Airport X-ray scanner is just as likely to kill you as a terrorist bomb..

[her209]

I'm so sick of all this BS. We are totally overreacting.

Overeacting to the terrorist threat or to the TSA screening methods?

 

[lxskllr]

So if terrorists are so unlikely to kill you why have we invaded two country's?

Its funny that people are OK with going to war but all antsy if they get screened.

I'm not ok with it. It's all a sham. It's unlikely any of this would have happened we minded our business, and didn't try policing the world. How many times has Switzerland been attacked?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Doesn't radiation exposure stack though?

So If you travel frequently, like pilots, staff, crew, road warriors, etc..., your risk increases every time you have to walk through the scanner. Isn't that why the pilot union(s) recommended they opt-out each time?

Gov't says full-body scanners at airports are safe

The Transportation Security Administration says radiation from one scan is about the same as a person would get from flying for about three minutes in an airplane at 30,000 feet, where atmospheric radiation levels are higher than on the ground. That amount is vastly lower than a single dental X-ray.

You would have to go through scanners more than 1,000 times in one year to even meet the maximum recommended level — and even pilots don't do that.

 

[WelshBloke]

I'm not ok with it. It's all a sham. It's unlikely any of this would have happened we minded our business, and didn't try policing the world. How many times has Switzerland been attacked?

You aren't Switzerland though, and I doubt you'd be happy or content in that role.

Its not just policing the world, your the biggest economy, the richest country, your media has an impact around the world. People are going to have a problem with you regardless of whether you police the world or not.

 

[lxskllr]

You aren't Switzerland though, and I doubt you'd be happy or content in that role.

Its not just policing the world, your the biggest economy, the richest country, your media has an impact around the world. People are going to have a problem with you regardless of whether you police the world or not.

Dude, we're on the way out. The empire's dead. Keep your eye on China and India. They're the real players now, and the only thing left to do is sit back and watch as long as our leaders have the brains to mind their place.

 

[Capt Caveman]

I'm not ok with it. It's all a sham. It's unlikely any of this would have happened we minded our business, and didn't try policing the world. How many times has Switzerland been attacked?

With that thinking, the rest of the world would have been controlled by Germany and Japan.

 

[torpid]

So if terrorists are so unlikely to kill you why have we invaded two country's?

Its funny that people are OK with going to war but all antsy if they get screened.

We invaded two countries for two different reasons. One country we invaded because (ostensibly) terrorists hijacked a plane using crude knives such as box cutters and stuff like mace. They did not use a bomb (though they had some FAKE bombs). Note that this thread refers to the chances of a bomb and not general terrorist tomfoolery.

 

[lxskllr]

With that thinking, the rest of the world would have been controlled by Germany and Japan.

Germany was done as soon as they took on the Soviets. Japan? who cares? Political lines would be a little different, but it wouldn't make any real difference in the world.

 

[WelshBloke]

Dude, we're on the way out. The empire's dead. Keep your eye on China and India. They're the real players now, and the only thing left to do is sit back and watch as long as our leaders have the brains to mind their place.

You really think India and China have the same economic, political, military and social power as the USA?

 

[WelshBloke]

We invaded two countries for two different reasons. One country we invaded because (ostensibly) terrorists hijacked a plane using crude knives such as box cutters and stuff like mace. They did not use a bomb (though they had some FAKE bombs). Note that this thread refers to the chances of a bomb and not general terrorist tomfoolery.

What so its ok to invade a country to stop people hijacking a plane with boxcutters but unacceptable to search people before getting on a plane? 😵

 

[Ruptga]

Overeacting to the terrorist threat or to the TSA screening methods?

I'll take C. all of the above. But what else is new? It's no secret that we are all creatures of habit and impulse. If we're not rushing to this side of an issue we're running to another just as quickly.

 

[Ruptga]

You really think India and China have the same economic, political, military and social power as the USA?

Can't speak for him, but India and China both have vast potential. Yeah, right now they're underdeveloped, but they are both developing very quickly. I have no idea when it will happen, but I'd be surprised if both of them didn't overtake the US before I'm an old man.

 

[lxskllr]

Can't speak for him, but India and China both have vast potential. Yeah, right now they're underdeveloped, but they are both developing very quickly. I have no idea when it will happen, but I'd be surprised if both of them didn't overtake the US before I'm an old man.

Exactly. It's not gonna be next year, but their day will come soon enough.

 

[Ns1]

lol @ Front Page Drudge

 

[Eli]

From other articles I've read, the amount of radiation exposure isn't a health concern.

Statements like these are so strange to me..

ANY radiation exposure is a health concern. It doesn't matter how small it is, it's always a concern.

