The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 17, 2012, 08:51 PM   #1
heyjoe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Posts: 165
NYPD working to develop gun sensors

http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york...sors-1.3458724

"The NYPD is teaming up with the Pentagon to develop a device that can spot guns and suicide bomber vests under clothes, police Commissioner Ray Kelly said Tuesday. The new scanners pick up the body's natural radiation and then spot what is blocking it, Kelly said."

well so much for concealed means concealed. Our right to privacy diminshes daily.
heyjoe is offline  
Old January 17, 2012, 09:19 PM   #2
Crazy88Fingers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 934
The worst part is, this sort of thing doesn't surprise me anymore.
__________________
"And I'm tellin' you son, well it ain't no fun, staring straight down a .44"
-Lynyrd Skynyrd
Crazy88Fingers is offline  
Old January 17, 2012, 09:26 PM   #3
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
On one hand, I'm all for technology and technology like this being pushed forward in development. On the other I see the abuse of technology like this almost unavoidable in a domestic capacity. This kind of technology would be useful for fighting the types of war we currently engage in where combatant and civilian are hard to distinguish often until it is too late. However at home, even with "restrictions" something like this would be nearly impossible to even prevent casual unintentional misuse let alone purposeful violations of our privacy and constitutional rights.
sigcurious is offline  
Old January 17, 2012, 10:43 PM   #4
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Orwell's predictions were about thirty years early... Should have been 2014.
MLeake is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 12:52 AM   #5
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,192
Quote:
The new scanners pick up the body's natural radiation and then spot what is blocking it, Kelly said
I can only imagine what it would take to power and attenuate such equipment, particularly in crowded places. The potential cost beggars the imagination.

It won't work. It'll be tested, and by the second day the system is live, people will have found ways to circumvent and spoof it. In the end, it'll be a boondoggle and a massive waste of taxpayers' money.

From a 4th Amendment standpoint, I despise it. From a practical standpoint, I'm not worried.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 12:55 AM   #6
kinggabby
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 22, 2011
Location: OKC
Posts: 473
Quote:
From a 4th Amendment standpoint, I despise it. From a practical standpoint, I'm not worried.
I agree. As long as I am legal I am not worried.
kinggabby is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 06:06 AM   #7
Crosshair
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2004
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 5,320
It's junk tech like that which makes images like this possible.



and then they have the balls to tell us that we arn't spending enough.
__________________
I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me.
Crosshair is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 07:11 AM   #8
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,205
In this country the more the government spends the more kick backs and corruption they can get away with.
rebs is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 07:49 AM   #9
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
Weren't things like that tried out in Vietnam, sort of? Or was that "people sniffers?"
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 08:35 AM   #10
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
Talk unreasonable search and seizure, so If I have something metal like a cell phone or a insulin pump under my clothes i'm going to be subject to search because the machine thinks it is a gun? This just goes too far, in Airports I can understand, to get into certain high profile events like new years eve @ time square, or federal buildings I can understand but just to walk down the street is too far. This is a bad idea, because unless it someone JUST sees guns and bomb vests the police are going to be dealing with a lot of false positives and a lot of lawsuits because of it.



If this system ever does go live i would love to organize a protest where about 10,000 people took metal objects vaguely but not really shaped like guns, stuck them in their coats and then walked around NY just causing havoc with police responces. Knowing the NYPD they would probably just open fire, shoot first ask questions later.
Patriot86 is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 12:54 PM   #11
Musketeer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2005
Posts: 3,731
Reminds me of when they started doing bag checks to ride te NYC subway. The official position was if you volunteer to ride you give implied consent to be searched. Nobody has to ride the subway...

Then, while listening to the Li
__________________
"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." Thomas Jefferson

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin
Musketeer is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:00 PM   #12
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,614
There was a law review article a few years ago, titled something like Superman's X-Ray vision and the 4th Amend.

So issues like this have been in discussion for quite awhile. I'm sure that the differential use of such according to ethnicity and race would start quite the firestorm eventually.

Of course, for some of you it would be quite legit if store owners or employers deployed these to guard their private property castles.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:01 PM   #13
Musketeer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2005
Posts: 3,731
Reminds me of when they started doing bag checks to ride te NYC subway. The official position was if you volunteer to ride you give implied consent to be searched. Nobody has to ride the subway...

Then, while listening to the Lionel show on local talk radio in NYC a NYPD office called in and was asked about what was justifiable cause for a search. His answer was "anyone who turns around and not ride rather than be searched.". So you decide not to undergo a voluntary search and that act justifies an involuntary search... That is exactly how this technology would be implemented on a day to day basis.

