Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Full Body Scanners Violate Child Porn Laws

Posted by samzenpus on from the think-of-the-children dept.

gandhi_2 writes "The Guardian has a story about an ongoing legal battle over the use of full body scanners in the UK. The Protection of Children Act 1978, includes provisions in which it is illegal to create an indecent image or a 'pseudo-image' of a child... which a full body scanner does."

7 of 751 comments (clear)

  1. Ridiculous law by ramsun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is ridiculous. Child porn laws need to differentiate between nude images and obscene/exploitative images. Hopefully this security debate will fuel a rethink.

    1. Re:Ridiculous law by Itninja · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree. But having done some volunteer work inside prisons a few times, and having spent a significant amount of time conversing with pedophillic sex offenders, I can tell you one thing: unlike 'regular' porn, child porn plays to an entirely different audience. People who desire it see any child nudity as erotic.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    2. Re:Ridiculous law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's funny. Some things (greek art, for example) lead me to believe that this isn't a universal truth, but rather a social construct.

      I recall when I was 12, all nudity was sexual, precisely because I was never allowed to see any "naughty bits". As an adult, there are plenty of naughty bits to be found if you know where to look and so it's not so thrilling any more.

      Perhaps this is simply a construct of the fact that child nudity simply can't be found anymore, anywhere, so people who are attracted to it have a lower tolerance for stimulus.

      This is also in light of the fact that from my understanding, the image of "dirty drooling pervert" isn't quite as accurate as most people would like to believe. Of course, your work in prisons may lead you down that path to some extent, but I would hate to think of the conclusions of a sociologist who was only ever allowed to study the prison population of the culture he was trying to understand. :-)

  2. So, pat down for childs! by stm2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Body scanners are optional, if you refuse, you get a pat-down search.
    But some pat-dows may constitute sexual assault:
    http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/inappropriate-pat-down-searches-during-an-airport-security-screening.html
    This may be a catch-22 for TSA :)

    --
    DNA in your Linux: DNALinux
  3. Odd timing by icebike · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its odd someone gets all the way from the middle east, thru Europe, all the way to Detroit with JUST the sort of device these things are meant to detect at JUST the time their deployment is starting to ramp up.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  4. Re:Developed != Civilised by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Interesting

    London had 300 knife incidents on the Underground in a week.

    Given I've used the Tube nearly every day for the best part of 15 years at all hours of the day and have never seen a single incident, knife-related or not, you are going to have to back that claim up.

    I'm not saying London is crime free, far from it, but I've lived here for 16 years and can count the number of things I've seen or even heard of affecting my friends on my fingers.

    --
    It's official. Most of you are morons.
  5. Re:Government by imakemusic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And they should have to be naked. It's only fair.

    --
    Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!