Strip search: camera that sees through clothes from 80ft away

Times Online UK ^ | 3/9/08 | Jonathan Leake

[xtinct]

A CAMERA that can see through people’s clothing at distances of up to 80ft has been developed to help detect weapons, drugs and explosives.

The camera could be deployed in railway stations, shopping centres and other public spaces.

Although it can see objects under clothes, its designers say the images do not show anatomical details. However, it is likely to increase fears that Britain has become a surveillance society.

The new technology, known as the T5000 system, has attracted interest from police forces, train companies and airport operators as well as government agencies.

It has been developed by ThruVision, an Oxfordshire-based company spun out from the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, one of the government’s leading physics research centres.

It was designed for use in spacecraft and astronomy but researchers soon realised that cameras capable of seeing through clouds of cosmic dust could also see through clothing. This week the camera will be displayed at the Home Office scientific development branch’s annual exhibition, Britain’s premier showcase for security equipment, to be held on an RAF airbase in Buckinghamshire.

ThruVision already offers a smaller system designed for office foyers that can scan through clothing at a range of 30ft-40ft.

[xtinct]

Great idea ???? Sheesh... doesn't Uncle Pervy have enough toys????

[SandRat]

...the images do not show anatomical details....

[Tamar1973]

Sheesh... doesn't Uncle Pervy have enough toys????

ROTFLOL! But if it's a gov't perv, it's ok, right? ; )

[Richard Kimball]

Those poor guys. If they ever scan me, they’ll never feel like real men again.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Already been done. ;)

[Bobalu]

[Fester Chugabrew]

I can break a camera like that without even trying.

[Army Air Corps]

They should have saved some money and bought some of these...

[big'ol_freeper]

...the images do not show anatomical details....

My guess is that size matters though. Being Irish, I'm never embarrassed to demonstrate my superior heritage. *wink*

[xtinct]

lmao... good one!!!

[BGHater]

RadGuard Lead-Lined Underwear

[xtinct]

roflmao ... too funny !!!!

[SandRat]

RadGuard Lead-Lined Underwear ...to keep Superman from checking out your package???

[BenLurkin]

[GVnana]

doesn't Uncle Pervy have enough toys????

And a government paycheck!?!?!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Will they use these cameras on Cindy Crawford and Salma Hayek? And how is a camera that can detect drugs through clothes supposed to NOT reveal private anatomical contours?

[processing please hold]

Do you think the muslims will take this sitting down? They’ll scream to the rafters, their modest women and all.

[Charles Henrickson]

GUILTY!

[IronJack]

Two thoughts:

1) One more reason to always wear clean undies;

2) the T5000 system

If it was the T101 from CyberDyne Systems, we'd be in real trouble.

[Past Your Eyes]

No anatomical details??? What fun is that?

[Revelation 911]

...the images do not show anatomical details....

I picture beavis and butthead getting a hold of this

[Revelation 911]

baby got back

[levotb]

Lost in all this idiocy (albeit very funny posts) is the simple fact that the Socialist Brits “blew it”, destroyed their country by allowing it to be invaded by millions of Muslims from Africa and the Middle East. NOW, because they allowed this senseless invasion (caused by GREED just as the Invasion here from Mexico was based on greedy big biusiness donors to the pols in charge), NOW they want to place cameras everywhere!! Why not, instead, DEPORT all aliens with suspicious backgrounds, be they legal or illegal? And THAT goes to to heart of the problem—liberalism. They are simply afraid of doing the right thing, of protecting themselves. They are LEMMINGS, the Brits!! And it is a sad, crying shame. We across the Lake are also lemmings in part because we fear the ACLU and La Raza more than we do doing what is right by U.S. citizens and U.S. law.

[Red_Devil 232]

Might not be a woman beneath that head to toe rag they wear! That is why they will be outraged!

[dr_who_2]

I've met up with a lot of terrorists with big posteriors, buck teeth, fanny packs, ipods, and ear rings. Walk around any shopping mall, and they're all over the place!

A choice between a Democrat European-style welfare state and a terrorism-obsessed surveillance state is not a choice.

[purpleraine]

Protects Superman’s package from Kryptonite.

[Doogle]

"LOOK!...Rosie's been smugglin illegals for years!"

[Bender2]

Re: My guess is that size matters though. Being Irish, I'm never embarrassed to demonstrate my superior heritage. *wink*

Well, big, old sport, I've done you a good turn... I keep getting e-mails in my Bulk Folder from an Talley A. Wacker titled "Add up to 4 inches to yours manhood" and thinking of you, I've forwarded it to you.

Like a complete Sears Craftsman ratchet set... I come from the factory with many different sized snap on attachments to give that extra thousand feet of stropping.

And to get back to the subject of this thread... I also come equipped with x-ray vision.

And sometime when Helen Thomas walks by, I see... more than I should!

[SIDENET]

baby got back

That's so 90s.

In today's vernacular, it's known as "junk in the trunk".

;-)

[SIDENET]

Yikes.

Sometimes ignorance truly is bliss.

[processing please hold]

I agree. But just watch them go postal over it. Any reason to right, that’s their motto.

[murphE]

That’s too much detail for me... dang.

[jdm]

G U I L T Y !

[big'ol_freeper]

I come from the factory with many different sized snap on attachments to give that extra thousand feet of stropping."

I did not realize you had your own company.

[Hodar]

I don’t know where you live; but in the airports I have visited; having to look at 80% of the specimens waiting in line would ruin my lunch.

Sure, there are few very attractive members of the opposite sex in and about the airport - but how many people like me do you have to look at, before you see one of those?

Besides, the way the young attractive women dress today, you aren’t going to see anything with this machine, that isn’t freely shown to the population at large. Not that I’m complaining, but if one looks closely enough at the pockets of these young ladies, you can count the change they are carrying.

[processing please hold]

right = riot

Eating while posting. Sorry

[weegee]

ALL this time I never knew that Helen Thomas wore a wig...

[Cheapskate]

They have no bill of rights to speak of and not all that many guns

They're screwed!!!!

[processing please hold]

I agree. It will be very interesting when or if the Brits put these cameras in their airports.

[LottieDah]

You mean it will just show rolls of fat?

[When do we get liberated?]

Why not? They obviously botched this....

[PGalt]

Cool. Thanks for posting. Funny FReeper comments BUMP!

[Revelation 911]

That’s so 90s.

.....youre expecting something modern from rochester ny

[nicko]

...ay, and there’s the truth of it...being Irish myself, I can, in some small measure perhaps, agree with you...holding up the beer, saluting your humble observation..

[SandRat]

You mean it will just show rolls of fat? ..errr.. Love Handles.

[SandRat]

Well.. after all it wasn’t designed by Larry Flynt.

[jws3sticks]

This source is not letting me post the picture, unfortunately. My point is that with this outfit, who needs those expensive and special machines?

http://www.starzhunter.com/c/carla_bruni_03/pics/carla_bruni_04.jpg

[karnage]

It ain’t der pockets I’m lookin at.

[Ronin]

Hasn’t this thing been around for the last five years or so?

[MaxMax]

However, it is likely to increase fears that Britain has become a surveillance society.

Um, it's a little too late for consideration about fears. The population
is probably already numbed to the prospect.