"No thanks, I’ve already had cancer, just feel me up or whatever."
Brilliant!
When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
11–20 of 193 posts
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#12Great moral: "Information, properly delivered, is power."
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#13Direct link to the printed letter (PDF):
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#14How dumb are people to not realize it's radiation one way or another? Do they think it's "magic" they can see through your clothes? How can there be a class action lawsuit against printer ink, but not against radiating you for no reason with devices that have no track record? Where are these devices for entering Congress or the Whitehouse if they are so safe? So would the President choose the radiation naked picture…
> So would the President choose the radiation naked picture method or the deep groping method for his daughters? I'd seriously like that question asked at some point by the press.
No one in the press has the guts to ask him this. But man, I'd love to see that too.
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#15I agree that having to choose between flying and getting groped/strip-scanned or not flying is ridiculous, and I'm happy that he and others were able to circumvent this. But he says they were using Millimeter Wave Scanners, which as far as I can tell, and contrary to his argument, do not use x-rays. That letter refers to another type of machine, x-ray backscatter scanners.
Well, firstly, the fact that the TSA employee didn't challenge that statement tells me that either that employee isn't properly informed or he/she knows more than what is publicly known. I'm gonna go on a limb and say it's the former rather than latter.
Secondly, it shouldn't be a question of whether the machine is x-ray or millimeter wave. Both of those emit radiation and until there's definitive proof that one or both do not cause damage, they shouldn't be in use.
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#16How dumb are people to not realize it's radiation one way or another? Do they think it's "magic" they can see through your clothes? How can there be a class action lawsuit against printer ink, but not against radiating you for no reason with devices that have no track record? Where are these devices for entering Congress or the Whitehouse if they are so safe? So would the President choose the radiation naked picture…
"Where are these devices for entering Congress or the Whitehouse if they are so safe?"
Jackpot. Part of the trouble is that the policy makers don't have to swallow their own medicine. They have private jets and political connections that place them above their own laws. It's not even that they are "above" the law. They simply write laws that won't involve them.
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#17How dumb are people to not realize it's radiation one way or another? Do they think it's "magic" they can see through your clothes? How can there be a class action lawsuit against printer ink, but not against radiating you for no reason with devices that have no track record? Where are these devices for entering Congress or the Whitehouse if they are so safe? So would the President choose the radiation naked picture…
> So would the President choose the radiation naked picture method or the deep groping method for his daughters? I'd seriously like that question asked at some point by the press. No one in the press has the guts to ask him this. But man, I'd love to see that too.
To be fair, not just the President but also any Congressperson/Senator that is interviewed for the rest of the year on any program.
Which one do you want your mother/children experiencing, naked picture radiation, deep groping, or would you instead choose the $10,000 fine for leaving (and possibly being put on the no-fly list forever)?
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#18Just curious, does anyone have some hard evidence that the MWBS is a cancer risk?
I ask this simply because anti-X activists have pushed junk science claims of the form "X causes CANCER" many times [1], so I'm a little dubious. I don't think fighting civil liberties violations with junk science is a useful tactic, if that is indeed what is happening here.
[1] For example, feminists pushed the "silicone gel implants cause breast cancer", anti-bioscience types push "GMO foods cause cancer". Drug warriors have pushed "pot causes cancer" and anti-abortion crusaders pushed "abortion causes cancer".
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#19I thought it was established on HN that that letter about safety had been properly addressed (it's from April).
Yes, the letter is from April, but not many people buy the FDA response to the letter.
See: http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/11/fda-sidesteps-sa...
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/11/12/131275949/protest...
Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.
#20I agree that having to choose between flying and getting groped/strip-scanned or not flying is ridiculous, and I'm happy that he and others were able to circumvent this. But he says they were using Millimeter Wave Scanners, which as far as I can tell, and contrary to his argument, do not use x-rays. That letter refers to another type of machine, x-ray backscatter scanners.
Well, firstly, the fact that the TSA employee didn't challenge that statement tells me that either that employee isn't properly informed or he/she knows more than what is publicly known. I'm gonna go on a limb and say it's the former rather than latter. Secondly, it shouldn't be a question of whether the machine is x-ray or millimeter wave. Both of those emit radiation and until there's definitive proof that one or b…
I'm not arguing for them. I'm arguing for arguing well.