Scan Medical Insurance - Do you think Airport Body Scanners are justified ?

Do you think Airport Body Scanners are justified ?

"Airport officials at Denver International airport were on high alert yesterday when a full body scanner operator was caught masturbating in his booth as a team of High School netball players went through the scanner." "The young ladies were going through the scanner one by one, and every time one went through, this guys face was getting redder and redder. His hand was moving and then he started sweating. He was then seen doing his 'O' face. That's when the security dragged him out of his booth and cuffed him. He had his pants round his ankles and everybody was really disgusted," Jeb Rather, a passenger on a flight to New York told CBS news" "What do you want to do, get blown up by a goddamn Arab at 30,000 feet or we get to see your private parts? It's up to you, the ball's in your park," head of the TSA's scanning department, Rodney Schroeder, told CNN. http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/?a=2389&c=124

Public Comments

I prefer a body scanner over a full-body pat-down Technology can be misused. The body scanners may or may not be a good thing - if they are, we have to think about how and when they should be used. Regulations should be established so important things like privacy, bodily integrity are only infringed upon minimally and only when justified.
Absolutely not. We are supposed to be presumed innocent until we are proven guilty. Governments are not supposed to be able to search people or their property without due cause or reasonable suspicion. Almost ALL the people being scanned are not being scanned because of due cause, and there certainly is not reasonable suspicion to do so. The full body scans are basically an illegal strip search. I hope someone sues TSA for post-traumatic stress disorder. This is especially traumatic for teenagers (boys and girls) and the elderly who have a different standard of modesty than lots of people today. And your story illustrates one of the sleazier aspects of this -- if anything, the people observing the scans should be sitting in a room with a camera on THEM, so the people BEING scanned can see the scanners. It's appalling that airports would permit this. I will not be flying through airports who use TSA. If I have to drive, I'll drive. I won't go to Europe until this practice stops.
Why am I not surprised? but the TSA response in inappropriate to say the least. But, why just pick on airports, that's what I don't get. Why is it worse getting blown up at 30,000 feet than it is at ground level? Why limit this to airports, just because terrorists used that venue once? Everyone seems to forget the World Trade Center had been a victim of terrorist bombs before, but nobody set up scanners and check points then. No, if the TSA is going to do it, it should do it all the way. Every passenger and commuter train should be checked, and every subway. Imagine a bomb going off in a crowded subway under a critical New York City building? We need to check people at supermarkets, and museums, and libraries, and churches. There is no telling, whatsoever, where a terrorist will strike if they want to. Or does the TSA think we should think the terrorists won't look for a new and unusual way to strike fear into our hearts. And yes, I would much rather be blown up at 30,000 feet. I happen to value my freedom, and anyone who gives it up is nothing more than his master's slave. He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/scanner.asp I still won't go through them.
if you arrive safely, definitely not