[ RadSafe ] World?s Pilots Reject Naked Body Scanners> Over Radiation Danger, Privacy Breach

[Clayton J Bradt]

"Flying on commercial aircraft, like driving a car on public roads, is not 
a right, but a privilege, dependant on the individual fulfilling a number 
of requirements.  If an individual does not like the requirements, they 
are welcome to try to change them.  In the mean time, if they don't want 
to get scanned or prodded, they had best look into alternative means of 
transportation." 


Mike, what alternative means of transportation did you have in mind?

You have hit the nail on the head, though:   In the land of the free and 
the brave there is no inherent right to travel by any mode of 
transportation.  Even on foot, US citizens can be stopped and questioned 
by government officials on the slimmest of pretexts; be demanded to 
produce identity papers, to explain where they are going and why, and even 
be poked and prodded.  Any resistance or refusal to comply would likely 
result in the subject being taken into custody for further questioning. 

We should ask ourselves why travel should be a privilege to be granted or 
denied by government bureaucrats.

Clayton J. Bradt
dutchbradt at hughes.net

>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 17:00:33 -0800
>From: "Brennan, Mike  (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] World?s Pilots Reject Naked Body Scanners>
                 Over Radiation Danger, Privacy Breach (re-sending 
without>>)
                 MailingList"            <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>Message-ID:
 <37C41083D3480E4BBB478317773B845D036BD568 at dohmxtum31.doh.wa.lcl>
>Content-Type: text/plain;               charset="utf-8"

>The point that seems to be missed here is that the reason for searching 
people before they board a plane it to make sure they do not have >items 
that will let them take control of the plane.  Pilots already have control 
of the plane.  Indeed, in the post-911 search for security, >it was 
proposed that pilots be given guns (I do not know if any airlines adopted 
this policy).  >

>Having read a number of comments on stories about these scanners, the 
overwhelming concern seems to be that someone will be seeing grainy 
>monochrome images of people "naked".  The radiation issue, if mentioned 
at all, is almost always an afterthought, and stated in a way that >makes 
it clear that the person expressing the concern has not bothered to become 
informed on the topic.  >

>To me there is a fair analogy to the people, particularly women of a 
particular religion, who do not want to have their picture taken for a 
>driver's license.  Flying on commercial aircraft, like driving a car on 
public roads, is not a right, but a privilege, dependant on the 
>individual fulfilling a number of requirements.  If an individual does 
not like the requirements, they are welcome to try to change them.  In 
>the mean time, if they don't want to get scanned or prodded, they had 
best look into alternative means of transportation. 

IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.