searching phone

[Zigner]

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

No, it's not.

 

[Hulu]

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.

You can go in that machine all day and get all the cancer you want.

If you are fine with the TSA , then you should be fine with public photography.

What is the guy going to see anyway? Poor lighting and shorts?

You should be equally concerned about both.

 

[Hulu]

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

Glad I could help.

 

[stealth2]

What is the guy going to see anyway? Poor lighting and shorts?

You do know that women often wear thongs, or no panties at all, yes? No, you probably haven't had enough intimate exposure. Seriously, Hulu - you're acting nuts.

 

[Hulu]

Fairly true.



And it is when you put clothes on.



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

Why is being molested or being explored to radiation and seen naked the condition of flying?

No one is forcing the airlines to have Muslims terrorist on the plane. There are easy way to have both security and allow people to travel unmolested.

"The U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court recognize and protect the right to interstate travel. The travel right entails privacy and free domestic movement without governmental abridgement."

 

[quincy]

You have a choice on whether to be scanned or not. If you are worried about cancer, don’t fly (and don’t smoke and limit your time in the sun ...). If you are worried about privacy, don’t use the internet.

The airport scans are not surreptitious. The under skirt photography is.

In other words, there is an important difference between the two.

 

[Zigner]

"The U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court recognize and protect the right to interstate travel. The travel right entails privacy and free domestic movement without governmental abridgement."

Funny - I don't see any mentions of airline flight in the Constitution.

 

[Hulu]

You do know that women often wear thongs, or no panties at all, yes? No, you probably haven't had enough intimate exposure. Seriously, Hulu - you're acting nuts.

The cheerleaders at my school wore the same gym shorts that you would wear for gym class.

If you are talking about women dressing like prostitutes and strippers, then the privacy must be created by them.

They are culpable in this situation.

If someone pulled their pants down and photo bombed a picture then claim to be an innocent victim.

like I said before, there is no expectation on privacy in public and privacy must be created.
TSA is circumventing that privacy with radiation with an very invasive strip search machine which in my opinion is worse then that this jokester is doing.

That being said, people who have been filming in public have been accused of horrible crimes and even beaten and arrested, jail for taking pictures in public.

Look at Turner VS Driver out of Texas, I have listen to that appeal court and they were accusing him of terrorism.

YES, TERRORISM because he was filming in public.

Turner is a Youtuber who will film in public and post it on youtube as well as a collage student at the time.

Another youtuber was filming a UPS facility and cops arrested him because there was like a school a mile in the opposite direction that he was pointed the camera and I think also obstructed by buildings.

Real Estate agent was almost arrested by police for setting up his camera as a house he was selling because there was a military base like a mile up the road and some karen called.

Film in public and you face all sorts of backlash against you.

Also, film with a normal camera, and that will get them even more upset then filming with a cell phone Camera.

There are youtube people who literally make their entire living filming the reaction they get for filming in public cause of people overreacting as well as countless lawsuit against the police for false arrest.

 

[quincy]

The cheerleaders at my school wore the same gym shorts that you would wear for gym class.

If you are talking about women dressing like prostitutes and strippers, then the privacy must be created by them.

They are culpable in this situation.

If someone pulled their pants down and photo bombed a picture then claim to be an innocent victim.

like I said before, there is no expectation on privacy in public and privacy must be created.
TSA is circumventing that privacy with radiation with an very invasive strip search machine which in my opinion is worse then that this jokester is doing.

That being said, people who have been filming in public have been accused of horrible crimes and even beaten and arrested, jail for taking pictures in public.

Look at Turner VS Driver out of Texas, I have listen to that appeal court and they were accusing him of terrorism.

YES, TERRORISM because he was filming in public.

Turner is a Youtuber who will film in public and post it on youtube as well as a collage student at the time.

Another youtuber was filming a UPS facility and cops arrested him because there was like a school a mile in the opposite direction that he was pointed the camera and I think also obstructed by buildings.

Real Estate agent was almost arrested by police for setting up his camera as a house he was selling because there was a military base like a mile up the road and some karen called.

Film in public and you face all sorts of backlash against you.

Also, film with a normal camera, and that will get them even more upset then filming with a cell phone Camera.

There are youtube people who literally make their entire living filming the reaction they get for filming in public cause of people overreacting as well as countless lawsuit against the police for false arrest.

If a person feels their privacy rights have been violated, they can seek out assistance from an attorney in their area to determine if the purported violation actually was illegal and, if so, what the legal recourse is.

This really is not a discussion site. We discuss laws as they are and not what someone thinks they should be. You can speak to your local, state or federal representatives if you want to change the law.

 

[Hulu]

You have a choice on whether to be scanned or not. If you are worried about cancer, don’t fly (and don’t smoke and limit your time in the sun ...). If you are worried about privacy, don’t use the internet.

The airport scans are not surreptitious. The under skirt photography is.

In other words, there is an important difference between the two.

Your choice is to be exposed to radiation and a naked (virtual strip search) be made of you or having someone physical molest you and physically touching your private parts.

That is like China saying you have a choice between doing what we say or a bullet to a head. That is a false choice.

Its like saying I can break your arm or leg, you decide and then saying the person choice that for themselves.

There is no choice of just doing the metal detector or metal detector and a chemical scan for explosives. Nope, its between radiation exposure/captured nude images or physical molestation.

That is a false choice and a violation on constitution rights however these rights are often violated in the name of security theater.

Same goes for the border chekpoints within 100 miles of any border which is basically 2/3 of the USA. When you consider any ocean to be a border.

The supreme court often ignore the constitution to allow something if you claim security as the reason.

They also said that a person growing food for their family could be regulated because it effects "interstate commence. "

 

[quincy]

Your choice is to be exposed to radiation and a naked (virtual strip search) be made of you or having someone physical molest you and physically touching your private parts.

That is like China saying you have a choice between doing what we say or a bullet to a head. That is a false choice.

Its like saying I can break your arm or leg, you decide and then saying the person choice that for themselves.

There is no choice of just doing the metal detector or metal detector and a chemical scan for explosives. Nope, its between radiation exposure/captured nude images or physical molestation.

That is a false choice and a violation on constitution rights however these rights are often violated in the name of security theater.

Same goes for the border chekpoints within 100 miles of any border which is basically 2/3 of the USA. When you consider any ocean to be a border.

The supreme court often ignore the constitution to allow something if you claim security as the reason.

They also said that a person growing food for their family could be regulated because it effects "interstate commence. "

Again, speak of your concerns with your state representatives. You are misunderstanding the purpose of this forum. It is not a discussion site.

 

[stealth2]

The cheerleaders at my school wore the same gym shorts that you would wear for gym class.

The cheerleaders at my school wore the same gym shorts that you would wear for gym class.

If you are talking about women dressing like prostitutes and strippers, then the privacy must be created by them.

Cheerleaders wear shorts/similar because they know the moves they perform could expose their private areas. Wearing thongs or going commando is not akin to dressing like a sex worker. You're telling us plenty about yourself, though...

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Why is being molested or being explored to radiation and seen naked the condition of flying?

Because the lines would be too long to search everyone without it.

"The U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court recognize and protect the right to interstate travel. The travel right entails privacy and free domestic movement without governmental abridgement."

You can walk from Maine to California and nobody will make you have a license or go through a scanner.