And why haven't we shipped dozens of these suckers to our boys and girls in uniform over in the sandbox??? And you'd think they'd be mighty popular with the IDF, as well.

To your point, I'm not so sure I like the invasion of privacy in a non-combat setting. However, I do think there is room a military application that should not be overlooked.

I agree with Omnibus Driver. That said, I bet the driver with the smack gets off scot free because of the method used to search his vehicle.

Harvey? Consider this your notification.

As soon as the local PD can afford it, they'll buy one. I think I can still blog from jail, right?

OD - who says they don't have one or several over there already?...

Grau - you're probably right, although the guy who wrote up the website text may have just been sloppy with the language, and the guy might've been under suspicion for other reasons before he was x-rayed.

Ogre - worst part is that I live right across the street from a light industrial zoned area, so I get those kind of trucks going by all the time. I'd never know what hit me.

I can see using it in a military setting and as far as the police using it, they already have the right to search under reasonable suspicion. Frankly, if they want to scan my vehicle, I am not adverse to it. I just don't want to see it abused which it has a potential for.

The mobile version that you are referring to is not something new. It has been around a lot longer than the personal scanning machine being piloted by the TSA.

The mobile van is currently not authorized in the U.S. for the direct intent of scanning individuals. It is primarily intended to scan vehicles and cargo containers. The vans are typically deployed at points of entry including ports and border crossings.

The website that you reference is that of the product manufacturer. They provide the equipment and guidelines to probable cause and consent is left up to those using the equipment.

As for "irradiating" people at random...the radiation from a scan of this nature is about .01 times the background radiation a person is exposed to in a day. Personally, I don't think the cargo containers or vechiles will mind a little dose of radiation at random. Given the democrats' desire to scan everything coming into port, it may not be that random. Once again, I don't think the cargo containers and vechiles will mind.

It is sad that steps are being made to make our country safer and people cry foul at every opportunity without making any attempt to educate themselves on what is really taking place. Seems like you are trying to make an issue for the sake of making an issue. Am I wrong?

Are you wrong? Yes & no.

I admit that I didn't spend a lot of time researching it. I just posted my first impressions of the pages on the manufacturer's site that I viewed, and the concerns that popped into my head. Since there's a pic on the site showing a truck driving down a city street, and an x-ray pic that shows people in the car being scanned, it made me wonder.

My intent was to put the questions out there in the hopes that someone would have more information on it than I did.

That someone would be you. And I want to thank you for taking the time to share what you know.

I'll also point out that the last sentence in my post was sincere, not sarcastic. Although the van obviously has the potential for misuse - like almost any law enforcement tool - I'm not going to go around shouting "UNCONSTITUTIONAL" until and unless I actually hear of it being misused. Which I haven't, and don't expect to.

Your response was very fair and thank you for responding. The picture is a bit deceiving and I understand your point.

The frustrated tone in my post was not and should not have been directed at you. Nonetheless, you are clearly open-minded and I am sure you can appreciate an opposing view point and arguement.

Regards,
Bob

Getting into the conversation a little late here :)
Anyhow, to answer two of the questions raised in comments above, these systems are being used by the military and the Backscatter vans already have 'personnel scanning technology' built into them:

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123051297

It seems unlikely to me that someone operating one of these devices to scan a vehicle would not look at the passengers and passerbys as well. Based on some legal classes I have taken, US law allows searches for 'probable cause' that is in direct view of a police officer and by extension, I suspect there is a good chance this technology will be allowed under this clause, especially with the current Supreme Court membership.