|
Afraid of the TSA body scanners? Try this new underwear
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 22 November, 2010
Inventor Jeff Buske has said he has created new clothing products that should protect flyers from TSA body scanner radiation.
Additionally, the new bras and underwear should help flyers who want to keep their private parts a mystery.
Dubbed "Rocky Flats Gear," Buske says he does not care about the politics of the situation, but instead wants to protect citizens from unwanted radiation.
... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 00:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well that's great and all, but they'll flip out thinking it's a bomb or something.
So where's the 4th Amendment again?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
22. November 2010 @ 00:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
Bush abolished it...eliminating freedoms was the only way to guarantee that the terrorists would win.
|
Senior Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 02:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
This gave me a neat idea. I can buy a jumbo pack of Fruit of the Loom underpants at Walmart, sew a leaf pattern onto the crotch and then sell each pair on eBay for $100 a pop. As far as the buyers are concerned, ignorance is bliss, right? :-P
|
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 04:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by nonoitall:
This gave me a neat idea. I can buy a jumbo pack of Fruit of the Loom underpants at Walmart, sew a leaf pattern onto the crotch and then sell each pair on eBay for $100 a pop. As far as the buyers are concerned, ignorance is bliss, right? :-P
i am sure the inventor had the same idea hahaha
Beat to the punch
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
22. November 2010 @ 05:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
...So the scanners can't see through clothing, but they can detect any weapons hidden beneath the clothing (Not sure how this is possible).
...And these underwear block the machines from seeing through your clothing (?I thought they couldn't do that anyway?), but still allow the machine to see any weapons hidden in your underwear?
...Everyone claims that the scanners can't see through clothing, and then they claim that they can see through clothing, and even into the human body itself (a terrorist could have a bomb in his rectum).
Isn't it fun when they openly contradict themselves within their own lies? Considering the source has never told the truth, wouldn't it be correct to assume that they are just full of crap?
I think the scanners can see through clothing...and I don't think they can find weapons.
|
Senior Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 06:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
i knew a woman that had lead lined boxer shorts.apparently she made them out of an old hospital curtain and 2 pairs of boxer shorts.
custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.
|
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 07:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xboxdvl2:
i knew a woman that had lead lined boxer shorts.apparently she made them out of an old hospital curtain and 2 pairs of boxer shorts.
haha Interesting concept
|
|
ps355528
Senior Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 07:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm going to have to make some.. or they will discover my lightsaber I shoved up my arse in the airport bar!!!!
uncomfortable.. it is..
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2010 @ 10:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
...So the scanners can't see through clothing, but they can detect any weapons hidden beneath the clothing (Not sure how this is possible).
...And these underwear block the machines from seeing through your clothing (?I thought they couldn't do that anyway?), but still allow the machine to see any weapons hidden in your underwear?
...Everyone claims that the scanners can't see through clothing, and then they claim that they can see through clothing, and even into the human body itself (a terrorist could have a bomb in his rectum).
Isn't it fun when they openly contradict themselves within their own lies? Considering the source has never told the truth, wouldn't it be correct to assume that they are just full of crap?
I think the scanners can see through clothing...and I don't think they can find weapons.
The scanners can not see through the skin, would be pointless to not see through clothing.....
Its like a cat scan only not as powerful, since it dose not need to record detailed internal structures. Anyone who has a problem with it really needs some help and de wooling...
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. November 2010 @ 10:15
|
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 11:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
...So the scanners can't see through clothing, but they can detect any weapons hidden beneath the clothing (Not sure how this is possible).
...And these underwear block the machines from seeing through your clothing (?I thought they couldn't do that anyway?), but still allow the machine to see any weapons hidden in your underwear?
...Everyone claims that the scanners can't see through clothing, and then they claim that they can see through clothing, and even into the human body itself (a terrorist could have a bomb in his rectum).
Isn't it fun when they openly contradict themselves within their own lies? Considering the source has never told the truth, wouldn't it be correct to assume that they are just full of crap?
I think the scanners can see through clothing...and I don't think they can find weapons.
The scanners can not see through the skin, would be pointless to not see through clothing.....
Its like a cat scan only not as powerful, since it dose not need to record detailed internal structures. Anyone who has a problem with it really needs some help and de wooling...
