EPTNude body scans at airports - Page 14
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
| ||
|
RoosterSamurai
Japan2108 Posts
On November 19 2010 07:49 Fa1nT wrote: When another plane gets crashed, bombed, someone shot on a plane, stabbed, etc, we will bring this topic back up and discuss it again. 4th amendment is that way ----> Check it out, yo. | ||
|
Kenderson
Canada280 Posts
 | ||
|
SharkSpider
Canada606 Posts
On November 19 2010 07:34 Nazarid wrote: if these "pictures" were secure then why are so many people already out there on the web with these "secure" pictures? well if you want to have near naked pics taken of you and possibly released to public view you can use these new machines or just have some guy named bob pat ya down and be done with it... and if your selected to use the machine refuse it... there is no law that states you have to cooperate with that test.. you can always opt for a different method although this may lead to abusive behavior from the Airport security and possibly cost you thousands of dollars in court fees but its the point... I am an American and i shouldn't have to use the security machine that rapes my rights as an American citizen, I like my cloths thank you and no one but my wife needs to see my "business" when a simple full body pat down can do the same thing this machine does. If you want a body pat you can get one. Also names are never attached to the pictures and the released ones have been -examples- released to the media so that they can't show an accurate representation. Furthermore, the faces are all blurred out in these ones. The reason these machines are there is because people don't want the full body pat downs. This is the most elegant solution to the problem of needing more info about what people have on their bodies but not wanting to impose on people's rights by having to grab their junk. | ||
|
RoosterSamurai
Japan2108 Posts
On November 19 2010 08:14 SharkSpider wrote: If you want a body pat you can get one. Also names are never attached to the pictures and the released ones have been -examples- released to the media so that they can't show an accurate representation. Furthermore, the faces are all blurred out in these ones. The reason these machines are there is because people don't want the full body pat downs. This is the most elegant solution to the problem of needing more info about what people have on their bodies but not wanting to impose on people's rights by having to grab their junk. So you're saying if a nameless, faceless person on the internet wanted a picture of your genitals, with no picture of your face, you'd be okay because they don't know your name, and won't see your face? Hmmm......Sounds a bit odd to me. | ||
|
SharkSpider
Canada606 Posts
On November 19 2010 08:16 RoosterSamurai wrote: So you're saying if a nameless, faceless person on the internet wanted a picture of your genitals, with no picture of your face, you'd be okay because they don't know your name, and won't see your face? Hmmm......Sounds a bit odd to me. No, I'm saying that some pictures have been released (voluntarily on the pretext that faces are blurred) so that the public can know what's going on (and start shitstorming before they actually look in to the facts). That's no reason to say anything about pictures getting leaked, and even less reason to keep saying "nude" instead of what these pictures actually look like. When I walk through one of these things during my next flight, a picture will be taken, some random airport person who doesn't know me and probably never will will get 10 seconds to look at it, then throw it away because I won't have a bomb strapped to my gut. I really have absolutely no problem with this. In fact, I'd be happy if getting a chance to see a healthy person walk through made the security officer's day just that much better, considering the amount of gargantuan americans they'll have to look at throughout the day. That can't be a fun job, but if ten years from now, they catch some fat guy with C-4 taped up between his belly and his junk , it'll be worth every idiot complaining about the whole deal, every media-fuelled misconception and every angry TLer who thinks that this is all part of some 1984 fascist power grab. Also absolutely everything in your post screams minsinformed and blown out of porportions. | ||
|
Bartuc
Netherlands629 Posts
| ||
|
themorningstar
United States22 Posts
I also don't like that they fine you if you opt-out of both and leave. | ||
|
Zhek
Canada342 Posts
| ||
|
Romantic
United States1844 Posts
On November 19 2010 07:36 Manifesto7 wrote: By keeping the American public fearful like this, the terrorists win without launching another attack. It is also the reason I won't fly out of the US again. It is an unacceptable level of intrusion just to take an airplane. Unfortunately, I'd bet the majority of the population is so disarmed by FUD and a lack of respect that the outrage will eventually die. It is also depressing that supporters seem to think you have a say in the matter, "Well is ok if they can't see my face" or, "as long as they don't save the pictures!". You have no say in the matter. | ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
| ||
|
SharkSpider
Canada606 Posts
On November 19 2010 09:15 Romantic wrote: Unfortunately, I'd bet the majority of the population is so disarmed by FUD and a lack of respect that the outrage will eventually die. It is also depressing that supporters seem to think you have a say in the matter, "Well is ok if they can't see my face" or, "as long as they don't save the pictures!". You have no say in the matter. It's depressing to see people assuming the worst possible answer to all of these questions when it's been specifically stated that that's not the case. Obviously I don't want these pictures put up on a billboard in my hometown with my real picture and name plastered on them, but the fact is that this won't happen, no matter how often people make outlandish claims about the security of the images. | ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
| ||
|
Romantic
United States1844 Posts
On November 19 2010 09:28 SharkSpider wrote: It's depressing to see people assuming the worst possible answer to all of these questions when it's been specifically stated that that's not the case. Obviously I don't want these pictures put up on a billboard in my hometown with my real picture and name plastered on them, but the fact is that this won't happen, no matter how often people make outlandish claims about the security of the images. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html Learn it, you're already living it. You'd be making sense if you weren't attacking imaginary comments and scenarios. Also, you do not have a choice on whether it happens or not. Sorry. Bureaucracy knows Best. | ||
|
SharkSpider
Canada606 Posts
On November 19 2010 09:31 Romantic wrote: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html Learn it, you're already living it. You'd be making sense if you weren't attacking imaginary comments and scenarios. Also, you do not have a choice on whether it happens or not. Sorry. Bureaucracy knows Best. See: Sarcasm People in this thread have suggested that these pictures could get leaked online, and that an operator might recognize people he or she knows in the scans. My comment was pertaining to the latter, namely, photos getting online and people being able to find out who they are. Neither of these are likely or even possible with the current system. Don't confuse taking a condescending tone (what I do) with being a moron (what the people who think that if they go through one of these there's a chance people they know will see the images are doing) And of course I don't have a choice. I'm just pointing out that the people who do make the decisions have made some correctly. You can't base your arguments on theoretics about what the authorities could do with the system when they've been quite specific in saying that they're not doing that. If they do change their opinions and start changing policies, then of course it will warrant another look. Until then, anyone talking about having the images leaked is presenting a straw man argument. (Gasp, you're not the only one who can identify them) | ||
|
Romantic
United States1844 Posts
Hundreds were leaked, so I don't know what you are talking about when you say people are unduly concerned. It is the typical authoritarian line that you don't have any reason to worry and it will never happen. No, it really isn't a strawman, even if it hadn't happened, it is a legitimate concern, albeit minor in the opposition to the scanners. I am glad you are fine with the scanners. May you enjoy going through the Testicle Squeezing Administration's new checkpoints ^_________^ | ||
|
shaunnn
Ireland1230 Posts
| ||
|
Zealotdriver
United States1557 Posts
| ||
|
FinestHour
United States18466 Posts
| ||
|
Romantic
United States1844 Posts
On November 19 2010 10:08 FinestHour wrote: What do they do about crippled people like in wheelchairs? Do they still have to submit to this kind of scan that requires them to have to stand up all the way Yup. Did you expect anything different from the government? | ||
| ||
