All Nudescopes at McCarran

cancer chic

May 9, 2012
3:14pm

We've had them in Albuquerque for awhile. I've not noticed them taking any longer in fact I think it's faster.

siwst852

May 11, 2012
10:37pm

The one I went thru in Detroit took forever. You walked in , found your feet position, waited til they said hold up your hands, waited until you were cleared. I don't know how they can take less time than just walking thru the metal detector. The lines were backed up just standing waiting to go thru. I was upset because my purse/stuff had gone thru and I still had several people ahead of me to go into the machine.

drmilled

May 11, 2012
10:42pm

Some people are never happy unless they have something to complain about. Security screening is here to stay. Quit bitchin' and keep moving, you are holding up the line.

BobOrme

May 13, 2012
11:07am

Those things absolutely do slow down the screening process. You don't have to remove everything from your person to go through a metal detector. You walk through the metal detector, and if you don't set it off, you move on to pick up your screened carry on stuff. The radiation generating scanners require you to put everything, including your boarding pass and ID into your carry on stuff. You have to "strike a pose" while being radiated, exit the unit and wait until two or three TSA employees clear the scans, then you move on to pick up your x rayed carry on stuff. The scanners are not accurate. When flying out of Nashville last year, the scanner showed an orange dot on the middle of my back. There was nothing in the middle of my back, but that false reading still lead to a wanding, pat down, and full emptying and rerun of the contents of my computer bag.

The full body scanners do not make any of us safer used as they are. If the usage was tied to profiling, then, it would make sense. As it stands, the scanners do require more TSA employees to conduct the screening, which means more government paid union jobs...the real reason for them.

Dan Svatass

May 15, 2012
7:42am

Quote

Originally posted by: BobOrme
Those things absolutely do slow down the screening process. You don't have to remove everything from your person to go through a metal detector. You walk through the metal detector, and if you don't set it off, you move on to pick up your screened carry on stuff. The radiation generating scanners require you to put everything, including your boarding pass and ID into your carry on stuff. You have to "strike a pose" while being radiated, exit the unit and wait until two or three TSA employees clear the scans, then you move on to pick up your x rayed carry on stuff. The scanners are not accurate. When flying out of Nashville last year, the scanner showed an orange dot on the middle of my back. There was nothing in the middle of my back, but that false reading still lead to a wanding, pat down, and full emptying and rerun of the contents of my computer bag.

The full body scanners do not make any of us safer used as they are. If the usage was tied to profiling, then, it would make sense. As it stands, the scanners do require more TSA employees to conduct the screening, which means more government paid union jobs...the real reason for them.

Millimeter wave devices are the foundation of faster screening. They give TSA a far more detailed report on where potential issues are on a passenger's body, minimizing the need for supplemental full-body searches. And searches will get faster as the public learns how to prepare before stepping into the devices.

They also emit less than a thousandth the radiation of a cell phone.

I like how BobOrme says, on the basis of one false positive he witnessed, that the scanners are "not accurate". Excellent commitment to science there, Bob, I'm sure you've never inadvertently caused a metal detector to beep.

BobOrme

May 15, 2012
11:21am

Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot

Quote
Originally posted by: BobOrme
Quote

Those things absolutely do slow down the screening process. You don't have to remove everything from your person to go through a metal detector. You walk through the metal detector, and if you don't set it off, you move on to pick up your screened carry on stuff. The radiation generating scanners require you to put everything, including your boarding pass and ID into your carry on stuff. You have to "strike a pose" while being radiated, exit the unit and wait until two or three TSA employees clear the scans, then you move on to pick up your x rayed carry on stuff. The scanners are not accurate. When flying out of Nashville last year, the scanner showed an orange dot on the middle of my back. There was nothing in the middle of my back, but that false reading still lead to a wanding, pat down, and full emptying and rerun of the contents of my computer bag.

