4 Replies - 888 Views - Last Post: 18 December 2010 - 09:05 PM

#1 NickDMax  Icon User is offline

  • Can grep dead trees!
  • member icon

Reputation: 2250
  • View blog
  • Posts: 9,245
  • Joined: 18-February 07

TSA Scanners need optical recognition?

Posted 18 December 2010 - 08:02 AM

So I was reading this poorly edited article about how the TSA is effectively useless and was left thinking, "Why are the scanner's not equipped with optical recognition?"

Well I would imagine that the answer simply is: its not that easy. But I don't know... Why isn't it at least there to help. I realize that a gun on its tend might look like a strange cell phone or something but really its hard metal.

Basically If human's can't do it, then why not make better machines. If you can't make better machines WHY SPEND MILLIONS ON A USELESS TSA?

Is This A Good Question/Topic? 0
  • +

Replies To: TSA Scanners need optical recognition?

#2 NickDMax  Icon User is offline

  • Can grep dead trees!
  • member icon

Reputation: 2250
  • View blog
  • Posts: 9,245
  • Joined: 18-February 07

Re: TSA Scanners need optical recognition?

Posted 18 December 2010 - 11:05 AM

On a slightly related note I found this article wile poking around the math world today: The Innumeracy Behind Airline Security

The article contained the quote:

Quote

I'm not preaching or talking morals here. In our society we are free to make our own lifestyle decisions. It's about the math. Spending $85M to buy 500 full body scanners at $170,000 each, and turning the simple act of boarding an airplane into a circus, to try to eliminate a risk that is orders of magnitude less than many other risks people accept in their daily lives is a total waste of public funds, and is possible only because large numbers of people apparently don't do - or don't understand - the math.

It makes absolute sense to organize our lives and our society to minimize risks. But not at the expense of life itself. Life is risky. The risk of dying in your home due to a fall are far greater than of dying in a terrorist attack on an airplane. What do you do, stay in bed all the time? Actually, that isn't a good idea. In addition to the life threatening health risks that result from not getting up and exercising, there is also a greater risk of dying by falling out of bed than from dying in an airline terrorist attack.


Now, I don't totally agree. I think that the fundamental goal of the TSA is to ensure that the the probability of dieing in a terrorist attack on a plane REMAINS less than that of dieing falling out of bed. Additionally there is the fact that even if you are not on a hijacked plane, you might be in a building that one runs into and lets face it there are branching concerns that stem from just 1 incident. So I personally think that investing in airport security is a good thing -- so long as the security actually works.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#3 tlhIn`toq  Icon User is offline

  • Please show what you have already tried when asking a question.
  • member icon

Reputation: 5476
  • View blog
  • Posts: 11,762
  • Joined: 02-June 10

Re: TSA Scanners need optical recognition?

Posted 18 December 2010 - 04:32 PM

Let's be realistic: TSA and airport security in general is to give the general public a warm fuzzy feeling. But in reality it doesn't stop terrorists from coming into the country. If there are 10,000 illegals a month coming across the Mexican border it stands to reason that Iraqi or Afghans can walk across with them just as easily.

TSA might have been a good idea at one time, but now they have become brainless automatons. Orlando International is considering pulling them out and going to private security just like 200+ other airports in the USA have. The politician who helped create the TSA is lobbying for their dissolution because the branch has grown to a point of being buried under its own bulk.

I have multiple trips to 7 countries in my passport. And more domestic miles than I should admit to. Its a work thing. I've experienced TSA in more places than the average now-and-then flyer. And frankly, most of it is a joke to keep up appearances and public opinion.

When you have examples like the one below, how can you have any confidence in them?

Quote

As the Chalk Leader for my flight home from Afghanistan, I witnessed the following:

When we were on our way back from Afghanistan, we flew out of Baghram Air Field. We went through customs at BAF, full body scanners (no groping), had all of our bags searched, the whole nine yards. Our first stop was Shannon, Ireland to refuel. After that, we had to stop at Indianapolis, Indiana to drop off about 100 folks from the Indiana National Guard. That's where the
stupid started.

