searching phone

[Hulu]

I thought public photography is first amendment protected activity as well as no expectation of privacy when in public.

If the Cameras were placed in a bathroom or a private residence, it would be a different story.

What if you take your camera to a beach and photograph those foreigners who run around naked on the beach cause they don't any better.

I was taught that privacy must be created in public and that you have no rights to privacy when in public which is how the government gets away with those camera all over the public streets.

Whatever the law is should be a 2 way street not government has unlimited authority to photograph you in public but you have no right to photograph them in public.

The TSA have these machines that would irradiate you with radiation so they could look and laugh at people private parts.

I don't see how that is allow but what this guy is doing is not. The law must be applied equal

 

[Just Blue]

I thought public photography is first amendment protected activity as well as no expectation of privacy when in public.

If the Cameras were placed in a bathroom or a private residence, it would be a different story.

What if you take your camera to a beach and photograph those foreigners who run around naked on the beach cause they don't any better.

I was taught that privacy must be created in public and that you have no rights to privacy when in public which is how the government gets away with those camera all over the public streets.

Whatever the law is should be a 2 way street not government has unlimited authority to photograph you in public but you have no right to photograph them in public.

The TSA have these machines that would irradiate you with radiation so they could look and laugh at people private parts.

I don't see how that is allow but what this guy is doing is not. The law must be applied equal

Are you serious? You are actually comparing security cameras to some pervert taking pictures up the skirt of unknowing innocent victims? Are you a moron?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I thought public photography is first amendment protected activity as well as no expectation of privacy when in public.

Fairly true.

I was taught that privacy must be created in public

And it is when you put clothes on.

The TSA have these machines that would irradiate you with radiation so they could look and laugh at people private parts.

No one is forcing you to board an airline and you have the option to a pat down.

 

[Zigner]

The TSA have these machines that would irradiate you with radiation so they could look and laugh at people private parts.

Yeah - that's what the machines are for. The TSA was bored and needed something to laugh at.

Do you realize how incredibly stupid such a statement sounds (and are you really that worried that your private parts are laughable)?

 

[Hulu]

Are you serious? You are actually comparing security cameras to some pervert taking pictures up the skirt of unknowing innocent victims? Are you a moron?

The TSA was bored and needed something to laugh at.

Yeah - that's what the machines are for. The TSA was bored and needed something to laugh at.

Do you realize how incredibly stupid such a statement sounds (and are you really that worried that your private parts are laughable)?

Tax payer funded machines that use radiation and possible cause cancer being used view innocent civilians private parts? I am curious what type of person would not have a problem with that. Sorry, some of us don't have private jets and still have to fly commercial.

As far at laughing at people private parts. There was an incident in which one TSA employee scanned another TSA employee and was laughing at his private parts and lead to a fist fight. So this is documented incident.

So how do you know this person is not some ex-TSA agent looking for weapons of mass destruction? Also, what is he going to see other than possible underwear or shorts ? Maybe he is looking for people smuggling drugs. The police have done far worst to people for no reason.

If you want to condemn this action, it would be condemned for citizens and government alike. If you want to condone it, then it should be to both as well. Government is not suppose to have any rights that people don't have to begin with.

 

[Zigner]

Tax payer funded machines that use radiation and possible cause cancer being used view innocent civilians private parts? I am curious what type of person would not have a problem with that. Sorry, some of us don't have private jets and still have to fly commercial.

Please give a cite relating to cancer being caused.

As far at laughing at people private parts. There was an incident in which one TSA employee scanned another TSA employee and was laughing at his private parts and lead to a fist fight. So this is documented incident.

One incident doesn't mean they were designed for that. Also, does that mean that you really are concerned that your privates are laughable?

So how do you know this person is not some ex-TSA agent looking for weapons of mass destruction? Also, what is he going to see other than possible underwear or shorts ? Maybe he is looking for people smuggling drugs. The police have done far worst to people for no reason.

Huh?

If you want to condemn this action, it would be condemned for citizens and government alike. If you want to condone it, then it should be to both as well. Government is not suppose to have any rights that people don't have to begin with.

Huh?

 

[Hulu]

Are you serious? You are actually comparing security cameras to some pervert taking pictures up the skirt of unknowing innocent victims? Are you a moron?

No, I am comparing the FULL body scammers the TSA use which can scan your junk so detail, they can tell if you are Jewish or not being MORE invasive and a violation of your rights then a guy with a camera taking pictures of women's underware or shorts.
Why are you fine with one but not the other? Either both are right or both are wrong.

TSA is documented laughing at people private parts and even a documented incident of a fight between 2 TSA agents over it when one scanned the other one.

 

[Zigner]

No, I am comparing the FULL body scammers the TSA use which can scan your junk so detail, they can tell if you are Jewish or not being MORE invasive and a violation of your rights then a guy with a camera taking pictures of women's underware or shorts.

Wait, now you think they are trying to find out if you're Jewish?

Oy vey!

