Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rapiscan's Backscatter Machines May End Up In US Federal Buildings

Posted by timothy on from the why-waste-such-a-valuable-resource dept.

McGruber writes "The Federal Times, a weekly print newspaper published by Gamnett Government Media Corp, is reporting that the Rapiscan Systems 'backscatter' passenger screening machines used by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration will likely be redeployed to federal buildings. Rapiscan System's backscatter machines have exposed passengers to radiation since they were first installed. As previously reported on Slashdot, TSA decided last month to stop using the machines because the manufacturer was unable to make changes to the machines that were mandated by Congress. Now TSA is attempting to sucker another federal agency into taking the nude-o-scopes."

14 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Congress? by rtfa-troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What better place for people to exposed to needless cancer risk from ionizing radiation concentrated just below the surface of their skin than the place that voted for this?

    --
    =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    1. Re:Congress? by Ferzerp · · Score: 4, Informative

      Incorrect. Backscatter machines use very low amounts of ionizing radiation.

      You're confusing them with the models being left in place, the "millimeter wave" ones, which do not.

    2. Re:Congress? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      http://wh.gov/pu7x

    3. Re:Congress? by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course, you realize that the Congressmen would simply exempt themselves from using these scanners (of course, not due to any negative health effects this machines certainly don't have, but because it would take up too much of their valuable time that is better spent selflessly serving their country). The only people that would be subjected to these scanners would be the tourists and school kids coming in for a tour or to watch a congressional session.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    4. Re:Congress? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It makes sense... I work in a government building that is also a tourist attraction. Every day I scan my ID card and breeze through the turnstiles while children, old ladies, and lawyers/lobbyists have to queue up and go through the X-Ray machines. I always smirk when I pass a group of lawyers... yeah they may be getting paid $50/minute and have a suit that cost more than my car but they still gotta take off their belt and surrender their precious cell phones like everyone else...

    5. Re:Congress? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My first thought matched your post. But - Federal Buildings aren't exactly the halls of congress, or even Janet Napolitano's office.

      People enlisting in the armed services traditionally have gone through preliminary indoctrination / induction procedures in federal buildings. A lot of vital statistics stuff is found in federal buildings. FBI offices, ATF offices, federal marshall's offices, and more. The Federal Building in Oklahoma City that was bombed was targeted because the ATF and FBI were located there. Few, if any, of those various federal employees had anything to do with approval of these machines.

      Worse, the public is still being exposed to this crap.

      Congress needs to just mandate that the damned things are destroyed. End of story.

      Congress really ought to just grow some balls, and decide to get rid of TSA and Homeland Security. I've seen nothing to suggest that they have improved on security in the United States. Fund the border patrol, and allow them to do the jobs they have been mandated to do since day one. And, Customs, as well. Keep the Air Marshalls, but put them under the authority of the FBI.

      We've gone so horribly wrong, and Homeland Security is the center of all that wrongness.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:Congress? by LMariachi · · Score: 5, Informative

      Congress members are already exempt from security screening at the Capitol and their other office buildings. See here for a relevant funny story, if your definition of funny includes a *headdesk* and general despair for the country and the human race in general.

  2. Re:I almost hope they do it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you don't care a lot about the fourth amendment, I'm not sure anyone should give a shit what you say.

  3. Re:What's with the name, dude? by mrbester · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Given its function Rapey-scan is just as valid.

    --
    "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  4. Re:Yep. And more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your truly important rights will disappear in the loss of the rights protected by the 2nd amendment. Don't believe it? What will YOU do when they pass a law that allows them to arrest you for no reason? Oh wait, they already have. OK, what will YOU do when they pass a law that allows them to pass judgement on you and execute you without a trial? Oh... ermm... they did that too.

    OK, what will you do when they tell you that you have to worship a religion not of your choosing? Or that you aren't allowed to bitch about what a shitty government we have? Or that you can't say the president is a douchebag?

    The whole point to the 2nd Amendment is that it gives the people the ability to defend their unalienable rights if need be. Its not about hunting or sporting clays as our current leadership would have plebs like you believe. Its to give the people the ability to cast down a tyrannical government if ever the need arises.

  5. Re:I almost hope they do it... by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Informative

    You are massively confusing two distinct issues. The Second Amendment is about a well-regulate militia. The Fourth Amendment is for reasonable search and seizure. Objecting to backscatter X-rays is, unlike the gun nuts, defended by classical readings of the Fourth Amendment. That's aside from the serious issue of exposing people to radiation with minimal safety precautions. Moreover, doing this with federal buildings would be a lot worse. You can at least have other alternatives to flying (long car travel, train travel, boat travel). But when one needs to go do something at a federal agency one doesn't have any options.

  6. The only thing more disgusting by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 3, Funny

    The only thing more disgusting than Congress would be an image of Congress, nude.

  7. Re:I almost hope they do it... by misexistentialist · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Second Amendment is about a well-regulate militia

    No, it's not. Just like the 4th prohibits the government from searching the people the 2nd prohibits disarming the people. You get the lowest level of freedom you accept: you probably support NYC stop-and-frisk because you are scared of guns, so stop resisting government control and relax.

  8. Still lying by sjames · · Score: 4, Interesting

    TSA still claims that NIST evaluated the machines and declared them safe even though NIST has plainly stated that it did not and can not.