though.
So what's the tech behind this? X-rays? I thought those were generally bad if you take some in large doses. What about people traveling all the time?
not X-rays, go back further in the thread, it's harmless
Backscatter Facts
Backscatter scans a narrow, low energy ionizing x-ray beam over the body surface.
Each full body scan produces less than 10 microREM of emission. This is equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about two minutes of airplane flight at altitude or each person receives every 15 minutes from naturally occurring background radiation.
Passengers will participate in the pilot on a voluntary basis, as an alternative to a pat-down.
Well that is on the x-ray band. As for those figures, I'm not a scientist so I have no idea if it's good or bad.
So what's the tech behind this? X-rays? I thought those were generally bad if you take some in large doses. What about people traveling all the time?
not X-rays, go back further in the thread, it's harmless
Backscatter Facts
Backscatter scans a narrow, low energy ionizing x-ray beam over the body surface.
Each full body scan produces less than 10 microREM of emission. This is equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about two minutes of airplane flight at altitude or each person receives every 15 minutes from naturally occurring background radiation.
Passengers will participate in the pilot on a voluntary basis, as an alternative to a pat-down.
Well that is on the x-ray band. As for those figures, I'm not a scientist so I have no idea if it's good or bad.
it means you probably got more radiation while you were reading and replying to this thread than the machine will expose you to
ALocksly on
Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
So what's the tech behind this? X-rays? I thought those were generally bad if you take some in large doses. What about people traveling all the time?
not X-rays, go back further in the thread, it's harmless
Backscatter Facts
Backscatter scans a narrow, low energy ionizing x-ray beam over the body surface.
Each full body scan produces less than 10 microREM of emission. This is equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about two minutes of airplane flight at altitude or each person receives every 15 minutes from naturally occurring background radiation.
Passengers will participate in the pilot on a voluntary basis, as an alternative to a pat-down.
Well that is on the x-ray band. As for those figures, I'm not a scientist so I have no idea if it's good or bad.
it means you probably got more radiation while you were reading and replying to this thread than the machine will expose you to
Two minutes of flight, fifteen of normal background radiation was mentioned somewhere in the thread, I think.
I seem to recall reading about this sort of technology in a several-year-old issue of National Geographic. England wanted to implement it, but the privacy concerns surprisingly kept it away. I guess now they’ve got the cheap excuse they needed.
You're aware that the shoe thing is unnecessary as well, right? This is speeding up what should be little more than emptying your pockets. I'm afraid I don't see how that is such a slow and arduous task that it would require such expensive technological innovations.
Unless you're a half-retarded yokel, emptying your pockets should barely cause you to break stride. Especially if you done any prep before hitting the security checkpoint. Unfortunately, our country is nearly 50% half-retarded yokel.
Also, I never got the impression that this would replace emptying out your pockets. Hell, I'd be surprised if it replaces the shoe-removal. Does it mention somewhere in the article that this is a replacement, and not an addition to the security process? Has anybody flown through an (the? Phoenix?) airport using these?
While the privacy concerns do seem minor to me provided they do maintain the policy of separation (and the pictures never get out), the added level of safety is also comparatively small. At which point I don't particularly consider it to be worth it.
And to everybody comparing this to a doctor's visit...just stop. There is a world of difference between a professional who has been weeded out by nearly a decade of school and who you (theoretically) choose personally and some random TSA agent who you have no (reasonable) choice in having see you. From my experience, 99% of TSA agents are basically mall security guards with a grudge and a God complex.
That's partly (or largely) mitigated by the fact that they supposedly will only allow female agents to view women and males to view men. Which, in addition to the "the person who sees your pasty nekkid picture won't ever see you in person" and the "no ability to save" policies really would go a long way to alleviate the privacy/modesty concerns. Then again, how many of us trust that all three of these policies will be followed without fail?
Huge expense, moderate privacy concerns, miniscule increase in security. Sign me up!
It just sounds like someone has a "Security Budget" to spend.
But I think I really know whats going on... The company will introduce these machines under the guise of "security" - however, as soon as someone of significance walks through "Zap" full 3D image of them... So, you want an actor to star in youe movie for no royalties? 3D actors baby! You need to go undercover in a ridiculously elaborate sting operation and have some kind of futuristic cosmetic surgery setup? You have the blueprints!
Meh, just one more thing I'll have to deal with at the Airport.
I can see how this would bother some people, but really, it's just another annoyance. If you don't like it, take a bus, or a boat, or a private charter flight. Security measures at Airports are here to say, and no ammount of complaining is going to change it.
I'm waiting for Richard Gere to go through one, I hope the Gerbil smiles for the picture.
