[filmscanners] Re: X rays was Digital PIC

["Arthur Entlich" <artistic-1@shaw.ca>]

Anthony Atkielski wrote:


>
>>I agree with you in principle, but when is
>>the last time you dealt with a situation like
>>this in the US?
>>
>
> I haven't been to the U.S. in years.
>
> Anyway, you say you agree in principle, yet it appears that you won't stand
> up for that principle.  As I said above, you get what you wish for.
>


Well, firstly, it wasn't my principle to fight, it was my wife who was
involved.  Secondly, only people who are a bit unhinged fight (or
attempt to fight) every battle they are involved with, principled or
not, because one needs to recognize the value of the fight, the
opportunity for success, the amount of collateral damage and whether the
cause justifies that damage. Using other measures just becomes a matter
of personality defect, or a mental health problem because literally
there is not enough time to fight every battle that comes up in ones
life, thirdly, a wise man knows how to minimize losses in his battles
and still get results. I didn't say we have let this matter drop, as we
have not.  There are letters being composed as I am writing; to the
airline, to the FAA, to the individual involved and his superiors. My
wife got his card.

If I have termites in my home, and if after using completely safe
extermination methods, they still are there, the other choices are to
rip my home apart to try to kill them one at a time, which might take
months or years to accomplish, if even possible, allow my home to be
destroyed by them, burn down my home to eradicate them, or try to get
the exterminator to use the safest pesticides which still have some risk
associated with them to both human and environmental health.

In as much as I am opposed to using pesticides with risks associated
with them, faced with this dilemma, and having used up all other
reasonable options, I would likely then call in someone who uses
pesticides which have a risk associated and make sure he were properly
certified, and had a good understanding of my concerns to minimize that
risk as much as possible.

Having worked in the study of the stages of moral development as my main
area of undergraduate work, and having interviewed many people during
that research, a pattern of values and logistics in human response to
dilemmas develops.  Very few situations end up black or white in terms
of action or even moral logistics.  Every principled action needs to
weighed against the likelihood of the outcome, which can include how
others are impacted.  There is a difference between sitting back and
taking no action, and evaluating the value of different actions and then
acting.

In the case of the guy who did not follow FAA rules for a hand
inspection of my wife's film, there were considerable possible
repercussions to be considered, and personally, I think she made all the
correct decisions based upon the magnitude of the outcome.  She made her
concerns known, she contacted a rep from the airline right there at the
airport, who was unsuccessful in her intervention, she informed the guy
of the FAA ruling, she warned him that there could be consequences of
his actions by not following the protocol, and she took his name and
information to respond later.

That strikes me as a fully balanced and sane response to the situation.
  Being "right" and doing what's "right" are not the same thing.

Art

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body