Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago

New scanners break child porn laws 

Alan Travis, home affairs editor

guardian.co.uk,
Monday 4 January 2010 22.14 GMT


UserPostedImage

The rapid introduction of full body scanners at British airports threatens to breach child protection laws which ban the creation of indecent images of children, the Guardian has learned.

Privacy campaigners claim the images created by the machines are so graphic they amount to "virtual strip-searching" and have called for safeguards to protect the privacy of passengers involved.

Ministers now face having to exempt under 18s from the scans or face the delays of introducing new legislation to ensure airport security staff do not commit offences under child pornography laws.

They also face demands from civil liberties groups for safeguards to ensure that images from the 80,000 scanners, including those of celebrities, do not end up on the internet. The Department for Transport confirmed that the "child porn" problem was among the "legal and operational issues" now under discussion in Whitehall after Gordon Brown's announcement on Sunday that he wanted to see their "gradual" introduction at British airports.

A 12-month trial at Manchester airport of scanners which reveal naked images of passengers including their genitalia and breast enlargements, only went ahead last month after under-18s were exempted.

The decision followed a warning from Terri Dowty, of Action for Rights of Children, that the scanners could breach the Protection of Children Act 1978, under which it is illegal to create an indecent image or a "pseudo-image" of a child.

Dowty told the Guardian she raised concerns with the Metropolitan police five years ago over plans to use similar scanners in an anti-knife campaign, and when the Department for Transport began a similar trial in 2006 on the Heathrow Express rail service from Paddington station.

"They do not have the legal power to use full body scanners in this way," said Dowty, adding there was an exemption in the 1978 law to cover the "prevention and detection of crime" but the purpose had to be more specific than the "trawling exercise" now being considered.

A Manchester airport spokesman said their trial had started in December, but only with passengers over 18 until the legal situation with children was clarified. So far 500 people have taken part on a voluntary basis with positive feedback from nearly all those involved.

Passengers also pass through a metal detector before they can board their plane. Airport officials say the scanner image is only seen by a single security officer in a remote location before it is deleted.

A Department for Transport spokesman said: "We understand the concerns expressed about privacy in relation to the deployment of body scanners. It is vital staff are properly trained and we are developing a code of practice to ensure these concerns are properly taken into account. Existing safeguards also mean those operating scanners are separated from the device, so unable to see the person to whom the image relates, and these anonymous images are deleted immediately."

But Shami Chakrabarti, of Liberty, had concerns over the "instant" introduction of scanners: "Where are the government assurances that electronic strip-searching is to be used in a lawful and proportionate and sensitive manner based on rational criteria rather than racial or religious bias?" she said.

Her concerns were echoed by Simon Davies of Privacy International who said he was sceptical of the privacy safeguards being used in the United States. Although the American system insists on the deletion of the images, he believed scans of celebrities or of people with unusual or freakish body profiles would prove an "irresistible pull" for some employees.

The disclosures came as Downing Street insisted British intelligence information that the Detroit plane suspect tried to contact radical Islamists while a student in London was passed on to the US.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's name was included in a dossier of people believed to have made attempts to deal with extremists, but he was not singled out as a particular risk, Brown's spokesman said.

President Barack Obama has criticised US intelligence agencies for failing to piece together information about the 23-year-old that should have stopped him boarding the flight.

Brown's spokesman said "There was security information about this individual's activities and that was shared with the US authorities."



I love it! Just one more unintended consequence of modern society's well-meaning but misguided sex laws. Laws born of paranoia rarely have positive effects.
UserPostedImage
TheEngineer
14 years ago
Alright, time to smuggle weaponry inside nappies.
blank
Porforis
14 years ago
Still, this isn't going far enough. We need full strip searches, a terrorist could merely remove their balls and replace them with two sacs containing explosives.
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
I propose we simply ban all luggage from all flights and mandate that everyone fly naked. Let people buy what they need at their destinations.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago
(my anarchist knee is definitely jerking)
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Porforis
14 years ago

I propose we simply ban all luggage from all flights and mandate that everyone fly naked. Let people buy what they need at their destinations.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



People can still shove plastic explosives up their butt. Or have it surgically implanted in their body. People shouldn't be allowed on planes anymore, unless they have no scars on their body and have taken large amounts of laxatives.
dhazer
14 years ago
ok i have a question, Would i get a fine or arrested if i just walked thru the airport naked? and if so whats the difference then when your scanned.
Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago

I propose we simply ban all luggage from all flights and mandate that everyone fly naked. Let people buy what they need at their destinations.

"Porforis" wrote:



People can still shove plastic explosives up their butt. Or have it surgically implanted in their body. People shouldn't be allowed on planes anymore, unless they have no scars on their body and have taken large amounts of laxatives.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



And have a statement signed by a physician, co-signed by a genetic biologist, and notarized in triplicate, that they have no had genetic therapy modifying their body into a biological or chemical or explosive weapon.

Oh yes, and certify that they are not susceptible to "excessive" beer farting.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago

ok i have a question, Would i get a fine or arrested if i just walked thru the airport naked? and if so whats the difference then when your scanned.

"dhazer" wrote:



who gets to look at you naked.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

ok i have a question, Would i get a fine or arrested if i just walked thru the airport naked? and if so whats the difference then when your scanned.

"dhazer" wrote:



You should be fined and jailed.

There's no reason for any of the other passengers to see what those who have to see via scanner should see.

Punish those who are behind the scanner, not your fellow passengers.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (1h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (1h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (1h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (4h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (4h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (4h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (4h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (4h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (4h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (4h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (4h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (5h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (6h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (6h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (6h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (6h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (6h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (6h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (7h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (7h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (7h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (7h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (7h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (8h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (9h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (9h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (10h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (10h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (10h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (10h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (10h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (10h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (10h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (10h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (10h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (10h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (10h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (10h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (11h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (11h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (11h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (11h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (11h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (11h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (11h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (11h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (11h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (11h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

9h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.