Is a CT scan the same as a cat scan? I heard CT scans give off a
lot of radiation.
|
|
harhumph
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 15:22 |
Link to this message
|
This site is lame, erasing my joke, so much for free speech and I even kept it pg-13, f'ing joke.
|
|
flyingpen
Junior Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 15:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
As a chemist, I'm so sick and tired of people freaking out over the "radiation". You deal with radiation on a daily basis(see: Sunlight). The amount of radiation these things puts out is nothing and would not cause any issues with a person. Honestly, the fDA would not net these be put out if they actually caused any problems. Honestly, if you don't know what your talking about then people need to listen to the people they do. Rule 12: Know your place.
Carpe Noctem
|
|
dEwMe
Senior Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 15:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hehehe yeah wear these and I guarantee you will get a pat down focusing on those areas...You gotta remember they are trying to protect us. Sure there hasn't been much 9/11 stuff going on but couldn't that be because they know they are likely to get caught? I would gladly be patted down rather than be flown into a building but maybe that's just me...
Just my $0.02,
dEwMe
|
|
slickwill
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 16:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, once the TSA realizes that they can't see your genitals they will pull you to the side and take you to the back room and throughly exam your unseeable-through underwear.
|
Member
|
22. November 2010 @ 20:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by slickwill:
Well, once the TSA realizes that they can't see your genitals they will pull you to the side and take you to the back room and throughly exam your unseeable-through underwear.
I was about to post the exact same comment...
www.inebriare.com
Xbox Live: Rogue Jello - PSN: bam431 - IGN: bam431
Youtube: electrowaffle - Twitter: bam431
i5 760, P7P55D-E, Vapor-X HD5770, 8GB DDR3, 1TB HDD,
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
23. November 2010 @ 01:11 |
Link to this message
|
the scanner system is nothing but a bunch of bull, to see how far they can push us into a corner like the cattle they think we are.
Whats to stop a group of armed men from taking over the entire terminal mmm. i don't thing MR. creamfilled & coffie is going to do much with his stun gun and club. after the terminals is under the terrorists control whats to stop them from hi-jacking every 747 in the lot.
Powered By
 |
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
23. November 2010 @ 06:18 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by flyingpen:
As a chemist, I'm so sick and tired of people freaking out over the "radiation". You deal with radiation on a daily basis(see: Sunlight). The amount of radiation these things puts out is nothing and would not cause any issues with a person. Honestly, the fDA would not net these be put out if they actually caused any problems. Honestly, if you don't know what your talking about then people need to listen to the people they do. Rule 12: Know your place.
The radiation thing is the minor issue. This is more about a device that takes naked pictures of people, saves them, and automatically uploads them to a server. Since kids are allowed to fly, this is a clear case of child pornography. If you think this does not quite fall into the realm of child pornography, remember that anything that is meant to resemble a child is now considered child pornography...even a picture of an 18 year old woman with a naked 17 year body stiched on is child porn.
|
|
flyingpen
Junior Member
|
23. November 2010 @ 07:09 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by flyingpen:
The radiation thing is the minor issue. This is more about a device that takes naked pictures of people, saves them, and automatically uploads them to a server. Since kids are allowed to fly, this is a clear case of child pornography. If you think this does not quite fall into the realm of child pornography, remember that anything that is meant to resemble a child is now considered child pornography...even a picture of an 18 year old woman with a naked 17 year body stiched on is child porn.
Sorry, honestly, this is the only site I get my news from. (sometimes /. but mostly AD) I'm not completely up to date with what people are B*tching about now. I saw in the article "but instead wants to protect citizens from unwanted radiation." and figured people are freaking out over the radiation the same way they do about cellphones. Ok so... what if it gets uploaded to a server? Can I connect to it? I mean this basically a nude version of my IP address. Yes its cataloged in some back alley server, yes SOME people have access to it but that's highly regulated and your picture will almost never be seen again. I really don't care if it takes nude pictures of me or not. And as far as the child porn goes, unless this is an elaborate scheme for the government to get MORE childporn, why does it matter? Again, their picture is going to get cataloged and never seen again. I fly atleast once a year and I have absolutely no issue with it. I feel safer with them doing this now. Oh ya, pro-tip here. Don't tell the Airport security that its a good thing that you've been out of class for a month or otherwise you would set off their chemical detectors... Even if you say your a Chemist. They get really suspicious >.>
Carpe Noctem
|
|
m3_chris
Newbie
|
23. November 2010 @ 12:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
No one is forcing you to fly.... don't like the scanners or patdowns, then quit complaining step out of the way so I can get scanned and get on my plane.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. November 2010 @ 14:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ya know if you can not stand being filmed outside or in public areas or be scanned before entering certain buildings or get on a planed... perhaps you need to return to the people under the rock you came from....
