Saturday, May 26, 2012Mostly Cloudy 22°C
City

Morning Brew: Blue Bin Overflow, Hit-and-run and Purse Snatch, Body Scanners coming to Pearson Airport, Stray Voltage on Sidewalks, Case Ootes to quit City Council, Proroguing Political Games

Posted by Jerrold Litwinenko / January 6, 2010

light bulb peplePhoto: "Cheers, to light bulb people" by ip.sebastian, member of the blogTO Flickr pool.

What's happening in the GTA (and sometimes beyond):

Making a lot of trips to the recycling blue bin, especially at this time of year? Many Toronto residents are finding that they have more packaging to recycle than they have room for in their City-issued blue bin, and the City wants everyone to know that they can put out excess recyclables in clear plastic bags and/or upgrade to a bigger bin at no cost if this continues to be a problem. Don't slow the shopping though... it's good for the economy.

A wacky crime went down in the Bathurst & Lawrence area last night. A woman driving a stolen minivan first struck a pedestrian, then got out of the vehicle, approached the injured victim, and audaciously snatched her purse before getting back into the minivan. Shortly after, the suspect then had to flee on foot after striking a hydro pole and crippling the vehicle. Seems like a crime motivated by, and carried out in, serious desperation.

In an announcement yesterday, the federal government revealed that body scanning security equipment is coming to a number of Canadian airports, including Pearson. The high-tech imaging system allows security staff to see though clothing and visualize the passenger's body with 3D realism, which has some people crying out about invasion of privacy and rights. I wonder to what extent these concerns are a result of self-consciousness about body image, and what extent privacy is even a real issue here. It's not like security scans of John Baird's naked bits or Joan River's plastic thighs are going to end up on the front page of TMZ, right?

Despite a massive, expensive effort by Toronto Hydro to solve all of the "stray electricity" problems on city sidewalks (some $3-million is now spent annually to patrol and fix aging handwells that leak voltage), it would appear that not all have been curbed. A dog and a responding veterinarian were both zapped on the Danforth on Monday and have recovered.

In municipal politics, city councillor Giorgio Mammoliti has officially signed on as a candidate for mayor (and the Star has selected a few choice quotes from him, that involve Godzilla and monkeys). Also, veteran councillor Case Ootes won't be running for city council in October, instead opting to retire from the position (which may open the door for Jane Pitfield's return to city politics).

And at the federal level, and in a move likely aimed at ruffling feathers and getting media attention (look, it worked!), the Liberal party is planning to return to work on January 25th despite Harper having prorogued parliament until March 3rd. In related news, Harper appeared on The National last night and told Canadians that the alleged torture of Afghan detainees under Canadian watch isn't an issue that's on our radar. Too bad most Canadians were too glued to the (amazing) hockey game to even know about the interview or hear Harper sweep yet another damaging but soon-to-be-forgotten scandal under the rug.

Discussion

34 Comments

fdr / January 6, 2010 at 09:08 am
user-pic
I guess every mayoral race needs a few joke candidates.

Mammoliti certainly fits. He once memorably suggested we turn the Toronto Islands into a Red Light Zone for prostitution. Has he ever been there? It's one of Toronto's best summer family-friendly spots, with Centerville, Franklin's Garden, and loads of park space. The ferries are jammed with biking enthusiasts and strollers. And Georgie thought it would be a good idea to throw that away? What a clown.

And Giambrone? The disasterous handling of the fare increase can't help his chances. Touted as a "policy wonk", the guy couldn't lead or manage his way out of a paper bag.
David Pylyp / January 6, 2010 at 09:13 am
user-pic
Wonderful Blog, always a great visit and look about

David Pylyp
Living in Toronto
hmm / January 6, 2010 at 09:56 am
user-pic
what happens if you wear lead though the scanners, or paint something on your body?
Mike W / January 6, 2010 at 10:12 am
user-pic
"I wonder to what extent these concerns are a result of self-consciousness about body image, and what extent privacy is even a real issue here."

You're kidding right? Why don't we have video cameras in toilets and showers rooms then? It's not because we're self conscious.
Mark Dowling / January 6, 2010 at 10:20 am
user-pic
I suspect we will not see the return of Pitfield (which I would not welcome anyway - she can stay on the west side of the valley k thx - and redraw the ward boundary to remove the Ootes enclave while we're about it) so much as the further transformation of my ward/riding into Dipperagua, with the fed and prov machines paving the way for Anthopoulos or whoever else picks up the banner.
Mark Dowling / January 6, 2010 at 10:23 am
user-pic
oops - typo "Alexopoulos"
Mal replying to a comment from Mike W / January 6, 2010 at 10:26 am
user-pic
Also coming to Pearson Airport: Fluffers.
Matt replying to a comment from Mike W / January 6, 2010 at 10:28 am
user-pic
I guess what Mike.W is saying is that he is concerned with urinating himself while going through airport security.

