I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.
Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.
BBC News - Dutch press EU to adopt passenger scannersLast month, the EU Transport Commissioner, Antonio Tajani, told Euro MPs that further testing was required to determine how such scanners might be operated.[=Delay]
"It is the Commission's view that the application of imaging technology as means of security screening at airports must be optional and passengers must be given the choice between them and physical control by airport screeners," he told the European Parliament.
The Telegraph and the BBC, whether biased or not, have used facts in their articles, and have not made up a fake story here.
The EU is delaying it all because they haven't really stated yet whether or not they agree with the notion of the move, and whether or not to allow what they claim to be a "violation of the individual's right to privacy".
In the common modern Democracy, there is this thing called "The comparison between individual's rights".
This means, that whenever there is an argument that requires the abolishing/violation (or most likely, partial abolishing/violation) of one of the involved rights, the value with the bigger importance wins.
e.g., the police is allowed to breach into the house of a potential villain when there is a fear for the right to life of a person, violating this potential villain's rights in the process.
Why? Because the right to life is the most important right, and will be secured even when it means the violation of other, lesser rights.
Same goes for this case, the right to life overwhelms the right to privacy, and while everything should be done to minimize the damage to the right to privacy of the individuals, the right to life should be secured.
Last edited by Apocalypse; 01-01-10 at 11:42 AM.
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."
We can spend our time criticizing the previous admin, or we can analyze the current one. The Bush admin received a lot of heat for ignoring or sitting on intel they inherited from the Clinton admin in the eight months prior to 9/11. Now our government is found to be repeating itself. Are we just giving it the benefit of the doubt until a specific Jihadist act of terror of satisfactory measure occurs?
Ya know, technology is great. But we've got to get back to the point where any people in a position to descriminate (in the true sense of the word) for security reasons are allowed to use profiling, common sense and gut judgement.