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."

12 of 575 comments (clear)

  1. This device empowers criminals. by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:This device empowers criminals. by Azuaron · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They're not talking about scanning random people on the street and taking their guns. They're talking about scanning arrestees instead of frisking them. If you're getting frisked, we're no longer talking about "law abiding citizens".

      Granted, they certainly could use this device to scan random people. But that's an unconstitutional search which the Supreme Court would slap the Hell out of. Remember: fear the people, not the tool.

      --
      I'm a psychologist (amongst other things).
    2. Re:This device empowers criminals. by GungaDan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they're only talking about scanning people they arrest, why do they want the capability to scan from over 80 feet away?

      --
      Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
    3. Re:This device empowers criminals. by Anon-Admin · · Score: 5, Informative

      What they are talking about is a terry stop. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop) They can stop and frisk you for weapons based on reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity.

      Just because it happened to me once, they can have a "reasonable suspicion" that you are going to j-walk because you are walking down the side walk!

      You will find that they can find "reasonable suspicion" in just about anything. S/His eyes were blood shot (Drunk or stoned), S/He looks out of place in this neighborhood, and my all time favorite "Three white guys under 25 at the mall must be there to cause trouble"

      Note that "Reasonable Suspicion" is defined as a point where the investigating officer has weighed the totality of the circumstances to determine whether sufficient objective facts exist to create reasonable suspicion. VERY open and abused quite regularly in my opinion.

    4. Re:This device empowers criminals. by Brain-Fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      who are you hunting on a plane?

      Terrorists! If all (or most) passengers were armed, there is no way a terrorist would be able to hijack the plane. In fact, I think, for safety, we should require all adult passengers to carry loaded guns when they board the plane. We can keep a supply of rentals at every airport.

      Ok, I jest. I agree that passengers shouldn't have guns on the plane. However, the TSA's methods of preventing that are way beyond reasonable. We can keep safety within acceptable tolerances without sexually assaulting passengers and giving them cancer.

      Like, locking the cabin door. That change did more for airplane security than the entire TSA. Metal detectors are sufficient for finding guns or knives, and sniffer dogs are fine for finding bombs. These levels of security would be more effective than what the TSA does now, far less intrusive/harmful to the passengers, and would save the taxpayers a fortune.

      But they wouldn't make Michael Chertoff even richer than he already is, so they are not acceptable.

    5. Re:This device empowers criminals. by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Guns are for hunting - who are you hunting on a plane?

      There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment or the Constitution about hunting.

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    6. Re:This device empowers criminals. by g0bshiTe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People should not have a gun on a plane. Quarters are far too close to fire. Had someone on one of the planes had a handgun, do you fire at a terrorist 20 or 30 feet from you with passengers to the left and right of the terrorist less than 2 feet from? Take a chance on a bullet going through the cockpit into the pilot or other flight crew? Or how about missing them and damaging flight gear? Say the landing gear.

      1 Federal agent with a weapon is plenty on a flight. Not every citizen needs one on a plane.

      Before you go crying that I'm an anti-gun person. I've held a concealed carry permit for the last 20 years.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    7. Re:This device empowers criminals. by operagost · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, if you could see it, it wouldn't be concealed then, would it?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    8. Re:This device empowers criminals. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you get questioned and you are innocent you lose 5 minutes of your time.

      You should never, under any circumstances, talk to the police; this is why. Summarized: there is no such thing as an innocent person to a cop, only criminals who haven't turned themselves in yet.

      If the police doesn't question a suspicious person they risk letting a criminal off the hook.

      Untrue: First off, 'suspicious' is subjective; judging from personal experience, a teenager with long hair and a guitar case is considered 'suspicious,' even if he has done nothing illegal.

      Secondly, unless a person has been reported for or is in the process of committing a crime, they are not criminals. Traveling in any fashion, whilst looking a certain way, is not a crime. Google 'DWB' to see my point.

      Policemen are not mindreaders, they can't decide for sure who is guilty just by looking at them.

      Exactly; it is not their duty to judge who is guilty and who is not, because they are not judges. Oh, and FYI, no one can decide who's guilty by cursory glance. Expecting anyone to be able to do so shows a great amount of ignorance regarding the legal system, as well as human nature in general.

      Expecting them to only stop criminals is unreasonable.

      No it's not, that's their JOB . Just like determining whether the accused is guilty or not is the JOB of judges and juries. See previous point regarding ignorance of the legal system.

      You see, those few minutes you spent answering some questions helped the police and made your neighbourhood a safer place. Being infuriated over that is just selfish.

      No; what's selfish is expecting the police to make you feel all warm and fuzzy by harassing every person in an x block radius and violating their civil rights, because according to you, everyone in your neighborhood (except you, of course), is a potential threat. Newsflash: You ain't that important, and your stuff ain't that great.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  2. on the other hand by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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.
  3. nothing new in NYC by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  4. They have every intention of random sweep scans by Brain-Fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.