Anyway, my thought behind things like this is that it doesn't matter if that specific exposure of 30 picocuries or whatever isn't a "concern" in and of itself. Radiation is cumulative. The reason people don't like it is because it adds to our daily dose of radiation, when it could be avoided.

Drinking a few drops of benzene probably isn't going to make cancer develop or cause any symptoms, but why the eff would I want to do that?

 

[Bignate603]

Statements like these are so strange to me..

ANY radiation exposure is a health concern. It doesn't matter how small it is, it's always a concern.

Anyway, my thought behind things like this is that it doesn't matter if that specific exposure of 30 picocuries or whatever isn't a "concern" in and of itself. Radiation is cumulative. The reason people don't like it is because it adds to our daily dose of radiation, when it could be avoided.

Drinking a few drops of benzene probably isn't going to make cancer develop or cause any symptoms, but why the eff would I want to do that?

It's because the added safety statistically outweighs the risk. Oh wait...:awe:

 

[bfdd]

Doesn't radiation exposure stack though?

So If you travel frequently, like pilots, staff, crew, road warriors, etc..., your risk increases every time you have to walk through the scanner. Isn't that why the pilot union(s) recommended they opt-out each time?

Yes rads stack. My buddy is an industrial radiographer, he shoots welds in high pressure vessels or pipes for cracks and he's only allowed to be at a certain level, if it goes over he has to go into a screening program until it goes back down or something. He's only allowed to be exposed to so many rads a year etc. A frequent flier who is constantly going through these would definitely be at a far huger risk than someone who goes through once a year.

 

[bfdd]

Germany was done as soon as they took on the Soviets. Japan? who cares? Political lines would be a little different, but it wouldn't make any real difference in the world.

So what you're saying is you don't know jack shit. Germany wasn't done when they took on the Soviets because they were under the impression Japan was going to be coming in from behind to squeeze and remove the Russian threat. Japan didn't do that, they strayed from the plan and decided starting shit with the USA was a good idea. If we had stayed out of it, Japan would have helped Germany destroy Russia and then they would have finished Europe and came for us.

 

[lxskllr]

So what you're saying is you don't know jack shit. Germany wasn't done when they took on the Soviets because they were under the impression Japan was going to be coming in from behind to squeeze and remove the Russian threat. Japan didn't do that, they strayed from the plan and decided starting shit with the USA was a good idea. If we had stayed out of it, Japan would have helped Germany destroy Russia and then they would have finished Europe and came for us.

Keep dreaming. Germany, Japan, and Italy🙂^D) didn't have what it took to keep and hold Europe. The outcome would have been the same, but the dates would have changed.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Statements like these are so strange to me..

ANY radiation exposure is a health concern. It doesn't matter how small it is, it's always a concern.

Anyway, my thought behind things like this is that it doesn't matter if that specific exposure of 30 picocuries or whatever isn't a "concern" in and of itself. Radiation is cumulative. The reason people don't like it is because it adds to our daily dose of radiation, when it could be avoided.

Drinking a few drops of benzene probably isn't going to make cancer develop or cause any symptoms, but why the eff would I want to do that?

If you read any of the articles, the amount of radiation exposure by a body scanner is equivalent to 3 minutes of air time at 30,000 ft altitude. What about radiation from cell phones then? Metal Detectors expose individuals to radiation. Oh noes!!!!

 

[Capt Caveman]

Keep dreaming. Germany, Japan, and Italy🙂^D) didn't have what it took to keep and hold Europe. The outcome would have been the same, but the dates would have changed.

No it wouldn't, the amount of resources to fight on the Western Front would have been minimal and could have been reallocated to fight and conquer Russia. England would have then been bombed into submission.

 

[lxskllr]

No it wouldn't, the amount of resources to fight on the Western Front would have been minimal and could have been reallocated to fight and conquer Russia. England would have then been bombed into submission.

They were stretched too thin with the eastern front. Even assuming they did gain any traction, capturing, and holding are 2 completely different principles. They didn't have what it took to retain territory.

 

[Nintendesert]

You don't need too many troops to retain territory if you're willing to send most of the populace to the ovens.

 

[LegendKiller]

Dude, we're on the way out. The empire's dead. Keep your eye on China and India. They're the real players now, and the only thing left to do is sit back and watch as long as our leaders have the brains to mind their place.

LOL. China is mega-fucked. They've mortgaged their country far higher than we have. Only somebody who watches CNN for their entire financial and economic news doesn't realize this.

 

[LegendKiller]

I'm not ok with it. It's all a sham. It's unlikely any of this would have happened we minded our business, and didn't try policing the world. How many times has Switzerland been attacked?

It would have happened regardless.