Having travelled through SFO a few times, and each time been asked to go through a millimetre wave (or backscatter) scanner, and each time 'opted out' and gone for the search (in public), I'd like to know what is the proper reasons to give when they ask why I've opted out.
I tried the radiation argument the first time, just after they were introduced, but this argument doesn't seem to be too valid now since the millimetre wave scanners aren't very powerful.
I've tried privacy but not really known what to say afterwards other than the technical issues of caching, wiping images, etc.
Each one got some snarky comments from the security staff, and discussion from the one given the opportunity to feel me up, so I'd like to arm myself with a bit more information/argumentation for next time.
80.5k56 gold badges289 silver badges651 bronze badges
asked Mar 12, 2012 at 20:30
10
Why do you need to give them an excuse? [Currently] we have the right to opt-out, no questions asked. Having to explain yourself eats away at this right.
I've never been asked why I opted-out, but if I was, I think I would say something like "to protest overly-burdensome security regulations". Which is the truth.
1
I tried the radiation argument the first time, just after they were introduced, but this argument doesn't seem to be too valid now since the millimetre wave scanners aren't very powerful.
Who told you this? The guys at the gate who don't want to pat you down? Tell them you only take medical advice from certified doctors and PhD's.
answered Mar 12, 2012 at 21:13
2
You don't need to give any excuse at all. They can't force you undergo this procedure, you volunteer to it. If you don't want to - then you don't. They'll have to use the good old manual search on you.
That said - why do you care? Do you believe that it will cause you any damage? I'm pretty sure we're all exposed to much higher levels of radiation from our cell phones, microwave ovens DECT phones and WiFi routers, so once in several months that you need to go through this scanner (and its not always used in SFO) won't add much to that.
If its privacy concerns... Well, feel better when someone standing right in front of you touches your groin? I don't.
What is it?
The only reasonable (to me) explanation would be ideological: you don't want it because you believe they shouldn't do it altogether. Well - you can just say so, its your right.
answered Mar 13, 2012 at 9:23
3
Well, you can still try the privacy argument, among others. Here's a summarised version of what Wikipedia has to say:
Privacy advocates are concerned about the use of active millimeter wave technology because it effectively implements routine and, in many cases, mandatory virtual strip searches. It allows screeners to see the surface of the skin under clothing, prosthetics including breast prostheses, and other medical equipment normally hidden, such as colostomy bags.
Tumors - While the majority of animal cancer studies show no response to chronic exposure of microwave radiation, some show an increased rate of tumor growth. The same increase also occurs in chronically–stressed animals not exposed to radiation.
I've also seen some people claim that they get claustrophobic being in the machine, but that's a tough argument to 'prove'.
Not only is the "radiation" issue invalid, but the privacy issue is also a non-issue. After the public's dislike of the remote viewing of images, the scanners were changed so that instead of producing an image that someone looks at and then radios the screening person where to check the passenger, it now automatically finds objects itself and uses a generic, cartoon-like avatar of a person as a map, and displays a yellow box on the area of the passenger that the screening person should check. This eliminates the need for any image. It is also good for the screeners, since it lessens the manpower needed to run the operation. The only (small) downside is that since the computer can't think like a human, you will get more false positives that would otherwise be dismissed by a thinking person looking at an image and recognizing a harmless object like a nickel or something.
answered Dec 28, 2014 at 14:18
1
My reasoning, which no one has questioned, is that I believe such scanners are security theatre, that they are unlikely to turn up anything that a trained agent would not already note, and that putting money into them means less funding for the actual people who make it work. Therefore, I refuse those scans because it's supporting the false idea of their effectiveness. This is a sincere belief on my part and I like to think that the workers appreciate that I think they're more important than the multi-million dollar equipment.
That said, I think I've been asked once why I was refusing the millimeter wave scan. For the most part, they really don't care.
You must log in to answer this question.
Explore related questions
See similar questions with these tags.