The full body scanners do not make any of us safer used as they are. If the usage was tied to profiling, then, it would make sense. As it stands, the scanners do require more TSA employees to conduct the screening, which means more government paid union jobs...the real reason for them.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot Millimeter wave devices are the foundation of faster screening. They give TSA a far more detailed report on where potential issues are on a passenger's body, minimizing the need for supplemental full-body searches. And searches will get faster as the public learns how to prepare before stepping into the devices.

I love the "as the public learns how to prepare before stepping into the devices". The general traveling public are not frequent fliers. They constantly have to be told what to do in airports that don't even have the body scanners and they still fail on a very regular basis. Make profiling a major factor in determining who has to go through the body scanners and I'd have no problem with it.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot They also emit less than a thousandth the radiation of a cell phone.

I call BS on that. Prove it, and then explain how flight crews and airport employees are not required to go through those things on a daily basis at every airport.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot I like how BobOrme says, on the basis of one false positive he witnessed, that the scanners are "not accurate". Excellent commitment to science there, Bob, I'm sure you've never inadvertently caused a metal detector to beep.

I didn't "witness" the false positive, I experienced it. I fly between 15 and 30 times a year depending on my work schedule, and have done so for the last decade. My personal experience with the TSA is very extensive, and it includes a working knowledge of airport screening at every sized airport imaginable. The level of TSA training that I experience at different airports is not consistent. There have been instances that I've know more about TSA regulations than some of the people screening me did. When that occurs, sometimes I'll speak up, depending on how long I have to get to the gate for my flight. If the time is relatively short, I'll keep my mouth shut. If I have a little extra time, I'll speak up. They always love that! Extra hassle just because they can do it. Run the contents of your carry on through the x-ray three times trying to find something - that actually happened to me. Have a TSA employ break something in your carry on and deny they had anything to do with it when you saw them do it - that actually has happened to me, at McCarran. Any questioning of their authority or knowledge of our own government's rules will result in what can't be described as anything less than harassment. It's what you get when you have government paid union employees. They don't have to fear losing their jobs for treating their customers like crap. ...and no, I've never inadvertently set off an airport metal detector.

All of that said, I find a majority of TSA employees to be professional at about an 85% rate overall. It should be 99% (nothing is perfect).

Dan Svatass

May 15, 2012
2:01pm

Bob,

1. The millimeter wave scanners are both faster and more efficient. They give TSA much more information than the metal detectors ("magnetometers") of old. That's why we're moving to the new technology. Having that information lets TSA know how to follow up with supplemental screening should the mw scanner detect an anomaly, rather than guessing where on the body the metal is.

2. Metal detectors don't detect bombs. The Underwear Bomber walked right though one with a big dopey smile on his face. Maybe you're someone who doesn't mind bombs on planes. I'm not.

3. On every flight, most everyone has flown many times. They figure out new procedures pretty quickly.

4. Profiling doesn't work. If you create a system that predictably makes certain people less susceptible to screening, terrorists will see that and find ways to exploit that opening. If you screen folks from certain countries more thoroughly, terrorists recruit people from other countries to make the attack. If folks with Arabic names are being given extra screening, terrorists recruit guys with names like Jose Padilla. What profile would have caught Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Padilla? Dudes who were natural-born American citizens?

Even your clownish hero Newt Gingrich admits profiling doesn't work: "We need to have the knowledge to be able to profile based on behavior. . . . Not racial profiling or ethnic profiling, but profiling based on behavior and then, frankly, discriminating based on behavior." Yes, I am quoting Newt Gingrich for knowing something.

5. Profiling is immoral. It's immoral for the same reasons that apartheid, Jim Crow laws, and the internment of Japanese-Americans were immoral. Using those broad markers as a basis for how we treat individuals means that we ignore the person, reducing that person to whatever stereotype we choose to impose. It's bad public policy, and it's bad police work. I would argue, in fact, that the practical ineffectiveness of such policies is an inevitable result of their moral failings.