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
|
greeneyes29
Newbie
|
23. November 2010 @ 18:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yea the FDA has NEVER been wrong before! From what I can tell they haven't studied the long-term effects of this product because they haven't taken the time to (if I am incorrect about a lack of longitudinal studies on this product please let me know. I would honestly be curious to see a legitimate study). And again, I haven't seen any longitudinal studies so they can pretend that they know what they have created but they won't until decades from now when travelers (especially frequent travelers) notice physiological issues. Perhaps this is an unnecessary scare but most people have natural concerns, and I think it's good to question. The FDA is run by people, not gods, they make mistakes, and I wouldn't be too shocked if they were just trying to protect their fellow government agency. I will make my verdict on the machines decades from now when someone has been able to study the full scientific effects. Personally I'm not terribly concerned about the radiation, I'm concerned about privacy. These scanners are invasive and unnecessary, but I guess it's better than being groped in public by a stranger.
P.S. People say these scanner images are backlogged and never seen again; however, I continue to see TONS of different scanner images and they are posted for the world to see online. Does anyone know if these people are actually giving the newspapers, websites, etc. permission to show scanner photos of themselves or is the TSA allowed to do whatever they want with them?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. November 2010 @ 21:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by greeneyes29:
Yea the FDA has NEVER been wrong before! From what I can tell they haven't studied the long-term effects of this product because they haven't taken the time to (if I am incorrect about a lack of longitudinal studies on this product please let me know. I would honestly be curious to see a legitimate study). And again, I haven't seen any longitudinal studies so they can pretend that they know what they have created but they won't until decades from now when travelers (especially frequent travelers) notice physiological issues. Perhaps this is an unnecessary scare but most people have natural concerns, and I think it's good to question. The FDA is run by people, not gods, they make mistakes, and I wouldn't be too shocked if they were just trying to protect their fellow government agency. I will make my verdict on the machines decades from now when someone has been able to study the full scientific effects. Personally I'm not terribly concerned about the radiation, I'm concerned about privacy. These scanners are invasive and unnecessary, but I guess it's better than being groped in public by a stranger.
P.S. People say these scanner images are backlogged and never seen again; however, I continue to see TONS of different scanner images and they are posted for the world to see online. Does anyone know if these people are actually giving the newspapers, websites, etc. permission to show scanner photos of themselves or is the TSA allowed to do whatever they want with them?
Meh a public picture is a pubic picture, now this is a 3D image of a supposed nude form but still nothing to freak out over.
I'd be more interested in the long term studies of effects of the radio,ect radiation on the body. But this really should be used as a B option, frist is the metal detector fail that get scaned or opt out and get patted down. More people should be allowed to join authorized flier groups. Basically a company get a license from the fed and the state the those who sign up pay a 500$ fee their info is passed to the FBI and CIA when cleared you pay 15-50%(depending on how much you fly) of ticket price to bypass security. Call it veri'flight and 70% of the time you can fly with no trouble however if their is a incident or event that causes a red flag to come on on certain ,most or all veri'flight members they will back back twice the percentage they took out unless you violated flying rules.
This seems a no brainier and more worth while than trying to replace metal scanners with body scaners.
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
24. November 2010 @ 00:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by flyingpen:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by flyingpen:
The radiation thing is the minor issue. This is more about a device that takes naked pictures of people, saves them, and automatically uploads them to a server. Since kids are allowed to fly, this is a clear case of child pornography. If you think this does not quite fall into the realm of child pornography, remember that anything that is meant to resemble a child is now considered child pornography...even a picture of an 18 year old woman with a naked 17 year body stiched on is child porn.
Sorry, honestly, this is the only site I get my news from. (sometimes /. but mostly AD) I'm not completely up to date with what people are B*tching about now. I saw in the article "but instead wants to protect citizens from unwanted radiation." and figured people are freaking out over the radiation the same way they do about cellphones. Ok so... what if it gets uploaded to a server? Can I connect to it? I mean this basically a nude version of my IP address. Yes its cataloged in some back alley server, yes SOME people have access to it but that's highly regulated and your picture will almost never be seen again. I really don't care if it takes nude pictures of me or not. And as far as the child porn goes, unless this is an elaborate scheme for the government to get MORE childporn, why does it matter? Again, their picture is going to get cataloged and never seen again. I fly atleast once a year and I have absolutely no issue with it. I feel safer with them doing this now. Oh ya, pro-tip here. Don't tell the Airport security that its a good thing that you've been out of class for a month or otherwise you would set off their chemical detectors... Even if you say your a Chemist. They get really suspicious >.>
You assume that the government protects the servers that keep these images...this is a huge assumption...they didn't even start encrypting the predator drone control signals until they found out that the enemy was hacking into them. What kind of person looks for a job where all they do is look at naked images of people all day? What kind of person looks for a job categorizing and sorting naked images of people? Is it really hard to believe that these images will end up online?
