Our week of opining continues, with another of our new columnists chiming in on the privacy-versus-security issues that arise with backscatter x-ray machines, coming soon to airport security checkpoints near you. Picking up this Shift is none other than Stephen Schleicher, who examines what would happen if this runway of security is on a slippery slope. For the previous installments, go here, and here.

Maybe you haven't traveled lately, but airport security is already pretty tight. When traveling by air, we're subjected to inspections of our bags, "random pat-downs" and puffer technology that detects chemical residue on our bodies and belongings. Recently the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) introduced backscatter x-ray screening devices at several U.S. airports that give a very revealing look at travelers.

Unlike traditional x-rays, which pass through or are absorbed by objects, the type of x-rays produced by backscatter devices use "Compton Scattering." X-rays hit material and scatter depending on the atomic makeup of the object. Organic materials like explosives are made up of low atomic materials (oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, etc.) and show up brightly. Metal objects will generally absorb the x-rays causing them to turn dark on screen. Regardless, the backscatter images reveal the shape and form of objects hidden in complex structures.

Backscatter scanners have been used quite effectively in the shipping industry, allowing inspectors to quickly and accurately view the contents of cargo containers. While backscatter technology may help identify potentially dangerous items, you've probably already seen a potential issue when it comes to scanning humans. We're made up of organic material, and when Backscatter x-rays are turned on an individual, inspectors are able to see right through clothing revealing an image that more or less shows the person naked.

Many see this kind of exposure as a violation of privacy. The ACLU has provided testimony as to why this virtual strip search is a bad idea, saying routine use will actually lead to further delays in passenger travel as any shape that looks suspect will require further, possibly humiliating, hands-on inspections.

But according to AS&E, the company that manufactures the Backscatter technology, inmates at prisons actually prefer this kind of inspection to physical contact. AS&E also points out the backscatter machines being piloted in Phoenix, Arizona use the company's SmartCheck filter option, which only shows the outline of the person being scanned and any objects in question. Still, the outlines of male and female genitalia can clearly be seen.

Beyond the privacy issue, the other concern among travelers is the threat of radiation. Even though backscatter x-rays are powerful enough to penetrate 12 inches of steel and pick up detail through 50 feet of cargo hold, they are mild compared to other x-ray technologies. In fact, one would have to be bombarded by the machines over 2,500 times before even approaching a dangerous level. It's unlikely an airline passenger would ever be scanned this many times in one week, but it does bring into question exposure issues should backscatter x-ray machines be put into wider use at locations like schools, train stations, and federal office buildings.

While the government claims these scanners are to protect us in the War on Terror, what about the War on Drugs? Backscatter x-rays do not penetrate much beyond the surface of our skin, which means "mules," who conceal drugs inside their body cavities, could still make it through a checkpoint. It won't take long for those on a suicide mission to figure out putting a bomb in their body is a perfect way to thwart the system. As interesting as backscatter x-ray scanners are, at this stage they still have many flaws ripe for exploitation. The cunning and wily will always find a way to beat the system at the expense of good honest people who don't want their privates on display.

Since 1976, the number of hijackings has declined. Between 1987 and 1996 only 212 planes worldwide were hijacked, with the majority of those hijackings committed by escaping refugees. Since 9/11 there has been only one hijacking (Turkish Airlines Flight 1476, with the incident ending peacefully with no deaths). Why then are passengers continually subjected to increased scrutiny via security claims? Because we allow them to. Because we are scared, and even if it is uncomfortable and invades our privacy, it makes us feel more secure.

If this type of security screening is allowed to continue, I see a vision of the future where one day we will be forced to strip naked, put on a government-sanctioned jumpsuit, be shackled to a seat, and then attached to an IV drip to knock us out in transit — all in the name of safety. — S.S.

Stephen Schleicher has crossed the country several times over the last couple of years working as an editor, graphic designer, videographer, director and producer. He currently shares his knowledge with students of media and Web development at Fort Hays State University. Stephen is the man behind the Coolness Roundup podcast, and loves reading comic books in his spare time.