Slashdot Mirror
Laptop Fires On Airplanes
The risk posed by lithium batteries on airplanes is not exactly new news to this community; but the issue is starting to get wider exposure. Reader Maximum Prophet points out that as usual xkcd gets it right, and sends in an NY Times article calling the batteries a fire risk that clears security. "More than half of the 22 battery fires in the cabin of passenger planes since 1999 have been in the last three years. One air safety expert suggested that these devices might be 'the last unrestricted fire hazard' people can bring on airplanes."
Actually, putting it in checked luggage would be worse (in fact, most airlines ban batteries from checked luggage already)... If they did catch fire, by the time passengers/crew realized it (from alarms, etc), the fire would be significantly more advanced than if it happened in cabin...
If a man isn't willing to take some risk for his opinions, either his opinions are no good or he's no good
You're Right, they don't listen. But it's not their job to listen. You don't walk into a store and tell the janitor what products that the store should stock.
These security agents are paid $14/hr, and probably don't have any connection to the TSA rulemakers. Whether the security guards can honestly tell a security suggestion from a security threat, I do not know, but I'd like to think they have to treat them all with caution.
All your 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 are belong to us
Is this really enough for us to go running scared about yet another airplane hazard? 22 incidents over 10 years is enough to make you think, but when there are hundreds of flights a day I would have to say it's one of the more minor problems that commercial airlines have to face and it seems like it can be solved by properly training crew members how to deal with that sort of fire. You could probably eliminate loads of possible "hazards" off of commercial flights, but not without major inconvenience and making the entire flight experience more miserable than it already is.
Even that is too much. There have been 11 incidents in the last 3 years, leading to 0 deaths. There is not a problem.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
I have had it with these motherfucking batteries on this motherfucking plane!
0 = 1 + e^(Alt something)
In related news, Chuck Norris has been banned from all Airlines.
Officials stated that "... Well, obviously he's a weapon. I mean, would you want to travel with a nuclear weapon your airliner?"
It remains to be seen how they intend on /stopping/ Chuck Norris from boarding a plane.
Chuck's only comment on the matter was "why would I need a plane to fly?"
We agree.
But banning liquids is a good thing.. Nobody has blown up a plane with a baby bottle since the law went into effect.
It works as good as my Cougar repelling rock in my office. I haven't seen a cougar in the office since I got it.
Sadly, sarcasm is about all I got left anymore...
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
22 fires out of how many millions of flights
That's still significantly higher than the number of bottled water related casualties, and those are still banned.
"Yes, I'm serious: Ban everything, and force passengers to maybe, I don't know, read a book perhaps?"
You must be joking. How can I read a book without a battery in my Kindle?
Making basic parts of modern society contingent upon our choosing to waive our natural rights is no choice at all. Doing that is tantamount to infringing those rights. How is that any different from "you may criticize the government, but if you do, you'll never fly again" or "sure, you can can wear that head scarf, but you're not getting on that plane with it in"?
The key here is that flying isn't a basic human right. Those airplanes are privately owned, and the people who own them can make any rules they want about who can ride. If they want to insist that only people with purple hair can fly, that's their perogative. If they want to insist that no-one more than eighteen inches tall can fly, they're allowed to do so. If they want to insist that people submit to a ridiculous, ineffective security screening before flying, they can.
All three rules are equally silly, and all three rules are equally legitimate. If you don't like the rules, you can find a different way to travel. If they make compliance difficult and annoying enough, many people will, and then the airlines will go under. Until then, you're stuck with it.
(And yes, there's a lot of pressure from the government for them to run this level of security, but if you believe the airlines don't have enough lobbying power to fight back, you're insufficiently cynical.)
The TSA and their guidelines are no longer private by any means. They are thoroughly up the government's ass.
The constitution says ol' Uncle Sam can't perform unreasonable searches or seizures without a warrant, and that to issue a warrant they need probable cause. Probable cause must be supported by things that have happened or someone testifies has happened (see oath or affirmation) regarding the specific person. FUD about terrorism does not count, no matter how real the threat is.
Now before you try to dodge simple facts with bullshit about no one forcing you to board a plane...
1 - Commercial air travel is the only method of air travel available to 99.999% of people. Going by boat, by car, or on foot will often result in similar infringements upon your rights. Hell, you don't even have to be crossing a national or even state border to be subjected to this shit. Just drive anywhere near the US border and your rights are fucking GONE in the interest of "national security".
2 - Something something Pursuit of Happiness something something. Seems to me the restrictions and "security" put in place constitute significant barriers to a person's basic freedom of movement if they wish to avoid said searches. Well of course they do - that's the goal. Keep you in your densely packed urban center, try to squash "suburban sprawl", and in general, exercise as much control over you as possible.
3 - Get up to the security checkpoint at an airport, ticket in hand. When you're next in line to go through the various scanners, give a wave to the friendly TSA employee, put your shoes back on, grab your stuff, turn around, and leave. Explain that you decided you did not want to be searched today. You'll be free to leave, right?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
If 99% of planes got hijacked and crashed, it would still be unconstitutional.