Oh, and once again...these scanners really don't do anything. Sure, it makes everyone feel very safe and let their guard down and everything...but I don't think that is a good thing. Sure, it might detect a weapon in your pocket, but so does a metal detector. If a terrorist is dedicated enough to travel halfway around the world, do training, and then die for his cause, you better bet that he is also willing to shove a pound of C4 up his rectum.
This technology does not provide the safety benefit it claims, it has serious privacy issues, and the only people who benefit from it are those who make the machines...and maybe future terrorists who take advantage of the false sense of security.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
24. November 2010 @ 00:41 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by flyingpen:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by flyingpen:
The radiation thing is the minor issue. This is more about a device that takes naked pictures of people, saves them, and automatically uploads them to a server. Since kids are allowed to fly, this is a clear case of child pornography. If you think this does not quite fall into the realm of child pornography, remember that anything that is meant to resemble a child is now considered child pornography...even a picture of an 18 year old woman with a naked 17 year body stiched on is child porn.
Sorry, honestly, this is the only site I get my news from. (sometimes /. but mostly AD) I'm not completely up to date with what people are B*tching about now. I saw in the article "but instead wants to protect citizens from unwanted radiation." and figured people are freaking out over the radiation the same way they do about cellphones. Ok so... what if it gets uploaded to a server? Can I connect to it? I mean this basically a nude version of my IP address. Yes its cataloged in some back alley server, yes SOME people have access to it but that's highly regulated and your picture will almost never be seen again. I really don't care if it takes nude pictures of me or not. And as far as the child porn goes, unless this is an elaborate scheme for the government to get MORE childporn, why does it matter? Again, their picture is going to get cataloged and never seen again. I fly atleast once a year and I have absolutely no issue with it. I feel safer with them doing this now. Oh ya, pro-tip here. Don't tell the Airport security that its a good thing that you've been out of class for a month or otherwise you would set off their chemical detectors... Even if you say your a Chemist. They get really suspicious >.>
You assume that the government protects the servers that keep these images...this is a huge assumption...they didn't even start encrypting the predator drone control signals until they found out that the enemy was hacking into them. What kind of person looks for a job where all they do is look at naked images of people all day? What kind of person looks for a job categorizing and sorting naked images of people? Is it really hard to believe that these images will end up online?
Oh, and once again...these scanners really don't do anything. Sure, it makes everyone feel very safe and let their guard down and everything...but I don't think that is a good thing. Sure, it might detect a weapon in your pocket, but so does a metal detector. If a terrorist is dedicated enough to travel halfway around the world, do training, and then die for his cause, you better bet that he is also willing to shove a pound of C4 up his rectum.
This technology does not provide the safety benefit it claims, it has serious privacy issues, and the only people who benefit from it are those who make the machines...and maybe future terrorists who take advantage of the false sense of security.
Mmm if it can detect metal and see through clothing the only issue remaining is minor. Since the images are vague and quasi real the real problem here the images getting out as its an unnecessary information leak, private claims are about as valid as people bitching about being photo shoped nude....
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
24. November 2010 @ 04:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
If you consider 10 lbs of C4 on an airplane to be a minor issue, then I guess it really is a minor issue. I mean, who cares if the blast is so small that it only blows up one plane? If you really think like this, then you might as well just allow people to bring guns onto the plane. If you are not going to prevent people from bringing bombs on-board, you can at least give the other passengers a way to fight back. Also, if bombs are not a concern to you, then why do you want the scanners at all? It isn't like they are going to use knives or guns to hijack a plane; just standing up to go to the bathroom is enough to get half the passengers ready to jump you. You could give the terrorists SMGs as they boarded the plane...and they still would not be able to hijack it.
If anyone else was making, storing, and distributing 3D images of naked children, they would be getting raped in federal prison by now. The government does it in the name of some unspecified security, and gets away with it.
|
