YumnaSultan's Waterfall
There is no difference from these scans than at looking at pornography
“These aren’t X-rays, they are essentially images of the naked body,” said Sharif Labban, a freshman who will be traveling from Raleigh/Durham International Airport, where the scanners will be in place. “I understand they are for the sake of national defense, but I do not see the distinction from pornography.”
You may say that majority of people agree with the scanner, but are you saying that the rest of the people's opinion that disagree do not matter? Many people claim that the scanning is an invasion of privacy.
The backscatter machines are ineffective because they cannot detect explosives in body cavities or covered by special plastic's like the "Christmas Underwear Bomber" has. You can sneak large quantities of explosives through the machine, using different techniques.
You ponit that a human life is priceless is a valid point. Although safety does not win over privacy. Benjamin Franklin stated that “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”
After 9/11 in 2009 the "Christmas Underwear Bomber" Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab got through the airport with all the checks and got on to the plane. He got through by putting the bomb in his down under and covering it by plastic that covered the explosives on the scanner.
checkshttp://www.express.co.uk/news/
You say that many pilots have gone through the scanners and none of them have cancer. Please give us names names of pilots that do not have cancer.
Body scanners are a fraud and a waste of money. They cost over $150,000 and do not always catch the explosive.
Radiation can cause some diseases and mutations. The more you keep going through the machines the more radiation you will get which will cause you to get the mutations.
As you guys keep stating that safety is an important factor, liberty and safety should come hand in hand. They should replace the Advanced Imaging Technology with a less invasive searches such as metal detectors along with search dog.
Body scanners do not always prevent planes from being hijacked like 9/11, due to the fact that you can still sneak in weapons through the scanner. An example of snealing a weapon through the scanner is that a passenger can tape a gun to there leg (the outside of it), right above there knee. That means that the black that shows up from the gun blends in with its background. Therefore the weapon will not be detected.
You may say that you are fully dressed the whole time, but it is called a ‘virtual strip search’ so you can see what is under the clothing which many people believe invades their privacy.
I disagree as you state that "it will also keep dangerous items out of the plane for people to have a safe trip." because the machine does not always detect dangerous items that the person is carrying. Researchers from U.C. San Diego, University of Michigan, and Johns Hopkins University say that anyone with knowledge of the scanners can sneak a weapon through the scanners. Which therefore means that more people can sneak dangerous items on to the aircraft because they will be able to get through the scanners.
I strongly disagree with you because the product will be under the celebrities name not the managers name. Which means that the celebrity should be held responsible for the products they endorse.
I strongly agree with your point that celebrities are role models and that they should set a good example.
I think that celebrities should be responsible for the products they endorse because a lot of people look up to celebrities. And if they set a good example against child laborers than maybe their fans will look up to them and start to think the same way.
