I had a lot of replies to this, and there was a definite majority opinion…

Bad: 18%
Good: 77%
Right idea, wrong solution: 5%

Here’s what you fellow Mobal Members had to say…

Bad idea:

“All the high tech equipment in the world won’t help against stone age tactics.”

Ron

“I think they are silly. The kind of bomb the ‘underwear bomber’ used would not have shown up on backscatter or millimeter wave machines, so they would have no preventive effect, and there is no doubt that there will be trade in nude images of famous movie stars, politicians and sports celebrities–all the protestation to the contrary notwithstanding. Closing the door after the horse has left the barn is not a good strategy for the twenty-first century.

As to the fact the some people wear revealing clothing on a beach–so what–others believe it’s a violation of their bodies. Should they not be allowed to fly?”

Geoff

“We are losing rights and privacy daily. This is absolutely unjustified. This in no way makes this country any safer!For those who fall for any excuse to give up privacy will eventually not be free. ( Benjamin Franklin ). What difference will it make then because you won’t even be able to fly.”

paul wargo

“I am astonished that no one appears to be concerned about the health hazards of this approach, i.e. radiation, significant especially if you travel a lot!! Not even individuals who have metallic implants seem to worry… I have no difficulty with the issue of “privacy”, but will choose patting down any time over being scanned.”

maria

“All this talk about security is a load of BULL & gives a false sense of security. The person who flies a couple of times a year is not inconvenienced, compared to people who fly on a regular basis. Since 9/11, if all the security was in place & functioning at 100%, we wouldn’t have any of these new schemes coming to light. And to top it off, you have a greater chance of being killed on your local streets.”

Leigh Lingard

“I think it is invasive and not very helpful-I’m against any unnecessary radiation exposure as well.”

Richard O.

“The same government that is trying to protect my safety while I am flying on commercial aircraft, also says, “There is no safe dose of ionizing radiation.”

I think I would be better protected if the United States did not make so many enemies.”

Jim Whitman

“Not only is it another infringement on our personal freedom, which probably will not work, but it is forcing us to submit to x-ray exposure each time we travel. Why don’t I hear more about that? While they claim it is small, for frequent travelers, this will add up.”

Joan

Good idea:

I love it as I have two artificial knees and it saves me lots of time.

Kay Smith

Although this additional process may at times pose an inconvenience, I’m comfortable with it’s implementation.

Michael Habig

No problem’; if it makes the trip more secure and allows me more piece of mind, go for it.

L Mann

It’s a terrific advance. I want safety in the skies and, as the “underwear bomber” proved, the enemy will go to any length. We must get over silly hang-ups and realize that this is not an invasion of privacy, but an insurance policy for safety.

Roger Lund

I think it’s great! I have a hip replacement and it saves a lot of time.

I can’t understand these people who think it’s an infringement on their personal freedom. What’s the big deal about getting patted down? would you rather be blown up in the air? nuff said.

Gene Polhemus

Great idea.

Wayne Dickson

I have an artificial hip and the x-ray is simpler than being patted down. I do think that the subject should be allowed to see what the TSA people see.

David Ballou

Speaking of personal privacy, have you been to a beach lately?? I can’t believe that anyone would have a problem with a full-body scan that might preserve their life!

Masrud

If this device speeds the process and provides better protection against terrorists, then let’s just do it and stop all the nonsense about privacy invasion. This is a necessary evil to lessen threats and improve airplane security.

csw

Go for it!!!!! Let us all not forget!

Addy

Will that mean I don’t have to be patted down when they see my pacemaker showup on the screen?

Evan Jackson

Outstanding idea. I have an artificial knee and scanning expedites the process! I don’t mind scanners seeing my private parts-I just don’t want to be blown up in mid-air!

Charles Schmitter

whatever needs to be done for security is all right with me.

Marvin Beitler

Great idea, but still not as good as profiling. Terrorists will simply ingest contagious poison or cram explosive up their butt (this will NOT show up on the body scan). Agents have to be given the latitude to take potential suspects aside for more thorough screening and questioning.

John Beck

Both an improvement in safety and an infrigement of freedom, but necessary in the world we live and preferable to some other measures used. We must also use profiling to target the threats.

