Camera That Sees Through Clothes

From 80 feet away.
link

I gotta get me one!

I have seen pictures of what these cameras show. It's not like seeing people naked (as they say, no specific anatomical details are visible), but the general outlines of the body do show up very clearly. However, using one for voyeur purposes would be about like junior-high kids getting their thrills from seeing cross-sections of girls' bodies in sex-ed class. If you really want to see nudity, internet has huge amounts of much more detailed information available...

Drooling over that is one of the saddest things I've seen around here.

This is what shows up from the Thruvision unit.



http://www.thruvision.com/home/

I have one of the old Sony 8mm Handycams with Niteshot that was made before they found they could see through certain clothes with an IR pass filter. They later changed the design after the media went hogshit crazy over it.

No, I don't have the IR pass filter.

Fourth Amendment? Never heard of it.

How is this unlawful search or seizure. Or are you just afraid that you might not be able to carry into stores, who don't want you to carry, anymore?

The first time a cop uses it and then says "this gave me probable cause", it opens the flood gates. Might as well just stop trying to pretend we have any protections from police searches at this point.

Sadly, we'll just go along with it in the name of security or something.

Actually if it is on camera and he can prove it was you, how is this unlawful or bad. If he has you or someone else on camera (recorded) and it clearly is showing a firearm or bomb or something.......

I can see how it could go wrong, but so can so many other things.

I'm not sure if this would lead to more or less unnecessary body cavity checks in airports and the like.

I'm afraid the cops might see my crack pipe.

Oh Noes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It should depend entirely on why the camera was pointed at you in the first place. If you are entering a secure location would be one thing, but just walking down the street would be another, and I guarantee the police would use it on people just standing on a street corner or in a coffee shop or any place else they are.

You go through that X-Ray machine and get all but stripped searched everytime you get on an airplane. Are you willing to go through the same process everytime you walk out the house int he name of security? When you go to get a loaf of bread you'll have those cameras on you, when you go to the dentist, when you pick up the kid from daycare, everywhere you go those camera will be watching you, knowing if you have anything under your clothes. It might not be illegal, but you've given the cops a reason to stop you and search you because of "probable cause".

I don't like it.

I know Flow and I are paranoid about a lot of things, but...dude....

I can see that happening in England or Chicago, but just anywhere? I doubt anyone will give the police the right to use just any old time. Beside who is going to pay for all of the equipment and storage of data in the US?

Small town police departments would love to have this as a money making venture. Throw up some new fees and fines, watch an area for "security" and pop the violators. It would be no different than a speed trap.

And what would stop stores from getting the technology to "prevent shoplifting" and security? You got to Walmart to get shampoo and they know if you're packing, but they now have a reason to stop you at the doors as well.

It's not so much paranoia as much as looking at the track record of agencies that get these kinds of toys. Give them an inch and they take a mile.

It's a little embarrassing, but I have to admit I was scanned with one of these cameras at the airport recently...

I can't think of a small town with a big enough budget that one could afford this, and two that the community wouldn't go ape shit and the town council and mayor and so on wouldn't find a way to take away the new "toy"

Generally you are required by law to tell an officer that you're packing if you're stopped for a traffic violation, so idk where the floodgates are.

How much does this thing cost and which mayor would be willing to kill the golden goose?

In a traffic stop, but just walking down the street? What's to stop the police from sweeping a crowd for "security" and picking you out and pulling you aside? There should have been no reason for them to stop you int he first place much less search you, but with this tool they have all the justification they'll need.

Show me a small town mayor who wants to be re-elected and I will show you a major who is willing to shut it down.

JohnM would have loved this thread.

Why wouldn't he be reelected? Small towns put up with the Barney Fifes and the "you ain't from around here are you boy" cops all the time because they bring in the bucks that make sure the roads are paved and the parks are cleaned. Throw in the "we're doing it for security!!!!!" angle and this is the gift that keeps on giving for small towns.

How many residents do you think would vote for a mayor or sheriff, if they were proposing using this on the populace?

And then you sue the shit out of them.

Geez.

Boy there sure is a difference between rural Oklahoma and Rural by-go-Virginia (I think that's where your from ). Since the attitude you describe above would not be tolerated here.

Ted would have, too.

Still trying to figure out just how a small town would make money off of this....

What about privacy? I wouldn't want anyone looking to see if I had a boner. You know this would be abused.

Just to recap, this story is being run in England, so this is technically a Britnannya thread.

Brockville, Ontario. Population 28 000.

3 stealth cars and a K-9.

Small towns tend to be test beds for new cop toys before they cities blow 100 times the money to equip their guys.