First, everyone was forced to get off the plane-even though the plane wasn't refueling again. All 330 people got off that plane, rather than let the 100 people from the ING get off. We were filed from the plane to a holding area. No vending machines, no means of escape. Only a male/female latrine.

It's probably important to mention that we were ALL carrying weapons. Everyone was carrying an M4 Carbine (rifle) and some, like me, were also carrying an M9 pistol. Oh, and our gunners had M-240B machine guns. Of course, the weapons weren't loaded. And we had been cleared of all ammo well before we even got to customs at Baghram, then AGAIN at customs.

The TSA personnel at the airport seriously considered making us unload all of the baggage from the SECURE cargo hold to have it reinspected. Keep in mind, this cargo had been unpacked, inspected piece by piece by U.S. Customs officials, resealed and had bomb-sniffing dogs give it a one-hour run through. After two hours of sitting in this holding area, the TSA decided
not to reinspect our Cargo-just to inspect us again: Soldiers on the way home from war, who had already been inspected, reinspected and kept in a SECURE holding area for 2 hours. Ok, whatever. So we lined up to go through security AGAIN.

This is probably another good time to remind you all that all of us were carrying actual assault rifles, and some of us were also carrying pistols.

So we're in line, going through one at a time. One of our Soldiers had his Gerber multi-tool. TSA confiscated it. Kind of ridiculous, but it gets better. A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the Soldier that they're going to confiscate his nail clippers. The conversation went something like this:

  • TSA Guy: You can't take those on the plane.
  • Soldier: What? I've had them since we left country.
  • TSA Guy: You're not suppose to have them.
  • Soldier: Why?
  • TSA Guy: They can be used as a weapon.
  • Soldier: [touches butt stock of the rifle] But this actually is a weapon. And I'm allowed to take it on.
  • TSA Guy: Yeah but you can't use it to take over the plane. You don't have bullets.
  • Soldier: And I can take over the plane with nail clippers?
  • TSA Guy: [awkward silence]
  • Me: Dude, just give him your damn nail clippers so we can get the f**k out of here. I'll buy you a new set.
  • Soldier: [hands nail clippers to TSA guy, makes it through security]


To top it off, the TSA demanded we all be swabbed for "explosive residue" detection. Everyone failed, [go figure, we just came home from a war zone], because we tested positive for "Gun Powder Residue". Who the F**K is hiring these people?

This might be a good time to remind everyone that approximately 233 people re-boarded that plane with assault rifles, pistols, and machine guns-but nothing that could have been used as a weapon.

Can someone please tell me What the F**K happened to OUR country while we were gone?

Sgt. Mad Dog Tracy

Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#4 KYA  Icon User is offline

  • g++ jameson.cpp -o beverage
  • member icon

Reputation: 3101
  • View blog
  • Posts: 19,141
  • Joined: 14-September 07

Re: TSA Scanners need optical recognition?

Posted 18 December 2010 - 06:15 PM

WTF indeed.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#5 NickDMax  Icon User is offline

  • Can grep dead trees!
  • member icon

Reputation: 2250
  • View blog
  • Posts: 9,245
  • Joined: 18-February 07

Re: TSA Scanners need optical recognition?

Posted 18 December 2010 - 09:05 PM

Excellent read.

I would point out that the TSA's job IS NOT to stop terrorists from entering the country. That falls on Homeland Security, the FBI, and the CIA and other federal agencies. The TSA has nothing to do with people crossing the borders, nothing to do with terrorist groups operating in the use

The TSA are glorified mall cops for airports tasked with making it difficult for terrorists to get personnel and equipment needed for a good-old hijacking or bombing or 911-like attack. They are a deterrent screening force.

I guess the big plan is to fill terrorist heads with the idea that you can't even slip past them with nail clippers. Except it just isn't so. They are constantly failing when tested. They are much more successful in making peoples lives miserable, abusing their power to grope teenage girls, abusing their power hold up mothers with breast milk, etc.

Now I understand the idea of deterrence but I don't understand the harassment.

(what I don't understand about the breast milk thing is: What do they hope the x-ray will do? Are they trying to make super-babies? What could the x-ray tell you that a simple inspection could not. She is smuggling a nail clipper tapped to the inside?)
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

Page 1 of 1