[ RadSafe ] NYC permitting of detectors: NYPD proposes some changes.

[Maury Siskel]

It seems reasonable and constructive to recognize that the shamans and 
witch doctors are never far from us. Some are genuine believers in 
spooks and magic while others are interested in power (control of other 
members of our hers)  Thus the correct action on our parts is to 
minimize this control. At any point in time whenever this is recognized, 
then the power must be sensed and withheld by whatever means might be 
available. There is no wiser expenditure of resources; but in a 
practicable sense, the resources must be assigned priorities and we can 
only do the best we believe we can.

Such situations seem so simple. but in the execution, few human choices 
could be more complex. I hope we can stop this silliness in its tracks, 
but obviously the task is not easy.

Please consider the relative effectiveness of individual letters and 
faxes rather than bulk petitions. Town meetings could be very effective 
for exposing these controllers among us.

Best,
Maury&Dog.
==============================

Philip L Smith wrote:

>I believe the real intent of this proposed legislation is to deny personal radiological knowledge and protection for the average citizen. You guys will all get to keep and carry your exotic and expensive instrumentation.  But, woe to the poor civilian who wants a rate meter for making informed decisions about his own safety.  The prevailing mind
>set among "authorities" seems to be "we're here to protect you and you better not try to protect yourself".  The sad truth is that a nuclear detonation in NYC will have all of the "authorities" hunkered down for days, probably unable to even communicate with those they are duty bound to protect.  The fallout zone would most likely cover much of Manhattan and substantial nearby populations.  Not only do they want to deny those populations access to the most basic instrumentation for evaluating shelter,  they also have strenuously avoided frank public discussion of prudent nuclear civil defense measures.  I think they sincerely believe that timely evacuation, directed by them, is the only reasonable response to a nuclear detonation.  This is sheer madness!  With almost daily press about nuclear terrorist threats it is high time we were allowed to use the words civil and defense in the same sentence.  Civil defense must involve civilians.  The more instrumentation of all types deployed the better.  In a 50 R/hr field, nobody will be directing traffic - the most desirable instrument will be the simplest, not the most accurate.  
>
>Phil Smith
>http://www.NukAlert.com 
> 
>------------------
> 
>Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:36:28 -0700
>From: Steven Dapra <sjd at swcp.com>
>Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] NYC permitting of detectors: NYPD proposes some
>changes.
>To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.1.20080204182711.009f5050 at mail.swcp.com>
>
>Feb. 4
>
>         Is anyone doing anything to identify and notify all the 
>organizations and companies in NY state that will be affected by this
>law, 
>or that could be affected by it?  I wonder if the Health Physics Society 
>has taken any action.  How about the ACGIH, as well as any companies that
>
>test air, water, or soil; or who do air and water monitoring?  What is 
>needed is a groundswell of opposition that will destroy this proposed
>law, 
>and that will serve as a warning to any municipality that might try to
>pass 
>a similar one within its jurisdiction.
>
>         Detector manufacturers need to be notified too.  This thing
>could 
>easily cause a great deal of upheaval and expense for them when they have
>
>to comply with new (and possibly unreasonable) technical 
>specifications.  Some companies could even be forced out of business by
>the 
>additional costs to them of complying with this thing.  As is sometimes
>the case in bidding specifications, manufacturing specifications could be 
>written in a way that would favor certain manufacturers.
>
>Steven Dapra
>  
>