Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

4 Bumps

Body Scanners

http://gizmodo.com/5690749/

This link was posted as an answer in a question. I have been against these scans since i have heard it shows alot of detail. I dont see alot of detail in these photos...it looks like a lot of blur. Am I wrong or are imagaes not that bad?

Answer Question
 
ria7

Asked by ria7 at 4:07 PM on Nov. 19, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 23 (15,224 Credits)
Answers (12)
  • If thats what the scans really look like I am so not impressed. But more than likely they have been blurred a little for the court case. Now I am more unimpressed about the fact they were saved .......... that is so so wrong and hope these security personnel get what is coming to them.
    MumaSue

    Answer by MumaSue at 4:11 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • No I don't think the images are that detailed. But I want to know why images that are supposed to be destroyed were kept and released to the public.
    SophiaofLight

    Answer by SophiaofLight at 4:17 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • SpiritedWitch

    Answer by SpiritedWitch at 4:29 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • I have seen them on news programs and they are very detailed, one person said that you can actually see perspiration on a person's back and see if a women is menstruating!!! Such an invasion of privacy and IMO, that is way TMI for airport security imo‚Ķ
    Seems like this might be a good tool to blackmail people to me, these people are complete strangers looking at our most personal and private possession! Esp. if they can see implants and there seems to be intentional confusion on this possibility/probability... And then there's our most precious cargo's privacy, our kids, UGH!
    agentwanda

    Answer by agentwanda at 4:38 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • And this is interesting if you haven't heard already:  "Guess who is the chief promoter of "naked scanners" in the world? Michael Chertoff, former Department of Homeland Security boss – and the predictor-in-chief of vile terrorists trying to blow up airplanes. To prevent such a misfortune from befalling them, the airports would have to – you've guessed it – buy those "naked scanners"


    http://rt.com/usa/columns/namenotfound/aiport-scan-privacy-concern/


    Hmmm???

    agentwanda

    Answer by agentwanda at 4:41 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • the liveleak link has more detailed pics. I am not ok with that!! You could def. see the mans package. It is disturbing that pics were leaked in the first place but the first link makes the pics look harmless.
    ria7

    Comment by ria7 (original poster) at 4:44 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • B-b-b-b-ut were were TOLD that they were not going to be saved. Say it aint so!
    Izsarejman

    Answer by Izsarejman at 4:47 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • When all this first came out, I saw leaked photographs where you could see nipples, the outline of penises, and even the folds of a woman's vulva. Seriously.
    KelleyP77

    Answer by KelleyP77 at 4:47 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • Kelley, that's the real scan, like they show at the liveleak video. Those Gizmodo pics are horribly distorted. The question is if they did it when they published them or if the government did them before they handed them over.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 5:00 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

  • Sick ..this is so wrong..
    tnmomofive

    Answer by tnmomofive at 6:57 PM on Nov. 19, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.