Rule 34 Does Not Apply

Full-body scanners do NOT break child pornography laws.

Some midguided privacy advocates are complaining that the images produced by a full body scan would constitute child pornography.  While I normally am all for privacy, the advocates are just wrong this time.

Child pornography requires the creation of an indescent image of a minor.  While someone of us may feel self conscious about the scans, the images are hardly indescent.

When you think of porn, do you picture the image to the right?  Hell no!  Not only is this guy simply not in the kind of shape you need to be a porn star, the images are too vague and distorted to be titilating.

If you’re the type of person who can get off by seeing a weird glowing blue somewhat amorphous scan of a child, then you probably could get off just by seeing the child walking anywhere in the airport.  And, the scanners are certainly less creepy than their alternative: a pat down.

And just to drive the point home, which of the two images below do you think is more pornographic?