Comments on: A view from across the pond http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2008/02/13/usa-metric-changeover-stalled/ Commentary on the measurement muddle in the UK Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:03:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Mike Oxley http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2008/02/13/usa-metric-changeover-stalled/#comment-10975 Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:34:35 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2008/02/13/usa-metric-changeover-stalled/#comment-10975 Re: The 30,000 people crossing the Atlantic each day, plus some flying over the Pacific, Mexico, and Canada. The US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) rules for carry-on luggage are: 3-1-1 for carry-ons = 3 ounce bottle or less (by volume) ; one quart-sized, clear, plastic, zip-top bag; one bag per passenger placed in screening bin. The one-quart bag per person limits the total liquid volume each traveler can bring. The 3 ounce container size is a security measure. Question 1. What is the volume of a 3 ounce bottle; doesn’t density apply here? Question 2. How do you measure the volume of a flat plastic bag, even if you know what a US quart is? Question 3. How do you expect a foreigner from an SI country to obey these rules, when they don’t make sense to a US citizen? Question 4. Section 205b of the US Metric Conversion Act of 1973 states that it is the declared policy of the US government to limit ‘traditional units’ to non-business activities. Does the TSA regard international aviation as a non-business activity, or is it just ignoring the 1973 Act? http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm <a href="http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/metric-conv.html#205b" rel="nofollow">http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/metric-conv.html#205b</a> <em>(Metric Views notes that this comment is off-topic, but is pleased to draw the issue to readers' attention)</em>  Re: The 30,000 people crossing the Atlantic each day, plus some flying over the Pacific, Mexico, and Canada.
The US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) rules for carry-on luggage are:
3-1-1 for carry-ons = 3 ounce bottle or less (by volume) ; one quart-sized, clear, plastic, zip-top bag; one bag per passenger placed in screening bin. The one-quart bag per person limits the total liquid volume each traveler can bring. The 3 ounce container size is a security measure.
Question 1. What is the volume of a 3 ounce bottle; doesn’t density apply here?
Question 2. How do you measure the volume of a flat plastic bag, even if you know what a US quart is?
Question 3. How do you expect a foreigner from an SI country to obey these rules, when they don’t make sense to a US citizen?
Question 4. Section 205b of the US Metric Conversion Act of 1973 states that it is the declared policy of the US government to limit ‘traditional units’ to non-business activities. Does the TSA regard international aviation as a non-business activity, or is it just ignoring the 1973 Act?

http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/metric-conv.html#205b

(Metric Views notes that this comment is off-topic, but is pleased to draw the issue to readers’ attention) 

]]> by: Ezra Steinberg http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2008/02/13/usa-metric-changeover-stalled/#comment-10922 Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:30:05 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2008/02/13/usa-metric-changeover-stalled/#comment-10922 I tend to agree. Without a coordinated program and political will, metrication will be a hodge-podge of some metric here and there with most things still in US Customary units. The USA is getting closer at least to allowing voluntary metric-only labelling. Two more states need to adopt one set of regulations and the US Congress needs to pass (and the President sign) a bill that amends another law in order to reach that goal for all products sold in the USA and its territories and possessions. How different this is from the UK, which is clearly predominantly metric in its labelling and advertising of goods. If the UKMA and supporters and allies manage to convince the UK government to convert road signs to metric, I am convinced that the tipping point for the disappearance of nearly all Imperial in the UK will be achieved. At that point, metric supporters in the USA will have yet another strong argument to make to advance metrication over here since we will be able to point to the conversion to metric of our former "mother country" and originator of our existing set of units. We might then say to our fellow countrymen over here that, if metric is good enough for the country that gave us our language and our customary units, then by Jove it ought to be good enough for us! I tend to agree. Without a coordinated program and political will, metrication will be a hodge-podge of some metric here and there with most things still in US Customary units.

The USA is getting closer at least to allowing voluntary metric-only labelling. Two more states need to adopt one set of regulations and the US Congress needs to pass (and the President sign) a bill that amends another law in order to reach that goal for all products sold in the USA and its territories and possessions. How different this is from the UK, which is clearly predominantly metric in its labelling and advertising of goods.

If the UKMA and supporters and allies manage to convince the UK government to convert road signs to metric, I am convinced that the tipping point for the disappearance of nearly all Imperial in the UK will be achieved.

At that point, metric supporters in the USA will have yet another strong argument to make to advance metrication over here since we will be able to point to the conversion to metric of our former “mother country” and originator of our existing set of units. We might then say to our fellow countrymen over here that, if metric is good enough for the country that gave us our language and our customary units, then by Jove it ought to be good enough for us!

]]>