Slashdot Mirror


The NYPD's X-Ray Vans (theatlantic.com)

An anonymous reader writes: A few years ago, we heard tales of vans outfitted by the U.S. government to hold giant X-ray scanners, which they'd use to drive around and inspect vehicles. Now, it turns out similar vans have made their way to police departments, including the NYPD. The police are unwilling to explain (PDF) how they're used, or how often. "A state court has already ruled that the NYPD has to turn over policies, procedures, and training manuals that shape uses of X-rays; reports on past deployments; information on the costs of the X-ray devices and the number of vans purchased; and information on the health and safety effects of the technology. But New York City is fighting on appeal to suppress that information and more, as if it is some kind of spy agency rather than a municipal police department operating on domestic soil, ostensibly at the pleasure of city residents."

24 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. America the Police State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These vans are just the latest in a long line of law enforcement abuse and complete disregard for the Constitution. The government classifies volumes of information to hide evidence of their own wrongdoing. They're "fighting on appeal to suppress information" in this case regarding potential serious public health hazards posed by their tactics. They use secret tools like stingrays to gather secret evidence which they attempt to present in secret, sealed and off the record. And in the event that an "activist judge" calls them on it, they withdraw the evidence so as not to have it revealed. They lock people up in secret detention facilities in Chicago, in America, without booking them, no Miranda rights, no access to a lawyer, such that no one but the police even knows where these people disappear to for days or weeks on end. Police are shooting and killing people weekly if not daily, acting as judge jury and executioner, and they face zero consequences.

    The police state isn't coming, the police state is here. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

    1. Re:America the Police State by networkzombie · · Score: 5, Funny

      Every time I'm in the airport and hear instructions over the PA to report suspicious activity I feel like I'm playing Half-life 2.

    2. Re:America the Police State by davester666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, that is something I would think we can all appreciate.

      That on-duty police offices are murdering people at a lower rate than the general population.

      It's all good then.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    3. Re:America the Police State by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      4th Amendment about "Unreasonable search and seizure." I don't know about you, but I think irradiating the general populace in the course of executing a search without a warrant from behind the veil of an unmarked van is unreasonable on multiple levels.

    4. Re: America the Police State by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Supreme Court ruled the government could not use nascent IR scanners to "see" through house walls without a warrant, and that's a freaking passive scanner.

      An active one like X-ray is a clear and blatant violation. This one is not even close. These people should literally be sent to jail.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  2. I can see... by surfdaddy · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...what they did there...

  3. Cancer by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually I'd be less worried about the spying and more worried about the radiation dosage. X-Rays are ionizing radiation and exposure to them increases the risk of cancer. I don't know what the dosage you would get from one of these things is but if it can penetrate the metal bodywork of a car to look inside it will probably be a lot more than a typical medical X-ray.

    1. Re:Cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Adding to this, if their platforms are covert vans, that implies the imaging systems are backscatter devices, meaning they are detecting a reflected signal and not a transmitted one. To the parent, x-rays won't penetrate metal, but reflect. However if they are imaging things like people, and since x-rays aren't deflected well by us (except for our bones), then they are having to pump more radiation out of their aperture to collect enough reflected signal for an image than they would if they (like medical x-rays) were making a transmission measurement.

      Of course if word got out that they were cooking people with ionizing radiation in the name of national security, the terrorists will have won.

    2. Re:Cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They are, indeed, backscatter devices. See source here.

      The summary is actually wrong in claiming that these vans are just now making their way to police departments. According to this link, the NYPD acknowledged using these vans at least as early as 2010. I'd really like to know how they've been used over the last five years or if there's any evidence of any additional security being provided from this surveillance.

    3. Re:Cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure if you pointed a large x-ray scanner at an NYPD building you'd be arrested for grievous assault on a police officer...that's assuming you're not shot on sight. Soon we'll all have to start carrying Geiger counters to protect ourselves from the police. Not that it'd help you though - even if you could prove exposure it'd be hard to prove where the source was if it's buried inside a van. Sure, you can approach the van but chances are some other random cop will show up and demand to know what you're doing checking out vans and arrest you on suspicion of "illegal van checking-out behavior". Can't win this one.

      The RHB seems to control a lot of the license requirements here (https://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/Pages/RadiologicHealthBranch.aspx)
      X-Ray machines are mostly medical grade devices - The devices have to be registered.
      Construction site radiation sources are presumably more strict.
      Anyone operating these machines must also be licensed.

      I'd assume the police have the requisite licenses as it's extremely unlikely there's any police exemption for this sort of tech. On the other hand we have Stingrays which probably violate all kinds of FCC emissions regulations and warrantless wiretap laws. They mostly seem to be getting away with that on the grounds of national security though and they could pull the same stunt here.

    4. Re:Cancer by davester666 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The police feel much more secure. Does that count?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Cancer by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

      This. Cops were dumb enough to give themselves testicular cancer by constantly irradiating their testicles back when laser guns first came out (by holding the gun between their legs while it was on). They will certainly be dumb enough to blast people with much more radiation than necessary with these devices. Cops are, after all, selected for low IQ.. Let's give them a ray gun that can give people cancer! What could possibly go wrong?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    6. Re:Cancer by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      New York City isn't a nation. The NYPD isn't a national security organization. They're a police department. They can't hide behind a national security justification for this.

