PDA

View Full Version : x-raying your vehicle...the cops have gone too far



sniper7
11-10-2010, 17:40
http://autos.aol.com/article/x-ray-truck/

It sounds like something straight out of George Orwell’s 1984: Government vans (http://autos.aol.com/car-finder/style-van/), equipped with full-body X-ray scanning machines, have been deployed on the streets of our cities, monitoring an unwitting populace for signs of illegal activity.
You could simply be going about your daily activities, not even doing something that should invite the suspicions of the authorities, but it doesn’t matter. The police can still scan you and the contents of your vehicle, and if they see something that arouses their suspicions, stop you immediately and search you, your vehicle, and its contents.
It might seem improbable, like Big Brother is watching you, but it’s fact, not fiction: According to the manufacturer, American Science & Engineering, the biggest buyer of its “mobile backscatter X-ray technology” has been the Department of Defense operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. It goes on to admit, however, that domestic law enforcement agencies -- that’s right, agencies inside in the United States -- have also deployed vans equipped with the technology to search for vehicle-based bombs.

Backscatter X-Rays: A Revealing Technology Is Revealed

The Z Backscatter Vans, or ZBVs, as American Science & Engineering calls them, bounce a narrow stream of X-rays off and through nearby objects, and analyze which rays return. Dense material, such as steel, absorb the rays. Scattered rays indicate less-dense objects that can include explosives, drugs, or human bodies. That capability makes backscatter X-rays powerful tools for security, law enforcement and border control.
So should the use of this technology make us feel safe? Or is it just another sign of the government using the war on terror (or is it the war on drugs?) as a convenient excuse to strip away basic Constitutional rights of an unaware populace? And is it even legal?
Improbable Technology Vs. Probable Cause
“First, it’s not clear that it is legal,” says Dr. Daniel Steinbock, professor of law and interim dean at the University of Toledo College of Law. “In fact, the Supreme Court has already ruled in Kyllo v. United States, that the use of similar technology, in this case, thermal imaging, is illegal under the Fourth Amendment’s restraint on the government performing searches without probable cause.”
Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), agrees; in fact, EPIC is currently suing the Department of Homeland Security to stop the usage of full-body-scan technology in airports. “It’s no surprise that governments and vendors are very enthusiastic about the vans,” he said in a recent interview with Forbes. “But from a privacy perspective, it’s one of the most intrusive technologies conceivable.”

In response, American Science & Engineering states that the ZBV’s primary purpose is to screen vehicles and containers for contraband and security threats. If a person, such as an illegal stowaway, is present in the vehicle or container being scanned, the system creates only a silhouette of that person, with no facial or body detail. The system cannot be used to identify an individual, or the race or age of the individual.
Health Concerns as Well as Privacy Concerns?
So there are definitely some invasion of privacy issues to consider, as well as the legality of the whole operation. But what about from a health perspective? Certainly a machine capable of providing such detailed images must be blasting some pretty powerful X-rays.
For comparison purposes, the X-ray dose received from the backscatter system is roughly equivalent to the radiation received in two minutes of airplane flight at altitude. Newer technologies require even less scanning time, further reducing individual X-ray exposure. The backscatter advanced imaging technology meets and exceeds the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard for personnel security screening systems using X-rays.

Freedom at What Price?
Advocates of the technology might argue that its use is necessary to preserve our freedoms and the American way of life, reasoning that sounds a lot like, “In order to preserve the Constitution, it is necessary to destroy it.”
Dr. Steinbock sums it up quite succinctly. “Without a warrant, the government doesn’t have a right to peer beneath your clothes without probable cause,” he says. Even airport scans are typically used only as a secondary security measure, he points out. “If the scans can only be used in exceptional cases in airports, the idea that they can be used routinely on city streets is a very hard argument to make.”

86k10
11-10-2010, 18:03
As i understand they are also doing this to houses. mobile scanning, or testing it at least.

Elhuero
11-10-2010, 18:05
sounds like a toy for obama's civilian national security force

Anton
11-10-2010, 18:06
Old news. But still frightening.

