[ RadSafe ] NYC permitting of detectors: NYPD proposes some changes.
sjd at swcp.com
Tue Feb 5 20:44:09 CST 2008
Maury is correct. Individual letters and faxes are by far the
most effective way of making one's voice heard. Bulk or not, petitions are
scoffed at or outright ignored.
At 02:32 AM 2/5/08 -0600, Maury Siskel wrote:
>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.
>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.
More information about the RadSafe