Meh, just one more thing I'll have to deal with at the Airport.
I can see how this would bother some people, but really, it's just another annoyance. If you don't like it, take a bus, or a boat, or a private charter flight. Security measures at Airports are here to say, and no ammount of complaining is going to change it.
I'm waiting for Richard Gere to go through one, I hope the Gerbil smiles for the picture.
But this isn't a security measure, it's a 'look how big our security budget is that we can buy shiny useless crap' measure.
Meh, just one more thing I'll have to deal with at the Airport.
I can see how this would bother some people, but really, it's just another annoyance. If you don't like it, take a bus, or a boat, or a private charter flight. Security measures at Airports are here to say, and no ammount of complaining is going to change it.
I'm waiting for Richard Gere to go through one, I hope the Gerbil smiles for the picture.
But this isn't a security measure, it's a 'look how big our security budget is that we can buy shiny useless crap' measure.
It's a security measure to the federal govt and the airports, and to a shit load of people who think it is. Might even be one to stupid terrorist wannabes who won't try because of it. Legit or not, it is a "crowd pleaser".
And honestly, I'm the wrong guy to judge this shit. The only time I fly is when I'm on orders or have my leave paperwork. Automatic get out of security measures and long ass lines pass. (Minus the shoe/metal detector part) (Basically they can't pull me off to the side for thier "thorough" searches. You know the one; "Sir, your name has shown up on our lists blah fucking blah". Ass wipes)
I can see how this would bother some people, but really, it's just another annoyance. If you don't like it, take a bus, or a boat, or a private charter flight. Security measures at Airports are here to say, and no ammount of complaining is going to change it.
Busses, boats, and trains are not necessarily feasible alternatives in many/most circumstances. Do you have any idea how long it takes to get from Los Angeles to New York by bus? Hell, even driving you're looking at days. And private charter flights are out of the realm of possibility for 99% of the population.
Our economy and culture has built itself around the ability to move people from A to B in less than a week's time; many of the flights people take on a daily basis aren't "optional" in any real sense of the word. Any new security measures should be viewed with that in mind.
And all this is to prevent terrorist attacks that are at best infrequent. How many successful plane bombings in the last decade? How many killed? Being killed by an attack on a plane is just a couple notches above "killed by falling piano" in my book of fears, and well below "killed by drunk driver." The number of people killed by plane-related terrorism is incredibly small; even more so once you discount all the ground-based deaths of 9/11. Why would you discount those, you may ask? Because such an attack is unlikely to ever happen again...due to both increased non-invasive security measures (locked cabin doors, disallowed knives of all sizes, etc.) and a radically transformed mindset (a pilot would sooner put it into the ground in a field now than hand over the controls, knowing what is possible...and passengers are less likely to cooperate as well). So any future plane-based terrorism will probably be limited to killing passengers.
So this system might save a thousand lives. Maybe. I'm basing that on the number of previous successful airplane bombings, and how far that could be/has been reduced with less costly (in terms of money, time, and privacy) measures.
If it's not worth the money to rush production of armored vehicles and invest in better body armor that would have saved the lives of people we intentionally put in very real danger, I fail to see how it's worth this kind of cost to alleviate a danger that is largely imagined. In other words the fact that even one penny of my taxes is going to these machines while we still have guys driving around in poorly armored/unarmored vehicles in Iraq makes me want to vomit and/or kill people.
And that's before we even get into the possibly privacy issues.
Am I the only one who's neverhad to taske more that 5 mins to go through airport security? Seriously what are we bitching about? I think the worst I ever had to do was take off my belt for the metal detector.
There's much larger threats to civil liberties and also much better places ot spend security money.
Am I the only one who's neverhad to taske more that 5 mins to go through airport security? Seriously what are we bitching about? I think the worst I ever had to do was take off my belt for the metal detector.
There's much larger threats to civil liberties and also much better places ot spend security money.
Sometimes it's quick, sometimes it's an hour and a half. I honestly avoid flying anymore though. I don't feel like putting up with the bullshit just because everyone around me willing lives in fear.
I can see how this would bother some people, but really, it's just another annoyance. If you don't like it, take a bus, or a boat, or a private charter flight. Security measures at Airports are here to say, and no ammount of complaining is going to change it.
Busses, boats, and trains are not necessarily feasible alternatives in many/most circumstances. Do you have any idea how long it takes to get from Los Angeles to New York by bus? Hell, even driving you're looking at days. And private charter flights are out of the realm of possibility for 99% of the population.