SA Friday
11-10-2010, 18:10
Clear and unadulterated 4th violation. Kyllo v US clearly comes into play on this and even to attempt it on a house without a warrant is a violation of the 4th ammendment. Cars, they might get more wiggle room with, but arbitrarily scanning... Nope. Anything they find is fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree.

sniper7
11-10-2010, 18:11
As i understand they are also doing this to houses. mobile scanning, or testing it at least.

wonder what can be installed when building a new home to prevent x-ray scanning.

funny how the .gov forces our lives to become transparent, yet they can't even divulge where are money is really going.

sniper7
11-10-2010, 18:11
Clear and unadulterated 4th violation. Kyllo v US clearly comes into play on this and even to attempt it on a house without a warrant is a violation of the 4th ammendment. Cars, they might get more wiggle room with, but arbitrarily scanning... Nope. Anything they find is fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree.

good, I hope one case goes to trial, the home-owner wins and then I am case #2.

retirement here I come[Coffee]

CareyH
11-10-2010, 18:19
About 4yrs ago they used to x-ray our trucks(trash trucks)and all other large trucks going on to fort carson, but they stopped doing that about 3yrs ago.

sniper7
11-10-2010, 18:27
About 4yrs ago they used to x-ray our trucks(trash trucks)and all other large trucks going on to fort carson, but they stopped doing that about 3yrs ago.


do you know why?

too much backlash, lack of findings, money issues? technology issues?

Mtn.man
11-10-2010, 19:10
lead walls.

SA Friday
11-10-2010, 19:12
wonder what can be installed when building a new home to prevent x-ray scanning.

funny how the .gov forces our lives to become transparent, yet they can't even divulge where are money is really going.
Well, you can always line the walls with lead.[Tooth] They will play hell finding your cache of C-4 then.

rockhound
11-10-2010, 19:21
install the new and improved acme gov't spy xray jammy thingy

Irving
11-10-2010, 20:19
Does anyone have a "Fuck You" mold? I need to make a special run of bullets that I want to attach to the inside of each fender of my vehicle....to help balance it.

Elhuero
11-10-2010, 20:26
Does anyone have a "Fuck You" mold? I need to make a special run of bullets that I want to attach to the inside of each fender of my vehicle....to help balance it.

LOL that's exactly what I was thinking, rig up a special message for them.

sniper7
11-10-2010, 20:33
Well, you can always line the walls with lead.[Tooth] They will play hell finding your cache of C-4 then.


guess I need to order more ammo.

all walls need to be lined with ammo cans[Beer]

Troublco
11-10-2010, 20:38
Not only is it a violation of our rights, but I'm here to tell you that the only good exposure to radiation is NO exposure. Part of my job is industrial process radiography, and we have multiple electronic devices to carefully monitor and track our exposure. If a system with enough power to do what they're using this for has a malfunction and gets stuck on (can happen), or gets pointed the wrong way, someone can get one helluva dose. And the thing to remember is, this is ionizing radiation. Yes, they use the same sort at the Dr's office, but they use shots that last a fraction of a second; and the benefit is considered to outweight the risk. For the sort of scans they'd be doing, the source would be on a LOT longer, and the mA and kV would be cranked. Folks have died badly from overexposures resulting from equipment/human failures from industrial radiography equipment. I just have a hard time imagining that if they DID have an issue, they'd be forthcoming about it; not that that would help whoever it got. [Rant1]

BPTactical
11-10-2010, 20:44
Kinda makes you want to get some lead for stained glass, duct tape and pull the door panels and come up with "creative text and illustration" on the inside of the outer door skin[Muaha]


A single extended digit comes to mind.....

Mtn.man
11-10-2010, 20:48
Lead based paint, yeah that's the ticket, all the stuff we have from china is safe to stash shit in cause it's painted with lead base paint.

Irving
11-10-2010, 21:04
A single extended digit comes to mind.....

That's what I was originally thinking, but typing out "middle finger" didn't read as well is Fuck You.



