Slashdot Mirror
NYPD Developing Portable Body Scanner For Detecting Guns
Zothecula writes "You have to feel sorry for the police officers who are required to frisk people for guns or knives — after all, if someone who doesn't want to be arrested is carrying a lethal weapon, the last thing most of us would want to do is get close enough to that person to touch them. That's why the New York Police Department teamed up with the United States Department of Defense three years ago, and began developing a portable scanner that can remotely detect the presence of a gun on a person's body. The NYPD announced the project this week."
That's one big gun you've got there buddy.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I have four knives on me right now. This is what I carry with me on a daily basis give or take. Three of them are Leatherman brand, but none are the traditional multi-pliar, I find having the tools spread across multiple devices better as a tech for various reasons.
I first fired a shotgun at the age of five. At six my dad handed one to carry with me when we were out quail hunting.
New York, like Chicago, Great Britian, and many other places too much fear in the tool and not enough effort into education, trust and tollerance.
The reason I could carry a shotgun at the age of six is my dad took me out at the age of four, shot some rabbits and explained death and danger to me. He taught me to respect the tools that guns are. When I was seven he gave me a pocket knife and expected me to carry it as it is one of the most ancient, practical and useful tools known. I got in trouble if I didn't have it on me when he asked. I often didn't have it on me because the school system had the same mentality as NYPD and I knew better than to got with my dads logic, which I considered supperior.
In an urban setting, guns are like fire extinquishers. They're something you hope you never need, but you should have one around anyways. In a rural setting they're a meal ticket, something to protect your livestock with, and occasionally a form of entertainment - when used responsibly.
When everyones armed the random individual who wishes to victimize others has less power to do so. Things like this scanner empowers criminals as it prevents otherwise law abiding citizens from carrying their tools of protection.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
I'm sure they won't abuse these items by just randomly scanning pedestrians. After all, they uphold the law!
All that matters is that people on the street THINK that every cop has one that does work.
And give a blurry image of it.
Or any other object that blocks the normal IR radiation from the body.
"Your honor, we had probable cause to search the individual because we thought that vague rectangular outline in his pocket was a gun. Our bad. It was a cell phone with a metal case. But, we did find the joint in his backpack during the search that we only did to ensure our own safety."
"you have to feel sorry for the police officers who are required to frisk people for guns or knives"
No, i dont. thats their job. I have to feel sorry for an author so desparate to spin the idea of shredding my constitutional freedoms that hes resorting to an empathetic appeal to "my fellow man."
nothing stops gangs and crime like a job. this perpetual incarceration model where once released a felon is bankrupt, banned from food stamps, and legally unemployable is whats virtually guaranteed america will enjoy some of the highest violent crime rates in the first world. developing the ways and means to catch the bad guy do nothing if you arent willing to address the heart of the matter.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I think I kinda want to punch you in the face right now. What you're saying has a point, but this is the wrong story. The scanner being presented is an infrared camera, nothing more.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Sadly this is nothing new in NYC; they have been doing stop and frisks for years. I wonder what happens when they deploy this technology and find a firearm on someone who is licensed to carry one? There are actually people who hold such licenses in NYC; given the extreme anti-gun attitude of the NYPD they'll probably wind up looking at the wrong end of a Glock and discovering the wonders of face meeting asphalt. That's if they are lucky; if they aren't they'll wind up being shot 40 times as they reach for their drivers license/pistol permit.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
This will absolutely be abused, starting on day 1. In fact, the abusive possibilities are far more likely to be the driving reason for development of this tech. The line about not wanting to frisk arrestees is just PR to win hearts and minds.
People who have permits to carry concealed weapons can expect to be needlessly hassled and targeted more than they already are.
Indeed. Scanning for knives from 80 feet (unless the circus is in town) is useful. For guns, you might as well be close.
Contrary to what you see on TV and in movies a person 80 feet away is hard to hit with a handgun, especially the more compact and concealable models. It requires training and periodic practice, its a perishable skill. Even police officers who don't go to the range often enough have problems. Now add stressful circumstances.
I wonder if this is just as effective as the scanners in the airport, and what the cost difference is.
"You will do foolish things, but do them with enthusiasm." - S. G. Colette
You clearly have never fired a gun or have any idea of what the self-defense laws look like in the U.S. Even with Castle Doctrine laws, you are only authorized to use force if you are in imminent target of lethal or non-lethal force. Shooting people in the back as they take off with someone else's property is completely unjustified, as you not in danger. Before you continue dramatically dreaming up events to justify your philosophy, think about the hard working, law abiding citizen, who is just about to lose everything he ever will be (his life) from not complying with the muggers demands vs bankrupting his future defending his life in court.
http://itemlive.com/articles/2012/01/12/news/news01.txt
Stuff like this should never happen, had that lawyer not stepped in to defend this man for free he would be bankrupt, and perhaps worse, plead out to a lesser crime. All because he refused to turn his back on a man with a knife.
You don't appear to be aware that the SCOTUS ruling where the police are in fact not responsible for your
personal safety.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html
In the end, who was really responsible for the lives of those 3 children? Now dead. The mother who wasn't keeping an eye
on them, or the police who failed to enforce the restraining order on the estranged husband in a timely matter?
www.alphalinux.org
Are you really all that surprised? I mean, isn't NY the same state whose (Democrat) senators claim that the First Amendment is a privilege, not a right?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese