Patterico's Pontifications

12/20/2006

Woman Sends Baby Through X-Ray Machine at Airport

Filed under: General,Morons — Patterico @ 6:21 am



The L.A. Times reports:

A woman going through security at Los Angeles International Airport put her month-old grandson into a plastic bin intended for carry-on items and slid it into an X-ray machine.

. . . .

The infant was taken to Centinela Hospital, where doctors determined that he had not received a dangerous dose of radiation.

Airport officials are wringing their hands trying to figure out how to prevent a recurrence:

“We’re trying to figure out what changes we can make, short of putting up signs saying, ‘Don’t put your baby through the X-ray machine,’ ” Melendez said. “We’re trying to determine how we can make this not happen again.”

My suggestion, put up signs that say: “Don’t be a stupid moron!” If the airport isn’t going to put up such signs, they have only themselves to blame if someone else acts like a stupid moron.

It’s kind of like when irresponsible hammer companies fail to include a warning saying: “Do not smash yourself in the head with this hammer.”

People must be warned.

36 Responses to “Woman Sends Baby Through X-Ray Machine at Airport”

  1. It’s Darwinian. The genes of anyone that stupid will naturally die out.

    Sissy Willis (c48a4e)

  2. A quick read of the article suggests that the woman, the child’s grandmother, spoke only Spanish and was apparently confused by the instructions she received at secruity.

    Strick (3ea434)

  3. Sadly, the child will not gain super-powers from this incident.

    PCachu (e072b7)

  4. What I want to know is why this was considered front page news in the LA Tabloid, er, Times.

    Curt (05559f)

  5. So the solution, naturally, is to put signs in Spanish as well as English. But that leads me to a question I have always wondered about: How many people must speak a language before the government is required to accommodate them by posting signage in that language? In other words, suppose we put up signs in Spanish saying, “Don’t send your baby through the X-ray machine.” Why shouldn’t the child of an Urdu-speaking woman receive the same protection? More broadly speaking, why is the government required to provide linguistic accommodations to non-English-speakers from some groups and not others? If I spoke only Urdu and wanted to vote, I’d be a little bothered that I had to learn English to do it, but a Spanish speaker wouldn’t.

    Diffus (ead439)

  6. I love how in the article the proposed solution naturally comes back to the idea of hiring more TSA workers. I flew this past weekend and TSA managed to station a guy 25 yards away from the x-ray machines for the singular pupose of warning everyone that our tolitries needed to be in a one-quart clear plastic bag. I guess now we will need a counterpart to that guy to stand near the x-ray machine and announce (in English, Spanish, Mandarin, Vietnamese, Russian, Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, and Tagalog) that children and pets should not be placed in the x-ray machine.

    The fare for my flight was $77.21 and the taxes added on were $24.89, or about 30% of the fare. I am not sure I can support paying more just to keep stupid people from jamming tykes into the machine.

    JVW (255a81)

  7. Vizzini: Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia…

    Some people have an odd sense of what it takes to be called a moron.

    Neville Chamberlain (80a4fa)

  8. The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia…

    Better to just drop the atomic bombs, eh Neville? Is that your preferred solution?

    And I have no idea what your comment about calling people a moron is alluding to, but if it is to Patterico’s post, are you saying that running an infant through an airport x-ray scanner doesn’t necessarily qualify you for moron status?

    JVW (255a81)

  9. It depends on whether you knew what the machine was for or not, JVW.

    As for Iraq, my “preferred solution” is to pull our troops out today.

    Neville Chamberlain (80a4fa)

  10. How about diapers with helpful hints:

    “Your failure to learn English could be bad for my health.”

    “Please don’t put this baby in an X-Ray machine, freezer, or other large appliance”

    “This side up.^.”

    … translated into the language of your choice?

    Regret (98303b)

  11. Would I be too unkind if I said that Neville Chamberlain’s and Devid Ehrenstein’s real problem is that America’s support for Israel and now the Iraq War have made it impossible for Americans to do a “William S. Burroughs” in Morocco?

    nk (d7a872)

  12. It depends on whether you knew what the machine was for or not, JVW.

    Well golly, Neville, somehow she knew enough to purchase an airline ticket, check-in, and proceed to the security line. What the hell could she have mistaken the machine for, a tanning booth? Or do you think most Spanish-speaking people come straight from the village and don’t know that airports screen items with an x-ray machine? After all, this has only been going on for, what, 30-40 years.

