Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Airport Scanner

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Surely it's not beyond the wit of man to automate these things so that a person doesn't have to look at them unless a warning is raised? Not that I'm that bothered about someone looking at the outline of my bell-end, anyway.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    God I would be... (not my dick though, that's open to everyone :lol:)
    But seriously... I can just imagine some pervvy old man with a beard wanking over the outlines of people because he can't actaully see someone in real life. Icky.
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not that I'm that bothered about someone looking at the outline of my bell-end, anyway.

    Is that because it is too small for the scanners :D:D

    Sorry you left yourself open there :) I think overall the added security added through these device outway the 1 person caught making a comment, which I wouldn't be suprised if it turned out to be a joke which got taken to far.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i still cant get excited about it, one guy is a pervert, ive never seen that many hot people at an airport, normally fat scottish people going to get their skin burnt off, lovely, even if someone hot did pass through the scanner, i'm pretty sure your soul would be too destroyed from seeing all the fat ugly people to even react.

    hot young things are definately the minority in this world
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    God I would be... (not my dick though, that's open to everyone :lol:)
    But seriously... I can just imagine some pervvy old man with a beard wanking over the outlines of people because he can't actaully see someone in real life. Icky.
    Xx

    Im sorry but a grainy black n white Xray like that, I'd pick google images minus safe search anyday.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hellfire wrote: »
    Im sorry but a grainy black n white Xray like that, I'd pick google images minus safe search anyday.


    And this, if i was gonna wank over people, wouldn't be some rubbishy x-ray picture
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ...But... but what if the person looking at the pictures was turned on by Frankie Boyle? Hahaha xD No, I just think it is abit invading of others privercy. Like, I wouldn't go up to some random guy on the street and offer him a quick flash would I? So, why would I let some other random bloke look at me?
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Seriously? Do you don't think this is like.. an invasion in your privecy?
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    so your plane doesn't get blown up?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ...But... but what if the person looking at the pictures was turned on by Frankie Boyle? Hahaha xD No, I just think it is abit invading of others privercy. Like, I wouldn't go up to some random guy on the street and offer him a quick flash would I? So, why would I let some other random bloke look at me?
    Xx

    Well if it stops me from going boom then im all for it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hellfire wrote: »
    Is that because it is too small for the scanners :D:D

    Sorry you left yourself open there :)

    I'm like a real life action man. Minus the chiseled torso, natch.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Seriously? Do you don't think this is like.. an invasion in your privecy?
    Xx

    nope, only restriction or I think special restrictions would need to be children etc.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i think its a lot less of an invasion than having to be physically searched
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hellfire wrote: »
    I think special restrictions would need to be children etc.

    So, me then. :p
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i think its a lot less of an invasion than having to be physically searched

    Or blown up... thats a big personal invasion of me I think.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hellfire wrote: »
    Or blown up... thats a big personal invasion of me I think.

    yeah admittedly im not keen on that happening either, kinda has a tendency to ruin your day
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So, me then. :p
    Xx

    Yes, I agree that someone like yourself their would need special restrictions, maybe special staff with Disclosures or special training/clearence etc.

    but then again doctors or nurses will/might see you naked, this is just another job where it is required, remember Airport security are very well vetted.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hellfire wrote: »

    but then again doctors or nurses will/might see you naked, this is just another job where it is required, remember Airport security are very well vetted.

    See, after certain things that happened to me that I wont go into... I don't really like people seeing me naked. I don't mind you know, pictures and stuff because that way you can forget about it and stuff... but actually knowing there is someone really close by looking at a picture of you, or someone actually (like a nurse) looking at you.
    I just don't like it. I don't think I'd mind so much if it wasn't for previous stuff that's happened I guess.
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    See, after certain things that happened to me that I wont go into... I don't really like people seeing me naked. I don't mind you know, pictures and stuff because that way you can forget about it and stuff... but actually knowing there is someone really close by looking at a picture of you, or someone actually (like a nurse) looking at you.
    I just don't like it. I don't think I'd mind so much if it wasn't for previous stuff that's happened I guess.
    Xx

    Which is understandable and I would say a difference in circumstances but to the average person or situation I would say it is not invasive or to personal. obviously if people have had problems with this kind of thing before then I think there needs to be rules around it.