Our economy and culture has built itself around the ability to move people from A to B in less than a week's time; many of the flights people take on a daily basis aren't "optional" in any real sense of the word. Any new security measures should be viewed with that in mind.
And all this is to prevent terrorist attacks that are at best infrequent. How many successful plane bombings in the last decade? How many killed? Being killed by an attack on a plane is just a couple notches above "killed by falling piano" in my book of fears, and well below "killed by drunk driver." The number of people killed by plane-related terrorism is incredibly small; even more so once you discount all the ground-based deaths of 9/11. Why would you discount those, you may ask? Because such an attack is unlikely to ever happen again...due to both increased non-invasive security measures (locked cabin doors, disallowed knives of all sizes, etc.) and a radically transformed mindset (a pilot would sooner put it into the ground in a field now than hand over the controls, knowing what is possible...and passengers are less likely to cooperate as well). So any future plane-based terrorism will probably be limited to killing passengers.
So this system might save a thousand lives. Maybe. I'm basing that on the number of previous successful airplane bombings, and how far that could be/has been reduced with less costly (in terms of money, time, and privacy) measures.
If it's not worth the money to rush production of armored vehicles and invest in better body armor that would have saved the lives of people we intentionally put in very real danger, I fail to see how it's worth this kind of cost to alleviate a danger that is largely imagined. In other words the fact that even one penny of my taxes is going to these machines while we still have guys driving around in poorly armored/unarmored vehicles in Iraq makes me want to vomit and/or kill people.
And that's before we even get into the possibly privacy issues.
It's a sad truth that the image of security is more important than the reality of security. Always has been, probably always will be. Unless one of us runs for President. And lets be realistic, my pic/profile is a guy who tortured people for kicks, so I'm out.
Besides, flying isn't a right, it's a "privellage".
As for us not getting good armor; it's also a sad truth that the public image of us getting what we need is more important than us actually getting the best shit available. Dragonskin, for soldiers, HA HA HA HA HA. Thats a good one. Whats next, hollow points for your 9mm. Or even better, actual .45's.
Mcdermott, you kill me man! (We need to come up with a sarcasm tag, seriously)
Am I the only one who's neverhad to taske more that 5 mins to go through airport security? Seriously what are we bitching about? I think the worst I ever had to do was take off my belt for the metal detector.
Depends where you fly from. I've had waits ranging from no line at all to 30-60 minutes. And last I checked you're at least going to have to remove your shoes in addition to your belt...that's still mandatory, no?
And the worst I've ever had was having to remove my jacket and shoes, wait for a patdown and wanding, having my carry-ons poked through, and been forced to boot up my computer and show them that it operates normally. Then been forced to haphazardly shove all my shit back in my carry-ons (which had previously been lovingly packed), throw my shit back on as quickly as possible, and rush to my terminal because the security line had taken over 30 minutes in addition to the 30 I spent at check-in.
It happens.
If you're wondering what I did to earn this special treatment, it's because I had my kit for my circuits lab in my backpack...had to travel during school and didn't want to fall behind. So we're talking about a breadboard with a circuit built on it, along with jumpers, resistors, capacitors, inductors, diodes, various IC's, batteries, and a multimeter. Apparently somebody thought that looked suspicious.
Sometimes it's quick, sometimes it's an hour and a half. I honestly avoid flying anymore though. I don't feel like putting up with the bullshit just because everyone around me willing lives in fear.
It's not entirely their fault...I mean when the government comes up with a color-coded "terror level" just to keep people in the right mindset, what you are you expecting?
It's a sad truth that the image of security is more important than the reality of security. Always has been, probably always will be. Unless one of us runs for President.
No, actual security has saved far more lives than the illusion of security. The only way to actually stop another plane hijacking, let alone a terrorist threat using a plane as a missile or something, occurs way the hell outside of the terminal. The 'bad guys' shouldn't even be on board a plane let alone on board with some weapon they managed to smuggle in, rather than use one of the plethora of 'weapons' that exist inside the plane itself.
Besides, flying isn't a right, it's a "privellage".
True, travel is a priveledge however that priviledge needs to be a secure one. To be safe in your travels is a right barring some extreme circumstance, like naked spelunking into alligator bay.
Dragonskin, for soldiers, HA HA HA HA HA.
I've heard how the body armor soldiers get is shit in comparison to this a number of times, but I've never seen any stats or videotaped tests of how it performs against blunt trauma and other IED related injuries.
Posts
I'm sure the novelty of 'oooh a naked person' will wear off pretty quickly for whoever is paid to monitor it all. Although inevitably pictures of a naked Britney Spears will be leaked.
