allynfolksjr wrote:
I've already had multiple CAT scans and X-Rays. I'd rather avoid more radiation if possible.
You get 10x from an average daily dose of sunlight.
I want to say that they are actually trying to keep from making transgendered passengers from feeling awkward or like less of a person, but I dunno. I think a lot of it has to do with ease of getting through the airport, hence the "Book your reservation as the gender on your ID" part. I also like that they say that, if you get a private screening, it will be with the gender that you _present as_.
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/transgender.shtm
That's nice, but I still contend that at present body scanners have no place anywhere. In the future they might a viable tool, if they can detect what they need to and be fast and efficient. If that ends up being the case you'll have to suck it up and deal with it just like they do on Star Trek(everyone who beams aboard has their entire body scanned for weapons, logs of everything are kept, and noone calls the ACLU).
But until that does happen(if that happens), metal detectors and bomb sniffers(each of which takes 30 seconds max) are all that are really needed for effective airport security. Those need to be enforced nationwide(as I said the FAA can do this), but things like how much of what kind of fluid you can take aboard, and how they handle the elderly or disabled can be handled by the individual airport.
JoeYoung wrote:
allynfolksjr wrote:
I've already had multiple CAT scans and X-Rays. I'd rather avoid more radiation if possible.
You get 10x from an average daily dose of sunlight. Oh right, and you're of course quoting the independent scientific study of the machines that was allowed and totally not blocked?
KermMartian wrote:
JoeYoung wrote:
allynfolksjr wrote:
I've already had multiple CAT scans and X-Rays. I'd rather avoid more radiation if possible.
You get 10x from an average daily dose of sunlight. Oh right, and you're of course quoting the independent scientific study of the machines that was allowed and totally not blocked?
You never respond to any topic where I actually need you. Go nitpick elsewhere. Also, your question is so grammatically terrible, I couldn't decipher what you intended to ask.
JoeYoung wrote:
KermMartian wrote:
JoeYoung wrote:
allynfolksjr wrote:
I've already had multiple CAT scans and X-Rays. I'd rather avoid more radiation if possible.
You get 10x from an average daily dose of sunlight. Oh right, and you're of course quoting the independent scientific study of the machines that was allowed and totally not blocked?
You never respond to any topic where I actually need you. Go nitpick elsewhere. Also, your question is so grammatically terrible, I couldn't decipher what you intended to ask.
What he's saying is that there have been NO studies to determine how much radiation one of these machines put out(and therefore you cannot know how much more or less there is than sunlight) and attempts to commission a study to get these facts have all been blocked.
picture unrelated to this, but relevant to the overarching discussion:
This issue aside, is that Ctrl-Alt-Delete? Wow, it looks completely unrecognizable from several years ago when I stopped reading, in a good way.
Woo, security theater. This is a really good/awful (depending on your point of view) article on why the TSA is useless:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-things-he-carried/7057/?single_page=true
Relatedly, Bruce Schneier has been blocked from testifying before Congress on this very issue.
I really wish they'd just use the dam bomb sniffers. They'll do the same job without all this BS.
Presumably the bomb-sniffing-machine companies aren't paying them as large a bribe as the dysfunctional-and-dangerous-scanner companies.
That's capitalism for you.
DShiznit wrote:
That's capitalism for you.
That's corporatism and government corruption for you. Capitalism involves a free market, and competition.
elfprince13 wrote:
DShiznit wrote:
That's capitalism for you.
That's corporatism and government corruption for you. Capitalism involves a free market, and competition.
Free market and competition means one side will do everything it can to dominate the other, including buying the government if it can. The catch-22 of governance and freedom is that if the government is strong enough to overpower the forces of corporate cronyism, it's denying people freedom. And if it grants complete freedom, than corporate cronies will simply buy the government, and then use that power to take away freedom for their own benefit.
You're presuming a legal system where corporations are people.
elfprince13 wrote:
You're presuming a legal system where corporations are people.
Every attempt to change that has been labeled "big government". I'm not sure what you want here.
DShiznit wrote:
Every attempt to change that has been labeled "big government". I'm not sure what you want here.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. A big tenet of libertarianism is that individuals have rights. Collections of individuals don't have any more rights than they would have had as individuals.
elfprince13 wrote:
I'm not sure what you're talking about. A big tenet of libertarianism is that individuals have rights.
I thought that was also a tenet of democracy....?
KermMartian wrote:
elfprince13 wrote:
I'm not sure what you're talking about. A big tenet of libertarianism is that individuals have rights.
I thought that was also a tenet of democracy....?
Individuals can still own large companies and wield huge amounts of power. In order to stifle them, you have to limit what an individual can do with the money and influence their success has granted them, which is seen as an overreach of government. You have to tell people what kinds of advertisements they can and cannot buy(a slippery-slope to state-controlled media and censorship according to some). You have to tell people who they can and cannot give gifts to, and how expensive those gifts can be. The conservative view, as I understand it, is that when you start telling people over a certain income level what they can and cannot do with their "hard-earned" money, you're discriminating against them based on their class(a.k.a. "class warfare") by curtailing the options and benefits of being a successful businessman, and telling them how to spend their money. This in turn (allegedly) makes it so less people will want to go into business and create economic growth because they'll have increasing rules and constraints as they go up the income ladder.
Like I said, it's the catch-22 of governance. The more freedom you give an individual, the more he can do to limit another individual's freedom for his own benefit.
http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/20/11305528-tsa-officer-turns-in-envelope-with-9500-in-cash?lite&ocid=todmsnbc11
Oh hey, the TSA made a mistake and hired someone that has a good set of moral standards! Nice of the guy to give back the money.
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.
»
Go to Registration page
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum