Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Hi Skip, You responded privately. I hope you don't mind that I respond publicly, quoting your post in full. I don't believe that there is anything in it that you would regret seeing posted but forgive me if I'm wrong. I do so because I believe that, at least in part, my original post was incorrect, or at best badly worded. On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:27:27 -0500, Skip MacElhannon <skipmac@co*.co*> wrote: > I am not certain what point you are trying to make here. Did you think that the label offered by Steve contained fraudulent information? My company ships hazmat products world wide and in my reading of the label I saw nothing that was incorrect. Though I did not go and double check the pertinent paragraphs in the 49 CFR or IATA regs cited on the label I have no reason to suspect that Steve would be foolish enough to misrepresent that information and my dealings with him in the past showed him to be quite thorough in his research. Of course Steve's label did not contain fraudulent information. That was not the point of my post but, quite obviously, my point was not well made. > The goal of this label was simply to make sure that airline officials do not, through ignorance of the correct shipping regulations or over caution, prohibit what is a legal parcel. Proactively presenting the proper documentation may facilitate traveling, legally, with ones dive gear. Personally I believe that if we don't get sensible pretty soon with equipment like this, we're going to have a huge can of worms here. I like to photograph unnawata and have now decided, simply because of September 11, that my next camera will be digital - against my (supposedly) better judgement. Simply because those X Rays are not going to do my film a whole lotta good. Sure, in this instance we're talking batteries. Apart from (pretty simple) batteries such as are found in cameras and strobes, I know next to nothing about them. The batteries that Steve (et al) are talking about are light years removed from the relatively puny ones that I know, entirely capable of containing powerful explosives (that's not my area of expertise either, I surmise). IF, however, a label is capable of allowing such a device through a terminal, when that label is as capable of being "copied" as I suggest (and it can), then the authorities have a problem. Especially if they have not addressed it. Let me give you an apposite example: Not a few years ago now I decided to buy a new (very expensive) slide projector "duty free" because it was leaving the country with me. I would then have to pay duty on re-entry (or smuggle it in). I got it home covered in plastic with printed Customs tape all over it, to stop me from getting it out of the packaging, except I recognised the tape, we'd printed it, and stupid Customs had failed to specify permanent adhesive. So I peeled it back, removed innards, and "resealed" the empty box (using the very same tape). Silly Customs. Gosh, I've just publicly admitted to being a criminal. ;) Cheers, Christian PS Usually I would delete the post you (correctly) copied to me in the interest of bandwidth. This time it might be appropriate to remain there. > At 10:11 PM 1/22/02 +1100, you wrote: > > > >Steve Lindblom wrote: > >> > >> The label, like the book, is copyrighted, so if anyone is going to post it, > >> it should be me :-) > >> > >> Since airline problems can only get worse now that they are searching > >> checked-on as well as carry-on baggage, we've put the SLA battery label > >> from the divelight book on the webpage, at > >> http://www.airspeedpress.com/batterylabel.html > >> so it can be freely downloaded and printed. It's designed to go on standard > >> 2x4 laser label stock. > >(Snip) > > > >> Showing them a printout of someone's post of the appropriate regs is often > >> not going to work, since they'll (quite rightly) have no good reason to > >> believe that the printout is legit - remember how that airline wouldn't > >> accept a laminated secret service photo ID, then wouldn't call the number > >> he gave them to check with the SS! If you are going to carry a copy of the > >> regs (and it's obviously a good idea to do so) try to get one from the > >> manufacturer of your battery, in some official-looking format (printed or > >> on a letterhead). > > > >Steve, > > > >Your sentiments are admirable, but ... BUT - > > > >I run a reasonably sophisticated Artroom, entirely for "legit" purposes. > > > >I guarantee you that I can, no trouble at all, prepare a "legit" > >sticker, letterhead, certificate of authenticity other than, dammit, a > >banknote, as quick as you can say Jack Robinson. Sure, an Artroom's > >fairly expensive, however a computer coupled to, say, QuarkXPress (or > >InDesign), PhotoShop and Illustrator together with a reasonable inkjet > >printer will also get you there. Total cost? Depending on where you > >are, maybe $US8,000 tops for a brand new system? > > > >That's the truth of the matter, no doubt the authorities will learn of > >this sooner rather than later. > > > >The question remains: > > > >What do they do when they do? > > > >Hell, I can take your photograph and Trey's and swop heads. No-one > >would be able to tell and I *mean* no-one. > > > >Oooooops, I'm outta here, > > > >Christian -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]