Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:42:38 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Fox"
wrote: Ross's point was well made. What is happening at Paddington is just posturing and will do nothing for security. It clearly is not universally applicable. The whole thing is a waste of time and money and would be better spent elsewhere. As the Paddington excercise is allegedly just a test, could the whole idea be to prove that it doesn't really help? That way TPTB can say "we tried to do something, but we found it doesn't work in the tests", and thus shut up anyone who calls for Commondale to be supplied with x-ray machines or guard dogs to be deployed to watch for bin Laden at Brigg? -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In uk.legal Tim S wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:30:56 +0000, Adrian wrote: Marc Brett ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : Sorry, but I don't particularly want a stranger operating a machine which can image the nipples and genitals of my 14 year old son or daughter. These people should be on the sex offenders register, not hailed as the guardians of our safety. snip I agree with Marc, I do NOT want some low paid bloke looking at my, my wife's or my children's skin outline. If these people are anything like your average low paid civil servant (who I have worked with) or a security guard watching CCTV monitors, I *know* full well they will be laughing their arses off like monkeys at anything remotely amusing. Possibly keeping a few images for the Christmas party too. snip http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...pi_scan_lg.jpg It's not especially hard - if there is a 3D reasonable image, to go from that, to a fairly decent nude image, based on facial and hand skin tone. Of course, you won't get exact blemishes, or hair colour, but it'll be pretty close. |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian Stirling wrote:
In uk.legal Tim S wrote: On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:30:56 +0000, Adrian wrote: Marc Brett ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : Sorry, but I don't particularly want a stranger operating a machine which can image the nipples and genitals of my 14 year old son or daughter. These people should be on the sex offenders register, not hailed as the guardians of our safety. snip I agree with Marc, I do NOT want some low paid bloke looking at my, my wife's or my children's skin outline. If these people are anything like your average low paid civil servant (who I have worked with) or a security guard watching CCTV monitors, I *know* full well they will be laughing their arses off like monkeys at anything remotely amusing. Possibly keeping a few images for the Christmas party too. snip http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...pi_scan_lg.jpg It's not especially hard - if there is a 3D reasonable image, to go from that, to a fairly decent nude image, based on facial and hand skin tone. Of course, you won't get exact blemishes, or hair colour, but it'll be pretty close. Actually, it would open whole new lines of merchandising - eg "modesty" panties and bras with woven-in gold/silver wire. The wire could be woven into words, such as, "If you can read this, you should be ashamed of yourself"..Or other wording that a lady wouldn't mention.. One argument I've heard is, "Why worry?, you show more on a beach". Missing the points that many don't and that those that do are doing so voluntarily. My points are my business and no one else's ![]() -- Sue |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Roger wrote: wrote in message .. . "Steve" wrote in message ... But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide? If you think that gimmicks and a waste of money like that is going to make you safer, then you need to be fleeced of even more money, to pay the clever people fleecing you. These scanners are a complete waste of time and money! What are they trying to achieve? They are trying them out in a "dirty" environment where there are large variations in temperature, humidity,airborne particulates and electrical interference. Things not present in an airport departure lounge. If technical bits work out, then there is the possibility of employing them on the exterior of airport buildings, and various public transport venues that are more easily "sealable". Paddington was chosen because it has a lot of diesel trains using it. It is no more than a technical trial. Amazing how a simple trial of a bit of kit exercises so many IQ's in trying to make out that it is an attempt to seal off Heathrow or interfere with civil liberties! Nothing is 100% effective, but if this works scanning can be moved from the interior of buildings to the exterior. At the moment anyone can walk into an airport terminal, join the huge queues without a single check. The equipment previously not being capable of coping with the conditions mentioned above. The thinking behind it is brutally simple, a bomb outside an enclosed space is mostly less effective than inside when there are large numbers of people about. |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:53:22 GMT, "D.S.B." wrote:
Owing to the fact that Z1-6 travelcard holders will be able to use the Heathrow Express tomorrow, at no extra cost, I have decided to take a trip on this service. I read in the media earlier in the week, that trials of a scanner system, similar to the system used in scairports started this week, with people randomly selected to be scanned. If I happen to be the "unlucky" one, can I request that I am not scanned, or can they deny me the right to travel? Thanks Yesterday (12th) people passing along the platform were invited to take part in trials, there was no problem refusing, and the invites were few and far between- although a 'sniffer ' spaniel sat strategically placed between gaps in BTP, well within sniffing distance. Passing through Paddington 10-11am today (Sunday), the scanners were closed and unmanned. Nicholas |
#37
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ross" wrote in message
... But that's not as "sexy" as new, cutting-edge equipment, so wouldn't have appealed to either our politicians or the senior security bods. Practical answers never do, not when there's a chance of playing with "sexy" new toys. -( The company involved, wouldn't be a Labour Party donor, would it? |
#38
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Ross wrote: On 15 Jan 2006 04:00:45 -0800, wrote in .com, seen in uk.railway: At the moment anyone can walk into an airport terminal, join the huge queues without a single check. The equipment previously not being capable of coping with the conditions mentioned above. The Turkish manage to seal their airport terminals very effectively by simply having the security check at the terminal building's entrance doors. This was also done at Aldergrove in the '80s. -- RIP Morph (1977-2005) |
#39
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#40
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Heathrow Express etc. Today (Sun 19/6) | London Transport | |||
[OT?] Building visible from the Heathrow Express | London Transport | |||
Piccadilly line extension to Terminal 5/Heathrow Express extension to T5 | London Transport | |||
Stansted Express Train - Express ride to a missed flight | London Transport | |||
Heathrow Express | London Transport |