6.

- Transportation Safety Administration

7. Unless you were unconscious, if you observed an event, even an event that involved you, you were a witness.

8. One of two things you said can be true: that you fly a lot, or that you've never set off a metal detector. Not both.

9. You've averaged almost a post a day here every day for more than five years. Take a second and learn how to quote.

BobOrme

May 15, 2012
4:08pm

Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot
Bob,

1. The millimeter wave scanners are both faster and more efficient. They give TSA much more information than the metal detectors ("magnetometers") of old. That's why we're moving to the new technology. Having that information lets TSA know how to follow up with supplemental screening should the mw scanner detect an anomaly, rather than guessing where on the body the metal is.

2. Metal detectors don't detect bombs. The Underwear Bomber walked right though one with a big dopey smile on his face. Maybe you're someone who doesn't mind bombs on planes. I'm not.

What was the underwear bomber's profile?

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
3. On every flight, most everyone has flown many times. They figure out new procedures pretty quickly.

You either haven't been to an airport recently, or your local airport is so small that there is never a line at security screening.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
4. Profiling doesn't work. If you create a system that predictably makes certain people less susceptible to screening, terrorists will see that and find ways to exploit that opening. If you screen folks from certain countries more thoroughly, terrorists recruit people from other countries to make the attack. If folks with Arabic names are being given extra screening, terrorists recruit guys with names like Jose Padilla. What profile would have caught Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Padilla? Dudes who were natural-born American citizens?

Even your clownish hero Newt Gingrich admits profiling doesn't work: "We need to have the knowledge to be able to profile based on behavior. . . . Not racial profiling or ethnic profiling, but profiling based on behavior and then, frankly, discriminating based on behavior." Yes, I am quoting Newt Gingrich for knowing something.

I did not advocate or suggest racial profiling. If you think profiling doesn't work, you need not look further than EL AL to prove you wrong. A nation that is under constant attack by terrorists profiles airline passengers by talking to them. They don't "randomly" submit their traveling public to be sexually fondled by strangers....and in case you missed it, McVeigh and Nichols weren't boarding an airplane.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
5. Profiling is immoral. It's immoral for the same reasons that apartheid, Jim Crow laws, and the internment of Japanese-Americans were immoral. Using those broad markers as a basis for how we treat individuals means that we ignore the person, reducing that person to whatever stereotype we choose to impose. It's bad public policy, and it's bad police work. I would argue, in fact, that the practical ineffectiveness of such policies is an inevitable result of their moral failings.

If the people who hijacked the planes on 9/11/01 that killed thousands of Americans fit my own profile, I would not only be happy to be submitted to extra security screening, I'd be disappointed if that wasn't happening. That wouldn't be moral failings. It would be dereliction of duty in the name of political correctness.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
6.

- Transportation Safety Administration

Nice pictures. I asked for proof.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
7. Unless you were unconscious, if you observed an event, even an event that involved you, you were a witness.

Okay, I witnessed myself being a victim. Is that better?

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
8. One of two things you said can be true: that you fly a lot, or that you've never set off a metal detector. Not both.

Both are true, but it is convenient that you modified the metal detector claim from your original post. I used to be able to wear my pewter belt buckle through metal detectors until around mid 2002. It wasn't inadvertent. I knew I was wearing the buckle, and for a while, holding it parallel to the floor would still let it pass.

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
9. You've averaged almost a post a day here every day for more than five years. Take a second and learn how to quote.

Too many upper and lower case "Q's". It got a bit confusing while trying to edit, but it looks like the messages were clear enough.

vegasvp

May 19, 2012
4:49am

Quote

Originally posted by: Siwst852
If they do switch to all scopes expect slower lines they take about 10x as long as walking thru the metal detectors. If someone messes up with something in the pocket is goes even slower. What are they going to do with kids who can' t raise their hands?

I went through the scope at McCarran on Thursday. It took about 5 seconds.

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

or

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now