    7. Re:Cancer by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I care more about the spying. Because if I get cancer, I die and that is it. If they are allowed to spy, the whole society gets cancer and then that society dies.

      That is what they mean with "Give me liberty or give me death."

      It is a pity that you think you are more important than the society that you are part of. The fact that you choose between the two means you allow them to spy. They will spy on you. They will spy on your kids. They will go further and dictate what you can and can not do.

      And all this because the risk of cancer might be a little bit higher compared to what you inhale in NYC right now?

      When a mobster asks you what knee you want to be taken away, does not mean there is a choice. You should say NEITHER!

      But please: do not say you are less worries about spying, because that makes it discusable. That makes me want to negotiate terms. And the terms of spying should not start with wether or not it will give you cancer. It should start with NEVER!

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  4. No worries here citizens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    No worries here citizens, we're just going to let untrained people wander around shooting a giant x-ray machine at whatever they want. This is nothing to be alarmed about, please go about your daily routine as if nothing is happening. Thank you for your time.

  5. Slashdot moderators owned by NYPD by gavron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Every story is modded down.
    - NYPD violates constitutional tenets (0)
    - NYPD violates FOIA rules (0)
    - NYPD thinks they are a terrorist fighting organization (0)

    Dear /. editors: whomever moderated this thread shouldn't get mod points for another 30 years. I know you think you have checks and balances. So does the NYPD.

    E

  6. When you let LEO play "Counterterrorist" Org. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3

    Don't be surprised when they get an exaggerated sense of self-importance and begin to think they're above the 4th amendment.

    1. Re:When you let LEO play "Counterterrorist" Org. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The NYPD, tasked with protecting the citizens of NYC from a repeat of one of the largest terrorist attacks on US soil (and by all reports the city is still high on the list of targets), has been willing to push the envelope as far as they can. It is a typical response to the mindset that has, at its core, the phrase "never again". And you will find quite a few people who are more than willing to give up liberty to achieve safety (or at least the assurance of safety from their public officials).

      Now, to be fair, you do not tell the potential robber where you hide the valuables and how to unlock the safe. Some operational details may make sense to be held back from the public at large, even as the general procedures should be able to be shared, and the details should be available to be reviewed by (truly independent) boards to insure that individual rights are not being stomped on. To say that balance is tricky is an understatement.

  7. X-Rays by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Funny

    They aren't X-rays, they are Freedom-Rays.

  8. A few important questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1) If something is in plain view, it can be evidence used to justify a search. I suppose it's a plausible interpretation that the heat something gives off could be considered in plain view when looking through an infrared camera. However, an x-ray scan is hardly plain view because it's an active scan, relying on backscatter in the case of these vans. Can any evidence collected from these vans, or evidence collected on the basis thereof, be admissible in court?

    2) Is this safe? X-rays pose a health danger, which is why precautions are taken when medical and dental x-rays are taken. What will be done to ensure that people aren't exposed to harmful radiation, especially without notice or consent?

    3) The NYPD is refusing to say what these vans are used for. If the NYPD won't say how they're being used, how do people know their privacy isn't being invaded and they're not being exposed to harmful radiation?

    4) Because these vans are being paid for with tax dollars, don't people have a right to know how they're being used? How do the people know this is a necessary expense and the taxpayers aren't being ripped off?

    5) At what point is it no longer acceptable to justify any and every form of surveillance under the excuse of terrorism? This is a tired refrain that has already been used to justify far too many abuses. Terrorism is the new communism, and I hope one day we'll be able to ridicule many of the things we've done just as we find McCarthyism and the red scare laughably absurd.

    1. Re:A few important questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      > I suppose it's a plausible interpretation that the heat something gives off could be considered in plain view when looking through an infrared camera.

      It's not. This has already been decided by the courts.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States

      > Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001), held that the use of a thermal imaging, or FLIR, device from a public vantage point to monitor the radiation of heat from a person's home was a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and thus required a warrant.

  9. Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I used to care about what was happening in US, As sadly it affects the rest of the world quite severely, luckily not as much anymore (with the rise of other nations) but week after week we read stories about the Govt or agencies stepping over the democracy line.

    The common response is well when it goes too far we will stand up as put an end to it.

    When?.. the answer is never, freedom is not something you even recognize now and wouldn't know what do with it if you had it, even a recent headline about the Drone programme targets being 90% civilian (which is a war crime) apparently is has been clarified that all military aged males in a combat zone are considered combatants even if they have no connections or armaments so just being alive makes you a target. wasn't enough for any action to be taken let alone DC cops driving around in vans X Raying whatever they feel like or the weird idea that americans have the right to do whatever they like. (manifest destiny)

    For gods sake, stand up and put an end to this ridiculous farce and become people again before it's too late.

  10. They hate us for our freedom. Problem solved! by trout007 · · Score: 5, Funny

    We should be completely safe now that we got rid of freedom.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    1. Re:They hate us for our freedom. Problem solved! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sometimes I get the feeling that some people think of freedom the way that collectors think of toys: They should be locked away in a case, behind a security system, in a darkened room where nobody can ever touch them. Only by locking them away can our freedoms be preserved in mint condition. What? You want to USE your freedoms? That's madness!!!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.