    JVW (255a81)

  13. What do you want me to say, JVW?

    Some people are shocked by the fact that adding $300 billion to the annual defense budget coupled with massive tax cuts for the wealthy have led to huge federal budget deficits.

    Are they morons too?

    Or, like this poor grandma you feel the need to feel superior to, where they just unaware of something that was perfectly obvious to most people?

    Neville Chamberlain (80a4fa)

  14. Are you talking about the ever shrinking defecit?

    G (722480)

  15. “Or, like this poor grandma you feel the need to feel superior to, where they just unaware of something that was perfectly obvious to most people?”

    I wonder if she puts her grandchild on the belt at the grocery store for the cashier to ring up.

    G (722480)

  16. Perhaps you should run a contest to design an ideogram that means “don’t put children in the X-Ray machine.”

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  17. п ← ☺ ⅓ – ⅞ = Ǿ

    G (722480)

  18. This poor woman was probably trying to comply with procedures that mystified her but, given her knowledge level and judgment, she’s not a good choice for caretaker of an infant – especially when you consider she was obviously taking this baby on a trip on an airplane. One can only imagine what might have occurred when she listened to the flight attendant’s instructions.

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  19. How many people must speak a language before the government is required to accommodate them by posting signage in that language?

    Interesting question, particularly at a large, international airport. 🙂

    Strick (3ea434)

  20. Stupid is as stupid does.

    West (d80d4f)

  21. Diffus: regardless of what you think about multilingual signage in government complexes in general, it seems to me that international airports are a special case: it’s reasonable to assume that they are the places within the country where the largest number of non-english speaking people are too be found, and some effort should be made to accomodate them.

    The best way to do this is to have icons rather than words — a picture over the screening machine of a baby with a line across it, using the standard “no [x]” iconography.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  22. I would hope that a belt driven machine that emits x-rays would be required by OSHA, and perhaps the FDA or other regulatory agencies, to be equipped with a big red panic button that says “EMERGENCY STOP” on it. Don’t get the wrong idea, what the woman did earns her the title moron, but it seems to me if everyone involved was paying attention the incident would not have occured. An unfortunate incident, but, there’s plenty of blame to spread around on this one.

    Boss429 (c39aeb)

  23. Press 14 for English, the universal language everywhere except America.

    I think maybe we should hire minders in all languages to live with non-English speaking idiots and guide them through life. Oh, and they should all be union members with mandatory donations to the Democrats….er, to the union PAC.

    Oh, and do not use your blow dryer while you are asleep.

    Patricia (824fa1)

  24. What do you want me to say, JVW?

    Ah Neville, first of all it is most entertaining how you used Patterico’s post about this event to take a gratituous swipe at the Bush Administration, then in your most recent reply you do it again. I know that you probably live 24/7 with your smoldering hatred of everything George W. Bush, but I am sure it would be really satisfying if you once-in-a-while let it go and tried to engage in some other conversation.

    And if you go back and read my original response, I am not trying to mock the poor woman who didn’t understand what she was doing (though I agree wholeheartedly with DRJ’s comment in reply #19 that she clearly should not be in charge of an infant), I was simply pointing out from the article that the usual suspects seem to be using this as a way to press their agenda, which happens to be hiring more and more government workers at taxpayer expense in order to try and keep people from doing stupid things to themselves and others. Where will it all end? Look for our new congressional majority to propose an increase in public sector jobs of this very sort, and don’t be surprised if some slimeball shyster tries to sue TSA and LAX on behalf of this woman for not making it clear to her in her native language that the kid doesn’t go through the x-ray machine.

    JVW (255a81)

  25. An unfortunate incident, but, there’s plenty of blame to spread around on this one.

    Sorry Boss, but this is exactly where I disagree with you. Yes, it would have been nice if some TSA agent had noticed what she was doing and prevented her before it happened, but it is unreasonable to expect anybody to catch 100% of the dumb things that people do. The fault here lies with the grandmother who did not know what she was doing, and with any other parent or guardian of the child who allowed the woman to travel with the baby (one month old, for heaven’s sake!).

