This was obvious from the moment the story broke

As soon as I heard about the new scanners at Manchester Airport I realised that someone would use the "paedo" clause to protect children. And just a week later I am proved right as Action on Rights for Childen (Arch) claim the Rapiscan equipment could break the Protection of Children Act 1978, under which it is illegal to create an indecent image of a child. As a result, security staff at Manchester Airport have been banned from using new "see-through" security scanners on passengers aged under 18.

Excellent, do my rights not to be blown up count for less than the rights of a child not to be scanned?