From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv
On 2026-10-19 1:20 p.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
. . .
So there's no solution to this and officers need to accept that there
will always be a risk in transporting women? That's definitely not ideal
but it may be the best we can hope for unless there's a tech
breakthrough or the problem becomes so rampant that roadside cavity
searches become the norm.
It's not just women in custody. See
Subject: Inexcusable shooting of two police officers, one dead, one seriously wounded
That prisoner was in custody, under arrest, in hospital. Neither medical staff nor police searched under his extensive skin folds.
That's a hell of an imaginative approach to concealed carry: get so fat
that you have immense folds of skin and use them as your holster!
You're right, it's *not* just women in custody! Now I want to know if
metal detectors could find guns hidden in skin folds, anuses, and
vaginas....
I asked ChatGPT this question:
A question about metal detectors. As a matter of police safety, it is important to ensure that detainees are not armed, particularly with
guns, but real-life incidents have shown that people have, on occasion,
hidden weapons in anuses, vaginas, and even under folds of skin (of very
obese people). Are there any portable metal detectors that could detect
such weapons?
The reply: =========================================================================== Yes, but with an important qualification: portable metal detectors can
detect some weapons concealed inside or against the body, but they
cannot reliably establish that a detainee is unarmed. The distinction is between detecting metal and determining where it is, what it is, and
whether a weapon is present.
There are several technologies worth distinguishing here. The fact that
a weapon is concealed in a body cavity or beneath a skin fold doesn't necessarily make it undetectable; the bigger issue is whether the
instrument can detect the material at that depth and distinguish it from
other objects or ordinary background signals.
1. What kinds of detectors are available?
A. Handheld metal-detecting wand
Portable
The familiar wand used by police and security staff can detect metal
close to the body, including metal that is not visible externally. It
may detect a metallic object concealed in a body cavity or beneath a
skin fold, depending on the device, the object, and its position. It
cannot reliably detect every weapon.
NIST
+1
mm wave scanner : Working, benefits and manufacturers | RF Wireless World
B. Millimetre-wave body scanner
This is the technology used in many airport body scanners. It can reveal objects concealed beneath clothing, including certain non-metallic
objects, but ordinary millimetre-wave scanners do not reliably see
inside the body. Portable versions and specialized screening systems
exist, but they are not equivalent to a handheld metal-detecting wand.
Office of the Privacy Commissioner
+1
Smiths Detection | Smiths Detection B-SCAN 16HR-FB | 603-249-9820
C. Whole-body transmission X-ray scanner
This is the more relevant technology when the concern is a weapon hidden inside a body cavity. Transmission X-rays pass through the body and can
reveal concealed objects internally, including some metallic and
non-metallic contraband. These systems are substantially more
specialized than portable wands and are generally installed in
controlled screening facilities.
Office of Justice Programs
+1
2. What about the particular hiding places you mention?
[This is a table with the first three items being the column titles. I
can't think of any good way to render this in Usenet.]
Concealment location
Handheld metal detector
More capable screening
Beneath a skin fold
May detect a metallic weapon
Body imaging may help
Inside the rectum or vagina
May detect a metallic weapon, but cannot guarantee detection
Transmission X-ray is designed to reveal internal objects
A weapon made mostly of plastic or ceramic
May fail to detect it
Imaging technology may reveal it, depending on the scanner and object
These are general capabilities, not guarantees for every device or every weapon. The U.S. National Institute of Justice's review of body-cavity screening technologies specifically distinguishes devices that detect
objects on the body's surface from those capable of detecting objects
inside it.
Office of Justice Programs
+1
3. Is there a genuinely portable solution for police?
For an initial safety check, yes; for a definitive all-clear, no.
A handheld wand is inexpensive, easily carried, and useful for screening
a detainee. But it detects metal, not weapons as such. It can alarm over harmless objects, and a negative result does not prove that a person is unarmed.
A practical police screening procedure therefore combines electronic
detection with other appropriate search procedures. Where there is a
credible suspicion of a weapon concealed internally, a handheld wand is
not a substitute for a more suitable examination.
There is also a legal and medical distinction: an internal examination
is much more intrusive than an ordinary pat-down and should be handled
under the applicable legal authority and appropriate medical safeguards.
One particularly relevant reference is the U.S. National Institute of Justice's report, Body Cavity Screening for Criminal Justice: Market
Survey. It examines the capabilities and limitations of the different technologies specifically for correctional and law-enforcement use.
Office of Justice Programs
The bottom line is that a portable wand can sometimes detect a metal
weapon hidden in the places you describe, but no ordinary handheld metal detector can be relied upon to rule out all concealed weapons. The
technology capable of detecting objects inside the body is generally
much less portable and more specialized. ==========================================================================
--
Rhino
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2