Haha! I needed that laugh! No comment on whether you're right or wrong though!

Hospitals and medical places frequently get their x-ray equipment checked by trained technicians and even then, things can go wrong. At the airport, the backscatter machines are checked like maybe once a year by NON-medical people. Think about how many passengers go through them every day and how often the machines are used. I hope everyone feels safe and reassured by what I just said. It's just a thought. :)

The sad thing is, it doesn't matter who is in charge, I think the machines are here to stay. Thank goodness we can still opt-out in North America.

Today, anyway.

Tomorrow? I wouldn't put any bets on it, given the sheer numbers of people the TSA has managed to "employ" who're more than willing to "just follow orders" so they can obtain a paycheck.

I have no idea of whether he is truly ignorant or whether he is just not interested in explaining his decision to other people. But, "going along to get along" is a valid reason to skip the grope. In the end, it's an untenable choice, anyway, so I can't get worked up one way or the other.

Only to the person(s) "going along" with it.

That's the only person that matters if a violation of one's body will result from not going along.

Or, sadly, maybe your dad would rather hazard the machines than get felt up by another man.

Not true. The more idiots "just go along with it," the more pressure brought to bear on the those who don't give proper obeisance to the thugs in blue.

The problem is you're wrong, because a long term increase in the number of cases of cancer will effect all residents and repeatedly irradiating large numbers of people will likely* result in increased cancer rates. Cancer is an expensive, labor intensive disease to treat (been there, paid those bills) and the U.S. health care system is already straining and costs are skyrocketing.

Trying not to veer too far into OMNI territory, I will just say that the cost of those machines in the long run will be a lot more than just civil liberties lost.


*based on the reports of a number of concerned, qualified scientists and doctors about untrained staff using machines not evaluated by independent agencies for safety and reliability

Sorry, I must disagree that anyone who is uncomfortable with choosing a path that will cause their body to be invaded is an "idiot." Allowing someone to grope you is not something that I can fit into any construct of refusing to give "proper obesiance." I choose to allow it, and I respect the right of others who choose to (try to) avoid it as best they can.

Even for people who don't take the 'anything for safety!!' line, the harm of radiation is invisible, speculative, and in the future, whereas the harm of the humiliating patdown is palpable, certain, and immediate. There's a lot of research on cognitive biases that suggests that people tend to prefer to expose themselves to objectively unreasonable risks (that is, risks of greater harm, even discounted for the low probability of occurrence) in preference to the choosing of certain, smaller harms.

I respect whatever choices people make, as long as they are actively making a choice. That's why I talk to my friends and colleagues about why I opt out. I believe that knowing more about the facts makes for more informed decidion-making; and it's definitely persuaded some of my friends and co-workers to opt out. :)

After watching the TSA in AUS grope EVERY SINGLE PERSON who passed through the MMW scanner because they had sweat on their skin under their shirts, I've come to the conclusion that anyone who chooses the scanner based on the incorrect notion that it means they won't be groped is an idiot.

These people kowtow to the TSA in the hopes they won't be groped, and they're groped anyway.

The only way to avoid being groped by the TSA is simply to avoid any place the TSA is.

Of course, idiots will always reverse their behavior when you tell them that they're idiots. Name-calling always results in the elimination of irrational behavior.

In other words ... "if you don't like it, don't fly".

Okay, let me power down a bit. But just a bit.

Not everyone agrees with me all the time. That doesn't make them idiots, and it doesn't make me an idiot. It means one, or both, of us is mistaken. Honestly mistaken, to be sure, but still mistaken. I need to have the good sense to recognize that my firmly-held, well-reasoned convictions might be wrong, even as I try to persuade them that their convictions are wrong. And, above all else, I shouldn't call them names.

Because, after all, they think I'm the idiot, and I'd want them to treat me with the same courtesy --- even if I don't deserve it.

There's a disturbing number of comments in this thread that are automatically dismissive of those (like the OP's dad) who don't agree with them. Let's discuss, persuade, even argue ... but let's do it with some respect.

Oh, wait ... I forgot ... we're about to enter the "silly season" of politics for the next two months, where everyone who disagrees with me must be called names. Never mind. [sigh]

That isn't what I said.

At this late stage of the TSA's idiocy and games, if one cannot tolerate being groped by one of the TSA's blue-gloved thugs, one will be barred by those self-same thugs from boarding the aircraft.

But you are correct. I should turn it down a notch. They're not idiots.

They're simply inexcusably and deliberately ignorant.

The good news is this: ignorance is curable. Idiocy, not so much.