Because that's what it's going to take to reverse this trend. We need hundreds/thousands of non-violent protesters politely and professionally refusing these intrusions and getting arrested for it. Until that happens these intrusions will continue.
Because that's what it's going to take to reverse this trend. We need hundreds/thousands of non-violent protesters politely and professionally refusing these intrusions and getting arrested for it. Until that happens these intrusions will continue.
Your notion of vast public dissent is a fantasy.
I'm simply pointing out that until mass non-violent protest and the accompanying mass arrests civil liberties will continue to degrade. I never said it was going to happen. I just said it's what needs to happen.
Again, not condoning the invasion of privacy for security theater, but the "threat" of ionizing radiation is almost always over-stated.
High Penetration Model: (500/y/subject) < 2.0 uSv (0.2 mR) / per scan
An average human receives 10 uSv during an average day from background radiation, and 40 uSv on a cross-country flight. Living in Denver, CO for a year will expose you to 1800 uSv.
Some more dosages for various routine living situations and medical procedures (note, they are in mSv, not uSv): http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/R/Rad...
I was trying to imply that the argument of "it's not that bad" can quickly become moot considering that imaging companies have more powerful scanners standing by for purchase & use. It really becomes a question of how much is too much? And, for what benefit am I being dosed with an extra amount of radiation?
Unfortunately, most travelers are unaware that they are even being dosed with radiation by a scanner. No doubt, the TSA would like to keep that fact hidden.
And for basically no value-add, since it's the TSA.
All in all, I think the TSA is awful and would love them gone. At the very least there should be regulation on the max amount of radiation that is allowed by a machine (not sure if this exists).