This technology may not work well now but I bet enoug money is being injected to develop it that this will be common within 20 years. Legislators and Presidents will side with it as "Public Safety" no matter what party they come from. No elected official wants to be known as having voted against a measure which would have spotted a rampage killer. If the SCOTUS doesn't clearly smack this down as an illegal search be prepared for it to become a part of life in a generation.
__________________
"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." Thomas Jefferson

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin
Musketeer is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:22 PM   #14
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by musketeer
Then, while listening to the Lionel show on local talk radio in NYC a NYPD office called in and was asked about what was justifiable cause for a search. His answer was "anyone who turns around and not ride rather than be searched.". So you decide not to undergo a voluntary search and that act justifies an involuntary search... That is exactly how this technology would be implemented on a day to day basis.
That's exactly my problem with search procedures today. TSA uses the same general argument. Police in a traffic stop use the same argument. You have the right to refuse a search but your refusal is reasonable suspicion for a non-consensual search. "I can't look in your car? We'll just call for the sniffer dog then..."

You're right, same thing will happen here.

They'll ask permission and do the search if you consent and consider your refusal to be suspicion for a non-consensual search.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:33 PM   #15
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
PK, it's a valid concern. However, all things being equal, if it comes to the police finding anything your lawyer would probably prefer it if you had not granted permission. It might give him an angle for getting the search thrown out. Giving permission because you feel like it's pointless to say no will nullify any such defense attempt.
MLeake is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:34 PM   #16
KLRANGL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 958
I actually wrote a paper for my "Image Processing for Homeland Security Applications" class on the subject of these new scanners that are in development to detect concealed bombs/weapons. You'd be surprised how accurate the newer millimeter-wave detection systems are at decent range and with low power constraints. Some of the active ones actually create impressive 3D images, and can even use the electromagnetic resonance of an object to determine what the object is made of.
Problem is they are possible to foil, especially the passive systems mentioned in the OP. There are also a few health risks involved that would need to be worked out first.
__________________
And it's Killer Angel... as in the book
KLRANGL is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:40 PM   #17
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLeake
PK, it's a valid concern. However, all things being equal, if it comes to the police finding anything your lawyer would probably prefer it if you had not granted permission. It might give him an angle for getting the search thrown out. Giving permission because you feel like it's pointless to say no will nullify any such defense attempt.
Beyond violating rights, the problem on a practical level is that they're not going to find anything in my car anyway so if I refuse and they call the sniffer dog, I'm just wasting time. I consider it compliance under coercion. Not that I've ever been searched but if I were to be asked I would probably give consent rather than wasting time waiting for the dang dog.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:48 PM   #18
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
PK, not sure how I'd react. I'm not worried about the search, either. I guess it would depend on how much of a hurry I was in that day, as to whether I felt like standing on a principle.

On a sort-of related note, another technological Big Brother-ism that bothers me is the taking of mobile devices to check GPS history, and whatever else they feel like checking. I have not personally encountered the practice yet, but have read about it in newspapers. Seems like an awful lot of power to give somebody, without a warrant.
MLeake is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 01:53 PM   #19
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,537
Speaking of dogs, I'm not sure how this new-fangled machine is all that different anyway.... the police already randomly walk the subways, airports and train stations with sniffer dogs, constantly searching all around. Who consented to THAT search?
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 02:39 PM   #20
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Thanks, PK, now I have the security dog cartoon from The Far Side stuck in my head....
MLeake is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 07:02 PM   #21
hermannr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 24, 2011
Posts: 730
If you are will to sacrafice freedom for security, you will have neither. NYC is not one the slippery slope, they hit bottom years ago.

The first person they use this on will kill it in Federal court, after the "evidence" is thrown out of normal court.
hermannr is offline  
Old January 18, 2012, 09:44 PM   #22
jgcoastie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 2,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by KLRANGL
There are also a few health risks involved that would need to be worked out first.
For those of you that do not know, RF (radio frequency) radiation can cause long-term health risks. Namely to the eyes and/or testes of a human, being that those are the two softest tissue types on the human body.

4th Amendment concerns aside, I doubt the feasibility of an "active" (meaning a RADAR-type system where RF is transmitted in a directional pattern and receives reflections of objects to generate an image) system to be fully operational and effective without subjecting unknowing citizens to potentially harmful RF radiation.

I also doubt the effectiveness of a "passive" (does not transmit, only receives a wide range of signals and filters out undesired signals based on what I would presume to be a complex system of filters and processors in such a fancy piece of equipment) system to reliably locate weapons and accurately distinguish them from other everyday consumer items such as watches, metal pens, keys, cell phones, PDA's, etc...

I don't think the technology is there, quite frankly, and I think it's a fool's errand that will result in quite a few lawsuits for many different reasons....
__________________
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." -Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights.
jgcoastie is offline  
Old January 19, 2012, 07:08 AM   #23
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
While I understand people's concerns, there will be many people who see the issues differently. There are those, who we may call the Silent Majority, who might be seeing an anarchy versus security issue. Most people will prefer security over anything else, historically (I think), and will see it as a law and order issue.

Law and order as a political issue is nothing new and was very much a hot button topic 40 years ago. Collectively, people forget nothing and there is never any going back to before when something became an issue. It will always be too late.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11851 seconds with 7 queries