I'm afraid the only way for the sky to be safe is to have everyone be entirely naked for the duration of every flight (with cavity searches thrown in, of course).
I demand nothing less!
Explosives have a different molecular composition and would show up as dark areas compared to human tissue.
You're aware that the shoe thing is unnecessary as well, right? This is speeding up what should be little more than emptying your pockets. I'm afraid I don't see how that is such a slow and arduous task that it would require such expensive technological innovations.
Damn. Technology has once again foiled my dreams for the perfect naked travel experience!
All this means for me is that I will definitly be hitting the gym before I next fly.
If someone is really determined, they'll hide shit a few mm under their skin in a place where there is no a cavity. I won't feel safe riding on airplanes again until every passenger is skinned alive, cavity-searched and bleached before being allowed on the plane.
You just made me cringe. Ugh....that wasn't even cool. The fact that someone sees your body (not your head) and that is it, really isn't a bad deal. I am sure it is much less annoying than say, a pat down, and faster as well.
I would volunteer in a second for this.
Where the hell do you guys fly out of where they pat down every passenger before you're allowed into the terminal?
True, we'll also have to cut off their hands and feet from the elbows/knees down. Have to be safe, you know, as there's nothing that could ever possibly be worse than living with the knowledge that there's a remote possibility that someone might try to hijack the plane you're on without a gun, remote enough that even with that chance it's still safer to fly than drive. Let me tell you, I don't know what all these crazy stupid activists are thinking, but when my government tells me to be scared I ask "how high" on the way up.
That ass is mine dammit. Mine and mine alone. I earned it. If buddy wants a snapshot he can arrange a set of mirrors and cameras in the washrooms like everybody else.
3DS: 2852-6809-9411
not X-rays, go back further in the thread, it's harmless
They probably only travel so much to gather reconnaissance data so that they can more effectively ZOMG TERRORISM!!#@#@!$!!!
Well that is on the x-ray band. As for those figures, I'm not a scientist so I have no idea if it's good or bad.
it means you probably got more radiation while you were reading and replying to this thread than the machine will expose you to
Two minutes of flight, fifteen of normal background radiation was mentioned somewhere in the thread, I think.
Unless you're a half-retarded yokel, emptying your pockets should barely cause you to break stride. Especially if you done any prep before hitting the security checkpoint. Unfortunately, our country is nearly 50% half-retarded yokel.
Also, I never got the impression that this would replace emptying out your pockets. Hell, I'd be surprised if it replaces the shoe-removal. Does it mention somewhere in the article that this is a replacement, and not an addition to the security process? Has anybody flown through an (the? Phoenix?) airport using these?
While the privacy concerns do seem minor to me provided they do maintain the policy of separation (and the pictures never get out), the added level of safety is also comparatively small. At which point I don't particularly consider it to be worth it.
And to everybody comparing this to a doctor's visit...just stop. There is a world of difference between a professional who has been weeded out by nearly a decade of school and who you (theoretically) choose personally and some random TSA agent who you have no (reasonable) choice in having see you. From my experience, 99% of TSA agents are basically mall security guards with a grudge and a God complex.
That's partly (or largely) mitigated by the fact that they supposedly will only allow female agents to view women and males to view men. Which, in addition to the "the person who sees your pasty nekkid picture won't ever see you in person" and the "no ability to save" policies really would go a long way to alleviate the privacy/modesty concerns. Then again, how many of us trust that all three of these policies will be followed without fail?
Huge expense, moderate privacy concerns, miniscule increase in security. Sign me up!
Yes, someone did. You lazy asshole.
But I think I really know whats going on... The company will introduce these machines under the guise of "security" - however, as soon as someone of significance walks through "Zap" full 3D image of them... So, you want an actor to star in youe movie for no royalties? 3D actors baby! You need to go undercover in a ridiculously elaborate sting operation and have some kind of futuristic cosmetic surgery setup? You have the blueprints!
Its identity theft taken to a whole new level!
I can see how this would bother some people, but really, it's just another annoyance. If you don't like it, take a bus, or a boat, or a private charter flight. Security measures at Airports are here to say, and no ammount of complaining is going to change it.
I'm waiting for Richard Gere to go through one, I hope the Gerbil smiles for the picture.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
But this isn't a security measure, it's a 'look how big our security budget is that we can buy shiny useless crap' measure.
It's a security measure to the federal govt and the airports, and to a shit load of people who think it is. Might even be one to stupid terrorist wannabes who won't try because of it. Legit or not, it is a "crowd pleaser".
