If security at airports is the real goal of the TSA, why are we not using the superior services of sniffer dogs, like our military in Iraq and our FBI are using?
Why are taxpayers being saddled with hugely expensive scanners, that invade privacy, violate the fourth amendment to the constitution and expose people to radiation?
Below, I have posted a link to a video (1) that proposes the use of sniffer dogs in USA airports as being considerably more efficient and significantly less expensive than the new body scanners. Additionally, the dogs do not pose radiation risk to people, nor are they an embarrassing invasion of privacy. The video proves that the body scanners are an unwarranted invasion. Hence, they are unreasonable, and in violation of the Bill of Rights, Article IV. (2)
The video has a demonstration of the FBI dog K-9 Program. The explosion detection canines can pick up about 19,000 different explosive combinations. The FBI uses these dogs to protect its headquarters, not full body scanners.
There is a clip of the sniffer-dog program in a Russia airport.
In Iraq, after discovering the explosive detectors costing millions of dollars did not work, traditional bomb dogs are now being used.
The cost of one body scanner is over $150,000. The cost of a sniffer dog is $8,500.
Michael Chertoff was the second United States Secretary of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush. Chertoff now represents one of two companies licensed to sell full-body scanners to the TSA.
(2) Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Comments
Subject: One major point on sniffer dogs you miss
From: John (Canada)
Date: Thu, January 6, 2011
To: Ken Adachi
Mr. Adachi,
Whoever wrote the article "sniffer dogs better, safer than
airport radiation" missed the fact that a sniffer dog can process travellers a
minimum 15 times faster than any scanning device can (that is my estimate, but
probably much higher). All a dog has to do is walk up a queue, and the job is
complete.
If you could forward this to the person who wrote that letter to the
editor I would appreciate it as his/her points are all valid (except the cost per
dog in Canada is a little higher!!) and would better underscore this clearly
simplistic solution that the US should be striving for. I've also argued that the
dogs would be in service longer than a machine, but that is only an assumption as
the machines are new and no one knows how long they will last.
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.