Lynn Glover

I support the idea. We have to improve security and although incremental, we have to keep at it. This will not be the ultimate solution though.

Mike Mickelson

I am willing to sacrifice modesty for safety,,, and I prefer it to being patted down which somehow leaves me feeling more violated. I also think that, regarding my safety and the safety of loved ones, profiling is not amiss in these times.

Angela Tatom

I went throught this in Washington D.C. Having artificial knees, it as a pleasure. Anyone can see anything they wish if I can get through the process with alacrity and dignity. I love it.

t smith

Hey, if it keeps me alive, it’s okay by me. I too, have an complete right hip replacement – this saves time also

Frederick J. Vaeth, Jr.

I think they are great for those of us with artificial joints, but I do not think they are sufficient for “security” … That requires one=on-one interviews in the Isralie method.

nancy

Absolutely in favor of it. False modesty is nonsense. I just feel sorry for the unfortunate people who have to look at the scans all day – what a lousy job. We should also use profiling; common sense should prevail.

Patrick Roache

Do It!!! If it make us more secure, I’m for it

Jud Bireley

I have no problem with it. The modesty factor is nonsense. The more specific they can be the better.

dobdick

It should have been done back in 2001

Jerry

fine with me. I will make sure I am wearing underwear.

Paul Bopko

Great! Until something better comes along, I’m all for it.

Anne

I think it is a great idea that would detect virtually anything a person might hide. Hadn’t thought about replacement knees and hips but it would be helpful there. Beats hands-on patting down which is less effective anyway.

Ed Cloos

It is a good idea. Safety first! Also, if they let those in line see the pictures of those they will be flying with, it would bring back old fashion courtesy where the men allow the ladies to go first.

Don Bryden

If it keeps us safer, than I’m all for it. I personally feel that in order to be safer we have to start profiling. I don’t care if its politically correct or not. We have to have agents on the ground to read body language and facial expressions, use intelligence and pull certain people who fit the profile aside and question them, find out what they might be carrying, why and where they are traveling to and from, etc. We have to start being smarter than them and stop worrying if we are hurting someone’s feelings.

Suzanne Frew-Harris

I have absolutely no issue with use of the body scanners if they really will enhance security. What I really want to know is when are we going to get away from the “political correctness” bull and really start looking closely at the characters who have already been identified as causing the problems. Continuing to be “PC” will eventually kill more of us.

Russ Minton

I’d rather be scanned than patted down.

Linda Schaefers

I have no problem with this technology, but I do fear that we will rely too much on technology to save us. Blind use of tools without logic and wisdom in the picture will just leave a loophole for our enemies to slip through. Who would have thought of shoe heels before? Or underpants? Or in the past, plastique in the checked baggage? We’ll never be able to provide blocks for every single mathematical possibility of terrorist techniques.

Paula Gjerstad

Went through the scanner in Denver due to hip replacement, and it was a lot quicker than the frisking, but it still kind of creeped me out, knowing that someone was looking at all the flaws I had so painstakingly tried to cover! My mom always said to be sure to wear your good underwear in case you end up in the emergency room…she was way ahead of her time on that one!

Mary Montgomery

What ever it takes to help prevent a possible disaster. The fact that none of these pictures are saved or displayed is the correct way to let people feel at ease. We also need more undercover personnel roaming among potential passengers listening, watching, and taking to them. And yes profiling to try to weed out potential trouble. EL AL does this and it seams to work.

Fred Stern

Right idea, wrong solution:

This discussion misses the whole point. “Sniffer” machines were ignored because they clog too easily. I believe that with a little bit of re-engineering, that problem will go away and we’ll have a machine that no one will object to. And it will sense explosives of any kind. Body scanners will miss a lot.

Patrick Milligan

In this day and age, we have to be in favor of new technologies that will make us safer in our travels. Problem with these body scanners is that it will only detect what is under the clothing and over the skin/body. We need better technology than this, i.e. detectors of body cavities (future hiding places?) that may be used next by these crazies. We need to be smarter and stay ahead of these “killing machines.”

JayDP

Agree or disagree with what people have said? Leave your thoughts as a comment below…