Wednesday, 30 May 2001 19:49 (ET)
Weapon-scanner raises constitutional concernBy KELLY HEARN, UPI Technology Writer BOULDER, Colo., May 30 (UPI) -- A federal agency is developing aradar-like device that uses electromagnetic waves to peer through clothingand detect concealed weapons from up to 15 meters (50 feet) away. News of the planned system comes amid national angst over domesticterrorism while adding a new dimension to the debate over theconstitutionality of high-tech policing practices. Government sources said they hope to have a working prototype of thedevice by year's end. The apparatus could one day be mounted on policevehicles and driven through unruly crowds to spot individuals carrying guns,knives and perhaps even plastic explosives. Engineers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Boulder,Colo., office are developing the technology with funding from the NationalInstitute of Justice and the Federal Aviation Administration. NIST is anon-regulatory federal agency. The technology is based upon a radar-like apparatus that illuminatesgroups of people with low-level electromagnetic waves that penetrateclothing but reflect off objects concealed beneath them. The reflectedenergy is collected, focused onto a detector array and ultimatelytransformed into an image that is displayed on a policeman's laptop, saidsources at NIST. However, "When does a technology-based search constitute a search forconstitutional purposes? How do you evaluate the level of intrusiveness?"posed James Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology, aWashington-based privacy group. Dempsey said U.S. courts have held that airport metal detectors do notviolate the Fourth Amendment about unreasonable search and seizure in partbecause such searches are overt and minimally intrusive, and becauseindividuals have a choice not to board an airplane. "In this case, your right to be in the street, and particularly your rightto protest, is more significant than the right to get on a jet plane.Furthermore, the use of this device is not overt and there is no warning ofit. Already, there are two strikes against it," he told United PressInternational. "My concern is over the way we think about these technological tools,"said Kristian Miccio, professor of law from Western State University Collegeof Law in Fullerton, Calif. "I fear we will put the concept of unruly crowdsand crime on the back burner while putting the technologies to enhance lawenforcement on the front burner. "In our fear of crime and terrorism, we are giving up so many freedoms wehaven't thought about," she continued in a telephone interview with UPI. "Wehave to decide what kind of culture and society we want to live in, that is,what are we willing to sacrifice in a war on crime." The system uses a high-powered, commercially available power source thatoperates at 95 gigahertz in a pulsed mode. NIST engineers said that such apower range would not impact human health or cause stoppages in pacemakers. "What we are doing is more along the lines of radar," said Erich Grossman,a NIST researcher on the project. "We illuminate an area with high frequencyradiation or three-millimeter-wavelength millimeter waves. That allows us tosee details but anything finer than three millimeters we won't see." While millimeter waves do not penetrate deep into human tissue, the devicecould conceivably detect, say, a metal plate near the surface of anindividual's skin, said Grossman. But, he said, the system produces imagesof objects rather simply detecting them, which would allow officers todiscriminate between benign objects and weapons. Grossman said the device is more powerful than airport metal detectors. "That's because our system doesn't require a cooperative subject," hesaid. "In other words, it's not a portal-based system where a subject has tocooperatively walk through a particular area. That is not intent of thisprogram." He said the device could operate in two modes. It can image an area twometers in diameter, which could cover one or two people. If the systemdetects a hotspot on a particular individual, the operator can zoom in moreclosely. Experts said legal considerations regarding such a device are analogous tothose involved in a case currently pending before the Supreme Court. Police in 1992 arrested an Oregon man after authorities used a high-techdevice to sense invisible heat waves emanating from his home. Policesubsequently obtained a search warrant and found a marijuana growingoperation. The suspect, Kyllo, claimed the search violated the FourthAmendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. "Like the Kyllo case, here is another technology that raises what iscurrently a major issue under the Fourth Amendment," said Dempsey. "There are many things to consider -- such as how intrusive is thissearch? Is it like taking a person's clothes off? Can the police see aperson's body or do they only get an image of the weapon? Those are factualquestions that make a difference in how it is assessed from a privacystandpoint," he said. When asked if officers would be able to see a detailed image of a humanbody, Grossman said that in theory engineers could incorporate a digitalcamera into the device, allowing the millimeter image to be superimposedover an optical image. Such a move would let officers see a person's body indetail. "In a practical system you could certainly do that, but we are notplanning to do that with the prototype," Grossman said. Officials at the National Institute of Justice and the Federal AviationAdministration said they could not provide comment by press time. The agencies have funded the project to the tune of $200,000 a year forabout three years, said Grossman. --Copyright 2001 by United Press International.All rights reserved.--