And honestly, I'm the wrong guy to judge this shit. The only time I fly is when I'm on orders or have my leave paperwork. Automatic get out of security measures and long ass lines pass. (Minus the shoe/metal detector part) (Basically they can't pull me off to the side for thier "thorough" searches. You know the one; "Sir, your name has shown up on our lists blah fucking blah". Ass wipes)
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Busses, boats, and trains are not necessarily feasible alternatives in many/most circumstances. Do you have any idea how long it takes to get from Los Angeles to New York by bus? Hell, even driving you're looking at days. And private charter flights are out of the realm of possibility for 99% of the population.
Our economy and culture has built itself around the ability to move people from A to B in less than a week's time; many of the flights people take on a daily basis aren't "optional" in any real sense of the word. Any new security measures should be viewed with that in mind.
And all this is to prevent terrorist attacks that are at best infrequent. How many successful plane bombings in the last decade? How many killed? Being killed by an attack on a plane is just a couple notches above "killed by falling piano" in my book of fears, and well below "killed by drunk driver." The number of people killed by plane-related terrorism is incredibly small; even more so once you discount all the ground-based deaths of 9/11. Why would you discount those, you may ask? Because such an attack is unlikely to ever happen again...due to both increased non-invasive security measures (locked cabin doors, disallowed knives of all sizes, etc.) and a radically transformed mindset (a pilot would sooner put it into the ground in a field now than hand over the controls, knowing what is possible...and passengers are less likely to cooperate as well). So any future plane-based terrorism will probably be limited to killing passengers.
So this system might save a thousand lives. Maybe. I'm basing that on the number of previous successful airplane bombings, and how far that could be/has been reduced with less costly (in terms of money, time, and privacy) measures.
If it's not worth the money to rush production of armored vehicles and invest in better body armor that would have saved the lives of people we intentionally put in very real danger, I fail to see how it's worth this kind of cost to alleviate a danger that is largely imagined. In other words the fact that even one penny of my taxes is going to these machines while we still have guys driving around in poorly armored/unarmored vehicles in Iraq makes me want to vomit and/or kill people.
And that's before we even get into the possibly privacy issues.
There's much larger threats to civil liberties and also much better places ot spend security money.
Sometimes it's quick, sometimes it's an hour and a half. I honestly avoid flying anymore though. I don't feel like putting up with the bullshit just because everyone around me willing lives in fear.
It's a sad truth that the image of security is more important than the reality of security. Always has been, probably always will be. Unless one of us runs for President. And lets be realistic, my pic/profile is a guy who tortured people for kicks, so I'm out.
Besides, flying isn't a right, it's a "privellage".
As for us not getting good armor; it's also a sad truth that the public image of us getting what we need is more important than us actually getting the best shit available. Dragonskin, for soldiers, HA HA HA HA HA. Thats a good one. Whats next, hollow points for your 9mm. Or even better, actual .45's.
Mcdermott, you kill me man! (We need to come up with a sarcasm tag, seriously)
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Depends where you fly from. I've had waits ranging from no line at all to 30-60 minutes. And last I checked you're at least going to have to remove your shoes in addition to your belt...that's still mandatory, no?
And the worst I've ever had was having to remove my jacket and shoes, wait for a patdown and wanding, having my carry-ons poked through, and been forced to boot up my computer and show them that it operates normally. Then been forced to haphazardly shove all my shit back in my carry-ons (which had previously been lovingly packed), throw my shit back on as quickly as possible, and rush to my terminal because the security line had taken over 30 minutes in addition to the 30 I spent at check-in.
It happens.
If you're wondering what I did to earn this special treatment, it's because I had my kit for my circuits lab in my backpack...had to travel during school and didn't want to fall behind. So we're talking about a breadboard with a circuit built on it, along with jumpers, resistors, capacitors, inductors, diodes, various IC's, batteries, and a multimeter. Apparently somebody thought that looked suspicious.
It's not entirely their fault...I mean when the government comes up with a color-coded "terror level" just to keep people in the right mindset, what you are you expecting?
No, actual security has saved far more lives than the illusion of security. The only way to actually stop another plane hijacking, let alone a terrorist threat using a plane as a missile or something, occurs way the hell outside of the terminal. The 'bad guys' shouldn't even be on board a plane let alone on board with some weapon they managed to smuggle in, rather than use one of the plethora of 'weapons' that exist inside the plane itself.
True, travel is a priveledge however that priviledge needs to be a secure one. To be safe in your travels is a right barring some extreme circumstance, like naked spelunking into alligator bay.
I've heard how the body armor soldiers get is shit in comparison to this a number of times, but I've never seen any stats or videotaped tests of how it performs against blunt trauma and other IED related injuries.