But seriously, what can you do about blatant rights violations? If I found out that someone was shooting my family with radiation without me knowing about it, I'd want them dead. But of course, there is ZERO recourse against government agents. Just a shrug of the shoulders and an "internal investigation."

Elhuero
11-10-2010, 21:08
That's what I was originally thinking, but typing out "middle finger" didn't read as well is Fuck You.



But seriously, what can you do about blatant rights violations? If I found out that someone was shooting my family with radiation without me knowing about it, I'd want them dead. But of course, there is ZERO recourse against government agents. Just a shrug of the shoulders and an "internal investigation."


they have to park those vehicles somewhere.......

Troublco
11-10-2010, 21:42
they have to park those vehicles somewhere.......

Indeed....

lead_magnet
11-11-2010, 21:36
Not to shoot you guys down here or anything, BUT...

There is already a Federal Case law on thermal imaging that reads...

Kyllo v. United States: 533 U.S. 27 (2001)
Where the government uses a (thermal imaging) device that is not in general public use to explore details of a home that would otherwise be unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a "search" and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.

^ that is right out of the baca book

So I would imagine if anyone were to get "nabbed" doing something illegal by cops using such a device, a even moderately compitent lawyer could shoot that down. And I would imagne some case law would come about focused on x-ray scans. Because if you think about it, its basicly the same concept it just hasn't been put to paper yet, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Search without probable cause is a search without probable cause.

68Charger
11-11-2010, 21:41
Lead based paint, yeah that's the ticket, all the stuff we have from china is safe to stash shit in cause it's painted with lead base paint.

you just figured out the REAL reason they wanted to ban lead based paint! [ROFL2]

Irving
11-11-2010, 21:59
A little bird suggested to me that they might use that to check out places near where the Pres is going to be, but not for normal everyday stuff.

BigMat
11-11-2010, 23:07
See, things like this make me wonder how dumb our gov't is.

Take all of whats been said as true the future isn't hard to predict. Jerkwad Terrorist drives a van full of whatever-the-hell-terrorist stuff around and gets caught by said X-ray van. Awesome, go USA! but then, amazingly, Jerkwad is let go because the search, and there by everything after it was TOTALLY ILLEGAL...Strong work Justice Department, your foresight continues to amaze us all.

OneGuy67
11-12-2010, 19:28
The only legitimate purpose I could see a law enforcement agency using this type of device is where your expectation of privacy is reduced, such as at the border crossing over. Otherwise, the 4th Amendment protections would kick in.

Mtn.man
11-12-2010, 19:34
Don't know why they spend all that money on the machines, these are alot cheaper.

http://www.tomheroes.com/Comic%20Ads/classic%20ads/x-ray_glasses.htm (http://www.tomheroes.com/Comic%20Ads/classic%20ads/x-ray_glasses.htm)

sniper7
11-12-2010, 20:51
Not to shoot you guys down here or anything, BUT...

There is already a Federal Case law on thermal imaging that reads...

Kyllo v. United States: 533 U.S. 27 (2001)
Where the government uses a (thermal imaging) device that is not in general public use to explore details of a home that would otherwise be unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a "search" and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.

^ that is right out of the baca book

So I would imagine if anyone were to get "nabbed" doing something illegal by cops using such a device, a even moderately compitent lawyer could shoot that down. And I would imagne some case law would come about focused on x-ray scans. Because if you think about it, its basicly the same concept it just hasn't been put to paper yet, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Search without probable cause is a search without probable cause.

I wonder how many drug dealers could actually come up with the lawyer to bail them out of that one. the .gov uses the info, then just waits for the suspect to fuck up under current laws.
seems like a way for them to gather intel on people then bust them in other ways.

Now proving they received their intel from imaging from the beginning would be another fight I think.

sniper7
11-12-2010, 20:52
Don't know why they spend all that money on the machines, these are alot cheaper.

http://www.tomheroes.com/Comic%20Ads/classic%20ads/x-ray_glasses.htm


I'm going to order some[ROFL1]

ChunkyMonkey
11-12-2010, 21:09
I just have squint my eyes.