To be honest all the years of going through an airport, they could have had a secret x-ray set-up & I wouldn't be the wiser. I see no harm in an x-ray that will be able to show them whether or not someone has something that could compromise the safety of the passenger & staff on the airplane. If someone seeing my business avoids a disaster so be it.

It is in no way as bad as what is being proposed in the United States, where they are actually discussing strip searching every Muslim man between the ages of 18-28. THAT actually violates human rights.
Rob / January 6, 2010 at 10:31 am
user-pic
The embarrassment of having some security officer see an image of my pathetic body is far preferable than falling out of the sky from 30,000 feet.
Ste / January 6, 2010 at 10:36 am
user-pic
why isn't the shutting down of the government a bigger issue then the silly full body airport scanning issue? All of your cell phones are basically being tapped, so what's the big deal with a full body scan that basically reveals nothing too um revealing, particularly when bigger privacy issues are being constantly infringed upon?
Mike W replying to a comment from Matt / January 6, 2010 at 11:08 am
user-pic
What are rights or privacy in the name of security, right?

If it's civil rights in exchange for "avoiding disaster" what's the problem. You agree with that philosophy.
SoAwesome!! / January 6, 2010 at 11:21 am
user-pic
How friggin hilarious is that hit n' run n' purse snatch story!!
Man...if thats not the story to beat in 2010 i dont know what is.
Good for the perp though. She knew she was upsh*ts creek so why not go for broke!!
Kudos to her.
Screwoff / January 6, 2010 at 11:25 am
user-pic
Who gives a rats arsehole if some dude sitting in a private room sees under your clothes.
We all have seen the naked form before. He aint sitting there thumping one out to you, he is protecting you.
Every airport should have this devises.
Rob replying to a comment from Screwoff / January 6, 2010 at 11:32 am
user-pic
"Who gives a rats arsehole?" If I had to make a guess/prediction, probably the group of folks who have made these necessary in the first place :)
Touche! replying to a comment from Rob / January 6, 2010 at 11:38 am
user-pic
Haha, fair enough. Law abiding citizens shouldnt care in the least.
Maxxx / January 6, 2010 at 12:03 pm
user-pic
If Michael Ironside is one of these "Scanners" count me out. I'll walk instead.
Cha / January 6, 2010 at 12:37 pm
user-pic
Maybe we should be more concerned about airline safety vis-a-vis the massive deregulation of safety testing the Harper Gov't has allowed the airlines.
Jacob / January 6, 2010 at 12:41 pm
user-pic
The pictures produced by the scanners are featureless, grey blobs. Nothing in those pictures is identifiably "you". All they're good for is detecting hidden items.
N / January 6, 2010 at 12:44 pm
user-pic
If we allow these scanners, next thing is going to be strip searching. I was joking with my friend a few weeks ago that he'll have to walk naked through airport. I am all for security and safety, but it this does invade privacy. I can already see these scanned images of actors/actresses appearing on the net.
Alogon / January 6, 2010 at 12:48 pm
user-pic
The problem everyone is ignoring in this airport business is not that we need MORE measures we just need the people in charge of screening already in place to wake the f*** up. The "underwear bomber" was on a list, reported by his father and was not flagged even though he had a one-way ticket and no luggage.
It is moronic to think that endless security checks will make a difference if when something of note actually crops up nothing is done about it.
It is crazy to trade privacy and liberty blindly and willingly for the illusion of safety. Way more people have died as a result of airplane crashes than terrorists blowing them up and that certainly isn't because of airport security vigilance. It is just a rare thing statistically - millions of flights and very few hijackings and bombings. We take more risk riding bicycles. - http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2002/html/table_02_01.html
You can scare all the lemmings into obedience with the threat of danger, fear tends to override the more rational parts of the brain.
Mike Hanlon / January 6, 2010 at 12:50 pm
user-pic
Driver runs over pedestrian, steals their cash and then flees. Sounds like someone has been playing far too much Grand Theft Auto...
Alogon replying to a comment from Matt / January 6, 2010 at 12:52 pm
user-pic
"If someone seeing my business avoids a disaster so be it."
How does someone seeing YOUR junk prevent disaster? Do you posit that the man at the scanner would go "postal" if he doesn't get a look at your balls?
But... replying to a comment from Mike Hanlon / January 6, 2010 at 12:57 pm
user-pic
...this is wicked funny because its not some dork sitting in his parents basement playing a game. Its hilarious because someone is awesome enough to actually do it!!

