It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
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.
The Department for Transport confirmed that the "child porn" problem was among the "legal and operational issue
The explosive device smuggled in the clothing of the Detroit bomb suspect would not have been detected by body-scanners set to be introduced in British airports, an expert on the technology warned last night.
But Ben Wallace, the Conservative MP, who was formerly involved in a project by a leading British defence research firm to develop the scanners for airport use, said trials had shown that such low-density materials went undetected.
Tests by scientists in the team at Qinetiq, which Mr Wallace advised before he became an MP in 2005, showed the millimetre-wave scanners picked up shrapnel and heavy wax and metal, but plastic, chemicals and liquids were missed.
If a material is low density, such as powder, liquid or thin plastic – as well as the passenger's clothing – the millimetre waves pass through and the object is not shown on screen.
Originally posted by FredT
Its only a matter of time till some perv will be caught with a collection of scanner images in his (I could say her too but lets face it its always a 'him") flat.
As recent event have shown its a zero sum game. Those idiots doing the checks at the airport (Who BTW, seem to single ME out for "Enhanced inspections" every time I fly, could not catch a case of the clap in an inner city free clinic let alone a determined terrorist
[edit on 1/4/10 by FredT]
privacy campaigners claim