EPTNaked Scanner - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Spike
United States1392 Posts
| ||
|
RoyW
Ireland270 Posts
| ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
what am i going to dos! | ||
|
blue_arrow
1971 Posts
On October 15 2009 08:31 Mora wrote: oh no they can see the size of my penis what am i going to dos! don't worry bro i got you covered http://www.sizemed.com/ http://www.sinrex.com/ http://www.enhancementresearch.com/ also + Show Spoiler + P.S. Good Luck! | ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
On October 15 2009 08:37 blue_arrow wrote: don't worry bro i got you covered http://www.sizemed.com/ http://www.sinrex.com/ http://www.enhancementresearch.com/ also + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua72u9CuKfk P.S. Good Luck! you must be confused. i am worried about them seeing my 10inch dong. edit - incase i wasn't explicit enough: i don't want to be any bigger. | ||
|
armed_
Canada443 Posts
On October 15 2009 08:27 RoyW wrote: It's a very sad pity that some people are conditioned from childhood to be offended by nakedness. Yeah, the aversion our society nowadays has towards nudity is at best hilarious and at worst downright sad. :/ Can't believe the attitude that nudity is somehow a last bastion of privacy. Inspecting belongings for the sake of security is fine and yet finding out what someone looks like under their clothes is absolutely awful? | ||
|
blue_arrow
1971 Posts
On October 15 2009 08:39 Mora wrote: you must be confused. i am worried about them seeing my 10inch dong. edit - incase i wasn't explicit enough: i don't want to be any bigger. oh I see what you're getting at, well I thought you were a nice guy with a little problem but instead you're just another one of those dudes who hides behind a false mask of humility! just cause you have a foot long john doesn't mean you can mock the guys with milimeter peters =( | ||
|
baal
10669 Posts
On October 15 2009 05:48 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Didn't know national security was dependent on seeing people in the nude(ish). Privacy should still hold some ounce of importance people. I'm fine with them padding me down, making me walk through a metal detector, having dogs roam around etc.. but this is a bit much. And it simply won't fly.. I promise you. agreed, this is just ridiculous | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
I know it doesn't seem very in depth or harmful... but I'm sure there's people who don't want pictures taken of their seemingly naked form... its kinda like those showers with the funky glass that you can kinda almost see through... but not quite... I'm not sure I'm be totally comfortable letting a stranger into the bathroom to look at my distorted naked form... on the other hand... you're not naked... and its not like you ever see the pictures... still... I'd prefer it to a pat-down but I'd still be weirded out | ||
|
omnigol
United States166 Posts
| ||
|
alphafuzard
United States1610 Posts
 | ||
|
Pengu1n
United States552 Posts
| ||
|
Rice
United States1332 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
On October 15 2009 08:04 {88}iNcontroL wrote: I dunno you ok with someone surgically implanting a bomb in themselves made from non metals? At a certain point we draw the line in favor of privacy, integrity and respect over "worst possible case scenario." We have other methods of detection that pick up the same/nearly the same amount of risk without exposing the person. and that line quite obviously needs to be drawn before exploratory surgery, but someone sees a rough outline of you naked in order to make sure you arent carrying some kind of explosive? god forbid. | ||
|
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On October 15 2009 05:40 {88}iNcontroL wrote: And when they explain that to Meghan Fox you think she will go "oh, ok" ? 1. If it exists it will be released somehow, somewhere. 2. If you told Megan Fox that im almost positive she wouldnt even understand it, so her answer would most likely be "oh, ok" | ||
|
Ilikestarcraft
Korea (South)17733 Posts
I think this method could have some potential because it could speed up the process in airports. I cant speak that i went to a lot of airports but the airports i went to it seemed abit long having each person going through the metal detector single file and then be checked. It would speed the process up. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On October 15 2009 12:12 IdrA wrote: and that line quite obviously needs to be drawn before exploratory surgery, but someone sees a rough outline of you naked in order to make sure you arent carrying some kind of explosive? god forbid. Says you. I say we draw the line before people are getting exposed. We have a bunch of planes blowing up from non metal explosives? No? Ok then. Why sacrifice the privacy of EVERYONE who rides a plane so we can use a lazier version of protection? | ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27172 Posts
It doesn't matter if it is a "rough outline" or "non-pornographic", and it isn't a case of Yeah, the aversion our society nowadays has towards nudity is at best hilarious and at worst downright sad. :/ being averse to nudity. It is simply not a liberty I think airports and airlines should be able to take.edit- And I will take it a step further, although this argument is gasoline for the flames. As long as measures like this and others (no toothpaste, no liquids, no FINGERNAIL CUTTERS) are continually being implemented, terrorists never need to hijack another plane. They are winning every day as society immerses itself in this bullshit paranoia. | ||
|
phase
United States399 Posts
| ||
|
strongwind
United States862 Posts
| ||
| ||