    Now then, if we find out that a TSA agent told her to put the baby through the machine, then I will retract everything I have said above.

    JVW (255a81)

  26. Foreign Language Signs:
    The counter people at the local BK used to spend all of their time explaining the menu to “immigrants” who could not read English. I approached the Manager, and suggested that he mount dual language menu boards (I had seen such in a BK in another state) to attempt to speed-up the counter service. They did, and nothing changed. It became quickly appearant that a great many of our local (SoCal) “immigrants” are illiterate in both English and Spanish. Signs do not make up for a lack of common sense.

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  27. Now then, if we find out that a TSA agent told her to put the baby through the machine, then I will retract everything I have said above.

    JVW, I don’t know what you said above and am not interested, I responded to Patricks post with my opinion, you have no reason to retract anything as far as I’m concerned.

    Boss429 (c39aeb)

  28. Patricia: I have been in many places where nobody spoke English, so the universal language claim is a bit overmuch.

    All of those places made an attempt to ensure that signs in reasonably-well-touristed places either were in English or consisted of icons, for which I was enormously grateful.

    I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that we do the same in reasonably well-touristed places.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  29. This reminds me of a law school exam. Any thoughts on whether the baby’s parents can sue the airport for failing to provide adequate instructions or for defective warnings? Would this incident be covered by product liability law or are there other California/federal legal theories that might apply?

    DRJ (a5fa81)

  30. I find it difficult to find the operators at the screening area at no fault having been through “podunk” airports prior to 911 and having to pass screening prior to entering the gateway area(remember all those planes hijacked to Cuba in the late 60’s & early ’70’s?). There’s always been someone at the entry side of the conveyor belt making it crystal clear to remove all metal objects etc. hand you the container and provide instructions as to what is required to be deposited in said container, and question if that’s all you have to place in the container since they want no hold-ups when they pass you through the walk through detector. For a baby to have been placed upon the conveyor and pass through an industrial quality x-ray machine and nobody (even others waiting in line to be scanned) to have noticed and thus cause the E-stop to be struck not happening tells me that not only is attention not being paid by those paid to pay attention to security, but those who rely upon said security have blind (literally) faith in said security if they fail to notice and speak with deserved outrage about the system failure. Quite frankley if they couldn’t figure out thee was a baby on board, how the f**k are they going to know there’s a bomb on board?

    Boss429 (c39aeb)

  31. aphrael, English is the universal language of business and science. I would venture that air travel falls within those categories. (See Wikipedia, for one source, and scholarly references therein.)

    As for posting signs, how many languages should we be required to post? California is home to hundreds of languages. And I will second what another poster said, that many “immigrants” are illiterate, so signs will do them no good.

    Patricia (824fa1)

  32. And the question is not only how many languages, but how many different types of multi-lingual signs will we need? Should every electrical outlet come with a sign reading in English and Spanish “do not stick your housekey in here”? Should every wet floor have a sign reading “don’t try to sprint through this area” in English, Spanish, French, German, Portuguese, etc.? I mean really, folks, where does it end?

    Maybe I am totally wrong about this, but I would guess that there are NOT four or five or twenty people per day who try to put their infant children through the x-ray machines at LAX. How often does it happen do you think? Enough so that someone should have signs posted at EVERY x-ray machine saying “do not run the kids and the pets through this”? How extensive does the nanny state really need to be for some of you? Are we really obligated to anticipate EVERY stupid thing that people might possibly do and warn them in advance about it?

    JVW (255a81)

  33. Aphrael:

    The best way to do this is to have icons rather than words — a picture over the screening machine of a baby with a line across it, using the standard “no [x]” iconography.

    You are kidding, right? Those dreadful icons are a cure worse than the disease. I could live with them in addition to clear English instructions, but not instead of.

    Xrlq (f52b4f)

  34. They should make sure she stays in Mexico.

    Robert O'Brien (2148f1)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0935 secs.