Originally Posted by
newhaven
Good points.
#1: This design can target an educated audience (wiser)?
#2: Not all outcomes may take place. When printed, check a few boxes?
#3: The backscatter X-ray risks are clearer than the active millimeter wave risks. Is there more information?
For a tri-fold format, additional content is needed. Is double-sided printing doable?
This is great, but is does need to be a tri-fold.
I strongly believe that whatever is put out needs to be completely transparent and reveal what will happen if you opt-out, i.e., the possibility of an extremely invasive "enhanced" pat down - think prison inmate.
I fear that if we do not do that, some poor person will think he/she is just going to waltz through a pat down only to find said pat down bordered on sexual assault. We then will have lost one potential supporter.
It's a fine line to walk and I realize that it's difficult as we could scare people away from opting out because they are so put off regarding such a pat down. Therefore, we need language to suggest that neither WBI nor "enhanced" pat downs are necessary to maintain security in the air. I think
emphasis should also be put on the ability to hide things in body cavities which are not image-able.
This is my first thought re language:
"Please realize that when you opt out, you will be subjected to a pat down. You might find that "enhanced" pat down humiliating and disturbing. The TSA screener might touch your genitals in a way that could seem to you to be sexual assault.
If you feel you or your child were touched inappropriately, please file a complaint with the Transportation Security Administration at:......................"