Man...people are great!
Matt replying to a comment from Alogon / January 6, 2010 at 01:35 pm
user-pic
You are literally to stupid to insult.


geg replying to a comment from Matt / January 6, 2010 at 01:47 pm
user-pic
When I call people stupid I always make sure to double-check my spelling
Alogon replying to a comment from geg / January 6, 2010 at 02:01 pm
user-pic
So true, so true, geg. But you know what they say - give someone enough rope...
Don't waste your time though, turns out Facebook User (Matt) is too stupid to teach.
Alogon replying to a comment from Matt / January 6, 2010 at 02:04 pm
user-pic
Well, you said "If someone seeing my business avoids a disaster so be it" which suggests that seeing you unclothed is the real pressing security concern. I certainly know that airport staff seeing my goods won't avert any disasters.
Matt replying to a comment from Alogon / January 6, 2010 at 02:13 pm
user-pic
But it will avoid embarrassment.

Matt replying to a comment from Alogon / January 6, 2010 at 02:17 pm
user-pic
Ok this is fvcking stupid. You didn't get my point. I called you stupid. You still don't get my point. The world is still spinning.

The point is, people are going to see us naked if we want to get on a plane. If we don't want to get on a plane they won't. I don't care if someone sees me naked if it means I can get on with whatever vacation I am taking.
Gregg / January 6, 2010 at 03:25 pm
user-pic
I thought x-rays were dangerous to the human body .. or is there something I'm missing ?? Time for some research on my part ...
Gregg / January 6, 2010 at 03:37 pm
user-pic
OK, here's what I found so far ...

It employs terahertz radiation ....

"- Under various exposure conditions no biological effects could be detected.
- However, under some specific conditions of exposure, an induction of genetoxicity was observed to occur in lymphocytes.
- Medical Imaging employing appropriate exposure parameters is probably unharmful at least for single exposures." http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/284691
handfed / January 6, 2010 at 04:54 pm
user-pic
The "body scanners" do not use X-ray, they operate in the millimeter band. The radiation dosage from the scanner is extremely low.

For those ladies afraid of having your private bits exposed by these scanners, consider abstaining from wearing TIGHTS on the street!
Alogon replying to a comment from Matt / January 9, 2010 at 11:44 am
user-pic
NO my friend, you are f'ing stupid. I got your point and, yes, the world is still spinning. I just think that idiots like you are the reason our hard-fought rights go down the toilet. Just because you don't care and don't have the foresight or intelligence to see what is going on doesn't make it OK.

You and a lot of other people can't seem to grasp how much this ib overblown to frighten us into compliance. It is just a fact that hijackings and bombings on planes over the last 30-40 years are but a statistical blip overall compared to the number of flights a year. You have more chance of being killed on a bicycle than a plane, or in a car, or having a household accident.
The small number of incidents involving planes had been a fact prior to 9/11 and prior to all this security BS. The fact is, none of this extra shit means a thing if it is staffed by morons. Morons like the ones who let a guy with a one-way ticket, no luggage, who was on a watch-list and who was reported by his own FATHER get on a plane. Could scanners have seen this stuff in his underwear? Could they see it jammed up his ass? Probably not, therefore you are going to be seen naked and wait longer in an airport for the ILLUSION OF SECURITY.
But, because of people like you, when they push the RFID chips and other tracking devices we can be assured they will pass largely unopposed while idiots make the "I'll give up my rights to not die" sophist arguments.
You could be killed by a guy with a rifle from a balcony (and it has happened) at any time. If you are going to eat it, you are going to eat it, nothing you can do. I would rather eat it with my rights intact than die a controlled lamb.
Seems the passengers are the real security anyway. Last two attempted bombings, passengers stopped the guy. I am for Air Marshalls instead of this other, probably useless, extra screening. El Al doesn't do this crap, they have armed marshalls and alert security at the airport instead and they haven't had a highjacking or bombing in decades.
Mike W / May 11, 2010 at 12:30 pm
user-pic
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/05/06/tsa.scanner.assault/?hpt=T3

This is what happens with people they work with. You think travellers are going to get more respect?

Add a Comment

Other Cities: VancouverMontreal