Dogs or machine? US debates body scanners

“The single best way to find a bomb-making device or bomb-making materials is the canine,” said Jason Chaffetz, a Republican lawmaker from Utah, who led the dog caucus, arguing that canines are cheaper and less invasive than body scanners which can see through one’s clothes.

Dogs are exceptional at sensing explosives, do not require software upgrades, do not depreciate with use and might even be able to detect bombs implanted under a person’s skin, he said.

And dogs are widely accepted by the public, Chaffetz said while arguing over the relative merits of dog vs machine in assuring national security at the Congressional hearing on airport security. Chaffetz said canines are missing one thing that body scanners have — lobbyists.

“That’s what the problem is,” he said. “If you look at those lobbyists who pushed through those machines, they should be ashamed of themselves, because there is a better way to do this and it’s with the canines.”

Transportation Security Administration’s John Sammon said dogs have limitations. They require frequent breaks, he said, while the imaging machines can be worked tirelessly.