Why are you fine with one but not the other? Either both are right or both are wrong.

Moronic statement.

TSA is documented laughing at people private parts and even a documented incident of a fight between 2 TSA agents over it when one scanned the other one.

Now you're worried about a workplace incident that didn't even involve the public?

 

[Just Blue]

Tax payer funded machines that use radiation and possible cause cancer being used view innocent civilians private parts? I am curious what type of person would not have a problem with that. Sorry, some of us don't have private jets and still have to fly commercial.

As far at laughing at people private parts. There was an incident in which one TSA employee scanned another TSA employee and was laughing at his private parts and lead to a fist fight. So this is documented incident.

So how do you know this person is not some ex-TSA agent looking for weapons of mass destruction? Also, what is he going to see other than possible underwear or shorts ? Maybe he is looking for people smuggling drugs. The police have done far worst to people for no reason.

If you want to condemn this action, it would be condemned for citizens and government alike. If you want to condone it, then it should be to both as well. Government is not suppose to have any rights that people don't have to begin with.

Thank you for answering my last question. I guess you are one.

 

[Hulu]

Please give a cite relating to cancer being caused.

One incident doesn't mean they were designed for that. Also, does that mean that you really are concerned that your privates are laughable?

Huh?

Huh?

you need proof that radiation causes cancer and that exposure should be minimized to what is absolutely necessary. Such as to see a broken bone and such? I suggest you research " ionizing radiation" You seriously don't know this already?

You know that shoe stores use to have radiation machine so you could make sure the shoe fit ok which the government said was harmless. Years later, people got cancer from them and current day they are banned.
They use to make watches in the US with radiation liquid which women use to lick the paint brush to straighten it out. After that, they pretty much all died even one women her jaw fall out cause of it.
There is a history of underestimating the dangers of radiation. They already banned the backscatter machine from airports cause of excessive radiation which I remember the TSA agent trying to downplay at the time saying how safe it was. Well, now its banned.

I know you are probably incapable of understanding this so perhaps someone else may want to read this to understand.

If there is a poison that immediately kills you the second you tough it, then its easy to draw a line and say its dangerous.
If someone does not immediately kill you but may cause damage years in the future, its much more difficult to draw the lines of cause and effect.
There are countless things which the government including the US government said were safe at the time which have been proven to be deadly in the future. Many of these things deal with radiation.

You seem to be saying its ok for the government take and store pictures of your private parts but abhorrent for this private citizen to do the same thing. What if he is looking for weapons or drugs being smuggled into a concert and wants to make a citizen's arrest or alert the authorities?

The powers the government have are ones that we give to them. Think of a small town in the pioneers days which may resort to mob justice giving up that authority to allow a sheriff to keep the peace for them. That is a power that a town gave up to allow justice to be served.

Now lets say that sheriff becomes corrupt and starts touching little kids for " security" reasons. That is NOT a power which was given to him by the towns people. If that sheriff was not there, no one would expect a person in the town to behave this way.

As far as cameras are concerned, the government argued that you have no expectation of privacy while in public and that if you want privacy, you must create it. This is why citizens are allow to film government officials in public the same way that government are allowed to film you in public.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

As for radiation...

The Health Physics Society estimates that airport X-ray scanners deliver 0.1 microsieverts of radiation per scan. In comparison, a typical chest X-ray delivers 100 microsieverts of radiation, according to a 2008 study published in the journal Radiology.

 

[Hulu]

Wait, now you think they are trying to find out if you're Jewish?

Oy vey!


Moronic statement.

Now you're worried about a workplace incident that didn't even involve the public?

You seem very comfortable telling people that its ok to take naked pictures unless they have laughable junk right? Basic principals of the constitution are lost on you. I know exactly the type of person you are now.

Few minutes ago, you said TSA does not laugh at people private parts then later you revised your statement to say they don't laugh to make a difference or that it was 2 rogue agents in Ohio? So when you are caught in a lie, you redefine what a lie is instead of admitting you were wrong.

 

[stealth2]

Guys.... Hulu's right! If TSA agents get to point and laugh at his tiny package (<-- ), perverted randos should be allowed to stick cameras under ladies' skirts.

 

[Hulu]

As for radiation...

The Health Physics Society estimates that airport X-ray scanners deliver 0.1 microsieverts of radiation per scan. In comparison, a typical chest X-ray delivers 100 microsieverts of radiation, according to a 2008 study published in the journal Radiology.

What about the Backscatter X-ray. Tell me why it was REMOVED from service after all those years of use and being told it was safe?

What happen to the so called " safe" backscatter xray machine?
Why do they not have to display the same safety warnings as hospital which use the radiation machines? Why do TSA employees not allowed to wear radiation monitoring tags?

They said the foot/shoe xray that shoe stores had were safe too.

Look, you are probably not going to drop dead on the spot with this but you may get cancer in 20 years cause of these machines.

Back to the original topic, this is more intrusive then the guy taking pictures in public