fossileyesed , brave post! Just so you know you are not alone I am one like yourself in this regard. It's never easy to say but well done very brave.
Drabbit, I ask in total respect , are you here just to scare people? This IS NOT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY! im sure most of us here as kids had pics taken of us by our parents right? How many has an embarrassing picture of you in the bath naked?
So..then thats child pornography too? You're parents are paedophiles? ..think about what you are saying.
Sometimes, whether this security is needed or not, it's not as evil as you think!
Just a thought.
iwanci wrote:I must have missed the point on this topic… how did it go from body scanners to pedophiles?
The biggest issue on the body scanners IMO is not the pedophilic aspect, rather it is the taking away of civil liberties and human dignity, but why? Please read on.
If they can convince us that they are for our own good then we will accept them. These scanners are said to increase airline security, maybe they will, more eyes on more people will also achieve the same security increase, simple. But why the scanners?
Pedophiles: Unfortunately the creeps of society have been around us and our children in various hidden ways since before we even knew who or what these animals were, I think 1000’s of years, in some societies it was common and acceptable to have child sex workers, so at some stage these creeps behaviour was acceptable. Scanners will not exacerbate the problem, the problem manifests itself with or without scanners. We cannot prevent the scum of the earth from re-offending unless society does something more than the current system of placing a prison term on a crime. "Do the crime do the time" should not apply here, this system places a value on these crimes, as we all know these are not crimes they are abuses which are far worse than any crime, and no value can be placed on them. "Do the crime and you will never have the chance to repeat the same crime" should be the message. Unfortunately, I believe that rape and abuse statistics show that you are more likely to be abused or raped by someone you know and/or trust rather than some random person. The random animal does exist and does unfortunately rear its disgusting head, we hear about these cases in the press, it’s the ones we don’t hear about unfortunately that worry me the most, as most are never reported. I believe society should do more to protect the innocent. How about chemical castration? How about life in prison? How about both?
These offenders also have the right to anonymity, they are afforded protection and a name change when they are let out of prison. The general public is not allowed to know where these people are now living. Does this sound like a fair society? Probably so if you are the offender.
So, IMO, the link between the scanners and the pedophiles is much weaker, what we should be doing is questioning society’s answer to the pedophile issue per se.
With regards to the scanners, when was the last time someone hijacked a plane with explosives, and blew it up? Or took hostages with guns? These instances have happened but they are far and few in between. I do a lot of air travel, I must be honest, I often think… “if I was a terrorist, what could I use… hmmm, steel cutlery I notice a knife, a fork, a glass, a wine bottle, hmmm a bracelet with sharpened concealed edges, let’s face it, 9/11 hijackers had box cutters (apparently) not guns not explosives… so the big question here is why the hell do we need the scanners.. And also, if I was a terrorist and security at the airport was too much….hmmm why not an ocean liner? A bridge? A train? A petrol tanker on the ground could be just as lethal I imagine.. anyone seen any movies lately?
Yet again, i believe we need to follow the money for the answers. Let us look at the local supermarkets. Here in Oz we have a prolific growth of self serve scanners in our stores… what do these do? They afford us the consumer a time saving…hmmm they also save business big money. I believe the bigger intention with the airport scanners is to introduce them, get people used to them, then decrease the paid security force, this of course adds up to huge cost savings no more no less. I think that is as complicated as the agenda gets, and of course who is pushing for these, would it be perhaps the manufacturers of the scanners? Just look at how much additional money is being spent on airline security since 9/11 if I was in business I would be asking “how do I claw these costs back without making people feel less secure?
My opinion only of course.
Iwanci that was a great post. I see your very valid points and agree. Your post is insightful and well explained. Thank you for taking the time to put some things in perspective.
