Lawsuit Filed Against NYPD Street Body Scanners

http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/lawsuit-filed-against-nypd-street-body-scanners/

by SoftwareMaven • 13 years ago

121 57 13 years ago

tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com

Original author here... thanks for posting! :) I filed the first lawsuit against the TSA's nude body scanners when they became primary screening in 2010, and you may also remember me from my "How to Get Anything Through TSA Nude Body Scanners" video. Today I filed suit against New York City for attempting to introduce street body scanners that can look under your clothes from afar. It is unfortunate that it seems that government at all levels is always in need of a fresh reminder that the citizens for whom it exists demand privacy, and that each technological advance is not a new tool to violate our privacy. However, as often as proves to be necessary, we will give them that reminder.

hnwh• 13 years ago

not to mention the health concerns of going around randomly Xray-ing people... "A cancer for you.. and a cancer for you.. "

tsaoutourpants15• 13 years ago

These devices, as best I can tell, actually don't come with a radiation risk. They're passive scanners, meaning they don't emit their own radiation.

TSA scanners on the other hand... ;)

darkarmani3• 13 years ago

This seems to relate to using devices to detect things inside your car (dogs) or devices to detect growing lamps in your house (unconstitutional search).

It looks like they are working to erode searches again, using dogs to detect drugs inside a home. http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/10/argument-preview-drug-snif...

Everything I learned in high school civics class seems to be obsolete when it comes to our Constitutional rights: "bong hits for jesus", "administrative" searches (body scanners), and now street searches.

Why is it the argument from ignorance/lack of imagination via fear is so compelling? "We need to do X to stop Y." Where Y is something very remote but really scary.

Zimahl• 13 years ago

Ugh, "Bong Hits for Jesus". That SCOTUS decision sincerely and utterly gnaws at my core. One of the worst decisions in the last 30 years.

josh_fyi• 13 years ago

Thanks for fighting the good fight!

Just curious ... when you fly, do you get hassled or barred from the plane?

tsaoutourpants15• 13 years ago

Not more than the average citizen. It actually shocks me that the TSA has never seemed to recognize me, especially in light of the fact that my name is in front of them to see and I always opt-out (except when embarrassing them on video, of course ;)).

cg410• 13 years ago

Thank you for doing this!

tsaoutourpants15• 13 years ago

Happy to help ;)

bcoates• 13 years ago

Are there practical materials to make hoodies and/or jeans out of that are opaque to these devices?

knowaveragejoe3• 13 years ago

If these are terahertz-band scanners, I believe most metals will block the waves.

evoxed• 13 years ago

So, tin foil hoodies? Or maybe chain mail will come back in style?

I haven't encountered one of these yet, but I'd actually be willing to go through if I had some sort of metallic pre-wash all over my clothes.

tsaoutourpants15• 13 years ago

There are tons of ways to defeat it. If the courts don't stop the scanners, I plan to design and market a scan-proof holster :)

fnordfnordfnord• 13 years ago

Yes. It's trivial to defeat. Proprietor reports that he can't keep them on the shelf.

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2011/01/12/airport-scanner-blo...

danso3• 13 years ago

Playing Devil's Advocate here: how is this comparable to "nude" body scanners? From the demo images, it seems to produce an abstract outline except for the shapes that, I'm assuming, are too dense to be organic. In concept, how is this different than being forced to walk through a metal detector? Both this visual body scanner and the metal detector only provide vague indications of what you have hidden under your clothes.

From a pragmatic point of view...maybe I'm misunderstanding the technology, but it seems prone to a wide range of false positives...to the point that using the scans to justify apprehending someone is not much better than stop-and-frisking because a person looks "suspicious"

darkarmani3• 13 years ago

> In concept, how is this different than being forced to walk through a metal detector?

Well, you generally have a choice (kinda) to walk through a metal detector. People should be protect from random searches while walking around the streets. At one time there were very specific cases where you had to submit to a search -- one being hot pursuit.

danso3• 13 years ago

I guess that's true. I forgot that the NYPD can search through all of your stuff when you enter a subway, but you have the right to refuse and just not take the subway (at least at that station)

DannyBee• 13 years ago

I hope you win, but the way case law has been going, this is going to be a difficult lawsuit to win at the lower levels

tsaoutourpants15• 13 years ago

Of course it will. And let me guarantee you this: the city will not start by defending the merits of the scanners, but by doing everything it can to get my case dismissed before it has to do so.

codex• 13 years ago

From what I can tell these devices cannot look under one's clothes. The image is just too blurry. In fact, these scanners could be considered cameras that capture light outside of the visible spectrum. Are we to now say that one can't take photos in public? That seems to be quite extreme. I would like to preserve my right to do so, even with an infrared camera.

Lawsuit Filed Against NYPD Street Body Scanners

Related Stories