Comments about ‘Jason Chaffetz says body scans still a bad idea’

We all know what a naked body looks like, it's no big thing, I would rather see that then a BIG BOOM and everyone dieing. It's wrong for U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz is defending his proposal to prohibit U.S. airport screeners from using imaging machines that can look through clothes to detect weapons or explosives.The Utah Republican told The Salt Lake Tribune in Washington that he believes technology is available that can identify explosives without invading the public's privacy. HE'S NOT A EXPERT. He's just a law maker.

It's a travesty that our government is spending billions of $$ on security only to have the passengers on the plane discover and stop the incident. My question is why in the world does a person on the U.S. terrorist list have a valid visa to the U.S. in the first place. I suggest we start with looking at the terrorist lists, comparing with our visa and passport lists and canceling the documents of anyone who is on both lists. We can talk about body scans later.

Again, Mr. Chaffetz's issue seems not to be so much airline safety as a personal feud with the TSA ... in a word, ego.

Chaffetz doesn't seem particularly concerned about the privacy issues bound in the PATRIOT Act ... and it's hard to creatively determine a significant difference here from there.

Body scan is tech that is available now. Lets use it to save lives, not to mention valuable time while traveling. Someone has to input data to keep any list up to date and how do we know that data is current? We need solutions now and not wait for congress to drag it feet!

I agree with Mr. Chaffetz. This is still a free country-- is it not? If a person has a clean record they should not be scanned by their own choice.

Chaffetz is wrong on this one. I've been through the millimeter wave scanner at Salt Lake International several times and have no problem with it, nor would I have any problem with my wife or children going through. The airport goes to great lengths to protect the privacy of people being scanned, and the scan is far more effective than a metal detector. It would have stopped Abdulmutallab dead in his tracks. Spending twenty seconds in that machine is far better than spending the last hour of your flight being treated like a prisoner.

The body scanners are a big invasion of privacy

The guy that did this had a clean record--- Chaffetz is wrong ---- again.

I wouldn't want to go through the scanner. I believe in modesty. Don't tell me this scan wouldn't be abused. I agree with Chaffetz. Let it be a secondary screening device. Those people who trigger alarms give up their right to privacy and modesty. The law abiding should be allowed modesty.

BTW, until a year ago I used to fly twice a week.

I can't believe it but I agree with Jason.

More individual rights being taken away.

Remember the Patriot Act.

If you want the "right" to fly on an airplane, then those who provide those planes should have
the "right" to ensure a safe flight. It's better than a wing and a prayer--literally.

There are a number of pros and cons in regard to using the body scanner - effectiveness, cost, practicality, logistics - but there is hardly any factor less important than "modesty". Really, has anyone checked Chaffetz's birth certificate? I'm less and less convinced he's old enough to serve in Congress.

If they want to get rid of the imager, then get rid of the patriot act too. seems like a fair trade to me. But of course, peanuts Chaffetz will never go for that. It is about his inconveniences only.

Modesty as argument to allow endangering the lives of hundreds of passengers on a plane? Insane. This is the ultimate point where puritan obsession with the body has brought us.

"Individual right" as another argument? OK, but then learn to fly all by yourself. As long as you travel with hundreds of others, please accept your responsibility towards them.

Oh, after a few planes blow up, I douby we'll still be squaking about privacy...

I think Chaffetz is feeling inadequate.

to have a choice of "fully screened" flights and "Civil Rights" flights. I guarantee that "fully screened" flights would be full (and sell at a premium) while "Civil Rights" flights would be practically empty and eventually no longer offered. I fly a lot and all I care about it how safe the plane is. Strip me down naked if you have to. If that is what it takes to ensure that nobody sneaks bombs on board then so be it. I want to come home to my family.

I still wonder how a guy like Chaffetz got elected. The fact that he worked for NuSkin spoke volumes but nobody seemed to care. Hopefully, with this latest incident his ridiculous bill will be stopped.

No one in this country has the "right" to fly in an airplane. However we do have the right to life (along with liberty and the pursuit of happiness). Rep. Chaffetz's bill will obviously give terrorists valuable time not only to attempt this type of operation again, but also to come up with new tactics in the mean time. While he may be right that there are other systems that can detect explosives not one is yet effective enough to even be given a trial basis at an airport. At the same time the full body imagers are available and effective.

If Rep. Chaffetz does not rescind this bill then I call upon everyone who does not want to see their right to life violated to make sure he is defeated in his bid for re-election in the upcoming elections.

Hey Chaffetz. Park the pride by the curb and admit you are wrong!!! Look at the evidence of PETN explosives. They can only be detected at best by full-body scanners!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is no other screening currently available that will pick up PETN, which with only 50 grams, can blow a hole in the side of an airliner, as shoe-bomber Richard Reid tried to do. This latest attempt was 80 grams sewn into the guy's underwear! A full body scanner would have revealed reason to be suspicious meriting further examination and discovery. So 300 passengers al pass through a scanner before boarding. So what? better to be alive.

the puffer machines installed at many airports would have detected this material. No need for the invasive nak-u-fyer scanners. Jason's right on this one.