    However I believe if you have a problem with it, can you not opt for a hand search instead?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Wouldn't they get all lerry about that though? Because when you rufuse something, they normally say you have a bomb or some shit.
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Seriously? Do you don't think this is like.. an invasion in your privecy?
    Xx

    No.

    I get the pat down from the burly ladies EVERY time I pass security (must look shifty!), and personally I'd much rather someone see me naked for a second than manhandle my boobicles on public display.

    And I'd rather the seeing naked AND the patting down than the getting exploded :thumb:

    ETA: if children are exempt, do you think people might hide things on them?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i think its a lot less of an invasion than having to be physically searched

    I disagree. it's that I can't see who's seeing me that I find most distressing about it.

    I've said before I'd far rather strip off in the middle of the airport, than use that system.

    I'm very worried that the person has received an harassment warning (that is for telling the person they'd seen), rather than anything to do with looking too closely.

    I'm not saying that harassment isn't a problem - but they have NOTHING in place to punish them for perving.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm going to California. We were told anyone aged 16 and under, does not have to have it done. I think the only one is in heathrow? Correct me if i am wrong. And That it's for certain flights and people only, who they use high profiling or people they deem dangerious?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be honest, all your "rights" seem rather inconsequential and petty when the potential alternative is being blown up.

    Now some will throw up their hands, beat their breasts, wrought their clothes asunder and make instant parallels to 1984, as such folk are wont to do, carping that this is a massive invasion of personal privacy, personal rights, yadda, yadda, yadda. Let them see my dong if they want. If it means getting on a plane versus not, that's fine with me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What this story makes me think is thus

    Woman who works with the man walks through the scanner by mistake. Man being a bit of a perv makes some sort of lewd comment, ie "phwoar, just like I imagined". Woman gets offended, police are called, whole things gets called a gross invasion of privacy and the original critics of the damned things crawl out the woodwork.

    At the end of the day, if it's a choice between death or my bits being displayed on a grainy black and white picture, then I choose the bits being on display.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Now some will throw up their hands, beat their breasts, wrought their clothes asunder and make instant parallels to 1984, as such folk are wont to do, carping that this is a massive invasion of personal privacy, personal rights, yadda, yadda, yadda.

    :wave:

    Only question I have, given the comments here from a number of people, is what would you consider to be excessive?

    I don't question that scanners can be effective, I question whether the need is really there. I may be mistaken but I think you'll find that less since than 500 people have died, in an airplane, as a result of terrorist. That includes the 250 passengers killed on Sept 11th. Heathrow alone has 67 million passangers going through it per year.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be honest, I've not given too much thought to what would constitute an invasion privacy.

    However, what you must bear in mind is that you don't have to fly. If you want to fly, you play by the airport's rules. This is not the same as the ID card debate where there is less of a choice element to it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you want to fly, you play by the airport's rules. .

    No, that's not the case. The airport isn't allowed to make unreasonable demands. The question is what we allow to be considered unreasonable.

    But of course, the bogeyman of terrorism is invoked to persuade us to accept this.

    People were happy to fly without the scanners. Let those who want these scanners introducing for their safety stay at home.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big Gay wrote: »
    No, that's not the case. The airport isn't allowed to make unreasonable demands. The question is what we allow to be considered unreasonable.

    But of course, the bogeyman of terrorism is invoked to persuade us to accept this.

    People were happy to fly without the scanners. Let those who want these scanners introducing for their safety stay at home.

    I don't consider the scanner to be an unreasonable demand. As for the 'bogeyman of terrorism', this is a real threat. Whilst I don't for one minute believe that there is a terrorist lurking around every corner, the Christmas Day guy with the bomb in his pants, the guys who had the explosive liquids in the drinks bottles and Richard Reid prove that they are out there and willing to do this kind of stuff. Having shown the lengths that they are willing to go to, I don't think it's unreasonable for the airlines to take suitable precautions.

    Yes, people were happy to fly without scanners in the past. People also were bombed and hijacked in the past. Your point?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The problem is they will only ever be effective if the operator is paying attention and i am not confident that after seeing 200 people walk thorough on a busy suumers day that their concentration wont drop.
    Its not as if they pay that much attention at passport control.
Sign In or Register to comment.