As far as the jump from scanners to pedophiles, i felt this head line kind of lead me to that when i read it. As a protective son, father and husband i immediately thought of some pervert working in that field. Some pubescent teen (boy or girl) walking through that thing and some prick getting some sick sexual satisfaction from it. i would probably end up in prison again. it just outrages me to think about it
New scanners break child porn laws
Action for Rights of Children warned that the scanners broke child porn laws in the UK after their widespread introduction, but the government refused to make an exception and now force all Brits who are asked to go through the scanners without the alternative option of a pat down. If travelers refuse then they are barred from flying, another complete violation of the basic human right to mobility
The fine line is between scanning and photographing a nude image of a child for national security and base child pornography.
Whether or not a child could cause a break in the national security chain, the human being in question is still a child.Nude or even semi-nude photos of children do go against the universally-accepted Protection of Children Act 1978. Bottom line.
“Airport Worker Caught Ogling Image of Woman on Naked Body Scanner”
This of course presents us with a dilemma.
In our bid to protect ourselves and loved ones from creeps and crimes, we inadvertently give up our rights. How?
Simple. When we hear of something bad happening to someone we ourselves go through several emotions. We naturally feel for the victim, we feel for the victims family, we feel anger at the perpetrator of the crime, and we think “what if that was me?” We place ourselves in a situation whereby we want and demand protection from these situations. All perfectly justifiable reactions and all totally acceptable. Why do we often demand protection at any cost though? IMO it is because we have no faith in our justice systems, we no longer have the basic understanding of the workings of our legal systems to feel confident that criminals get what they deserve. We repeatedly see the shortcomings of the laws that are there to protect us, and we feel weakened by this lack of clarity. We feel we cannot protect ourselves and our systems do not work. In some old movies I watched growing up I remember criminals stating that they knew what awaited them if the crime did not pay off, death row, the hangman’s noose, hard labor etc . Newer movies show a different attitude, they show criminals carefully calculating the repercussions of a failed crime, “at worst I will plea bargain, I will plead insanity, I will stash the money do some time then retire”, etc.
Although movies are not indicative of reality, they are often a good indicator of current social perceptions, current social moods and current social issues, this is why we relate so much to good movies that are released in or about our time, and we don’t relate so much to older movies that depict a different era, or to movies targeted and younger generations. So, if movies are anything to go by….
Our society is also a poor learner/ teacher. We often glorify and immortalize criminals. In Australia Ned Kelly a known murderer and thief is immortalized, almost a national hero. This week a painting of him sold at a record >$5Million Aus. Another known criminal (still alive) has written and published books where he admits to heinous crimes like torture etc, he cut off his ears, a lunatic, he is free now and has become a public image, guest speaking on TV shows, radio shows, public events etc What's wrong with that picture??? How many criminals (past and present) do you know of who are revered today? Society should make these criminals outcasts, instead of burning old scriptures, books etc, it is these peoples records that should be destroyed, no trace shuld be left, their names should never be spoken, no one should ever feel their wrong actions will imortalise them, never.
So where is the problem? EVERYWHERE.. problems are so deep seeded in society that they are almost beyond repair unfortunately, it took many years to get our corrupted selves to this point, it will take many more to get us back. The best we can do is patch work fixes, unless of course we want to give up all our rights, even then the crimes will continue.
My approach... be free, be happy, look to the good, prepare for the bad, trust no one, like everyone, stand up for your rights.
Airport worker warned in scanner ogling claim
LONDON (Reuters) – A security worker at London's Heathrow Airport has received a police warning and faces disciplinary action over claims he ogled a female colleague using a full-body scanner, officials said on Wednesday.
The 25-year-old worker made lewd comments after his colleague Jo Margetson, 29, mistakenly strayed into the scanner, which can see through clothes to produce an image of the body, the Sun newspaper reported.
The case is believed to be the first of its kind since the full-body scanners were rushed into service at a number of British airports in the wake of an attempt by a suspected Muslim extremist to blow up a plane bound for Detroit on December 25.
They are now being rolled out at airports across the world.
Details of the incident at Heathrow's Terminal 5 on March 10 emerged on the day lawmakers said concerns that the scanners were intrusive had been overblown.
Margetson told the Sun she had been "traumatized" by what had happened and had informed police and her bosses at the airport's operator BAA.
"We treat any allegations of inappropriate behavior or misuse of security equipment very seriously and these claims are being investigated thoroughly," said a spokeswoman for BAA.
"If found to be substantiated, we will take appropriate action."
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said officers had been informed of the allegation and "a first instance harassment warning has been issued to a 25-year-old man."
Opponents of scanners have argued since their introduction that they risked breaching individuals' rights to privacy. Britain's Equality and Human Rights Commission has already said they might be breaking discrimination and privacy laws.
"For every official caught ogling like this, there are plenty more eyeing up law-abiding travelers," Alex Deane, director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group, told the Sun.
"These expensive machines are totally disproportionate."
The government says staff using the machines are properly supervised and would not be able to see the person being scanned. All images are deleted.
Britain's parliamentary Home Affairs Committee said fears about the scanners were misplaced and they should be introduced at a faster pace to deal with the threat of terrorism.
"The Committee is satisfied that the privacy concerns that have been expressed in relation to these devices are overstated and ... should not prevent the deployment of scanners," it said in a report.
(Reporting by Michael Holden; Editing by Steve Addison)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100324/od_ ... canner_odd
Tis strange but true, for truth is always strange, stranger than fiction.
Can we remember the first cases of harassment at work, nightclubs etc? Can we remember a time when these cases seemed prolific? Now, can we remember the last time we heard of a case of harassment at work or in a nightclub or the beach? It is not that it no longer occurs, I would bet it occurs ever more frequently, it's just not reported in the press because it no longer sell papers unless it involves someone famous (Tiger Woods?) and even that is becoming a bore, we are used to it, we see another case and think, yeah seen this before.. next story. The same will happen with the scanners, its news only whilst its new.. then ...
I don't like the idea of the scanners because it takes away our privacy and our right to be presumed innocent. If we accept them now then they will become prolific. Naturally if we accept scanners we must accept that someone is going to see us almost naked, that's the whole point of the scanner. It's not that someone made a lewd comment that concerns me, or that someone got their jollies, people can ogle and think thoughts without making a single remark or gesture and that does not make them less guilty of ogling. It's the fact that someone, anyone has been given the right to view us naked or otherwise that concerns me. Who empowered this person?
Our rights and outrage should extend way beyond the comments or ogles made by people, these comments are a by-product of the system not the problem. Our outrage should extend way up to those that allowed these cameras to be implemented.
If given the right to refuse the scanner, then refuse the scanner, if not given the right and you feel outraged then find another means of transport. Unfortunately as toxic32 already pointed out, these scanners may become common place throughout our society not just at airports, this level of control is what should be concerning us the most. But what will happen is this, the 'sheeple' will go through the scanner, it will be a pinless excersice, they wil accept them, they will become prolific and we will move on to another cause. That's the general order of things,and that's the most frightening. How hard could it possibly be to simply refuse to fly? It is a passive protest, no harm other than to the dollars and then the system will not take off (pardon the pun), it will beocme someone's bad idea that never worked.
As with everything, we will go along until it is way out of control, then protest, rebel, etc to no avail.. by stopping it at first sight we stop it from manifesting itself.. but this may be too late as well, next time you go to an ATM to withdraw some money, please make sure you are not picking your nose. Next time you are in a lift, remember to smile. Next time you are at a nightclub, don't for heaven sake clean the spinache from your teath in the two way mirror in the hallway.
Next time you are in a taxi, do not kiss your girlfriend and please make sure she is not wearing the miniskirt at the tennis. I think you get the point... these camera's must ALL go to make any real difference... but then the dilema, who will protect us ?
In my humble opinion, in the future life may well be recorded, any arguments, incidents and crimes may become very easily resolveable... but at what cost?
bayonetta wrote:Facinating........but sometimes i get to thinking that with the implimentation of this scanning tech...that they're searching for more than just terrorist.....this tech can probabally determine who's human and who's not.
Whooow! Havent thought of that! Thank you.
- Related topics
- Last post