foxnews.com— Privacy advocates worried about x-ray scanners making their way around U.S. airports may be surprised to know the technology is also making its way onto America's streets.
Oct 25, 2010View in Crawl 4
"A van that can drive down the street and look through people's clothes, look into vehicles and even peer into your home? I think that's an invasion of privacy and not what we should be doing," Utah Congressman Jason Chaffetz told FoxNews.com.
"But Hey.... If you're not doing anything wrong then then you've got nothing to fear, right?"
it's this kind of mentality that will be the end of basic freedoms in society. Can you take a moment to analyze what you are suggesting? You are suggesting that privacy is not an issue because you shouldn't do anything wrong anyway. Yet somehow you don't understand how a democracy works. It's not like communism where the government has authority without legitimacy. In this case, the government is losing its legitimacy (which is a basic necessity to democracy) to protect human rights of privacy. It's very frustrating to read your post, because you are supporting the idea that you shouldn't break the law. Remember prohibition? Remember when slaves and the underground railroad existed? What if the government could just spy on you and know that you were helping someone the government has deemed a criminal that is actually an activist. Should they be allowed to do that? I swear to f**king christ are you f**king retarded?
What a bunch of crap! Aren't these people satisfied with all the invasions of our privacy they conduct now? There should be severe limitations put on the use of this technology NOW!
Hasn't SCOTUS already ruled on this crap. I seem to recall a case where thermal imaging was deemed illegal under the constitution without a warrant. Something about if the technology wasn't readily available to an ordinary person it was a search. Of course this hinges on the government actually obeying the law, something their not well known for.
So is it ok if we start shooting radiation at police whenever we feel like it.
Seriously I feel like I should keep a geiger counter handy. I wonder what radiation level the courts would consider acceptable. I mean can I sue when my nuts are the size of grapefruits from ball cancer.
barbradyOct 25, 2010
"A van that can drive down the street and look through people's clothes, look into vehicles and even peer into your home? I think that's an invasion of privacy and not what we should be doing," Utah Congressman Jason Chaffetz told FoxNews.com.
crapolatimeOct 25, 2010
Radiation badges. Get your radiation badges.
ninicraftoneOct 25, 2010
But Hey.... If you're not doing anything wrong then then you've got nothing to fear, right?
Closed AccountOct 26, 2010
except elevated doses of radiation and being treated as guilty until proven innocent
chimthegrimOct 26, 2010
"But Hey.... If you're not doing anything wrong then then you've got nothing to fear, right?"
it's this kind of mentality that will be the end of basic freedoms in society. Can you take a moment to analyze what you are suggesting? You are suggesting that privacy is not an issue because you shouldn't do anything wrong anyway. Yet somehow you don't understand how a democracy works. It's not like communism where the government has authority without legitimacy. In this case, the government is losing its legitimacy (which is a basic necessity to democracy) to protect human rights of privacy. It's very frustrating to read your post, because you are supporting the idea that you shouldn't break the law. Remember prohibition? Remember when slaves and the underground railroad existed? What if the government could just spy on you and know that you were helping someone the government has deemed a criminal that is actually an activist. Should they be allowed to do that? I swear to f**king christ are you f**king retarded?
lionel1024Oct 26, 2010
OK, that was sarcasm.
Also, why the f**k is freedom now pluralized as "freefoms?" I saw some deers in my back yard yesterday. See how retarded that sounds?
firewall1Oct 26, 2010
"as little radiation as a chest x-ray."
That's quite a bit! And if you're getting zapped a couple times a day...
bcronosOct 26, 2010
What a bunch of crap! Aren't these people satisfied with all the invasions of our privacy they conduct now? There should be severe limitations put on the use of this technology NOW!
psypher1Oct 26, 2010
Kill these assh**es posting ads!
Closed AccountOct 26, 2010
guilty until proven innocent
ano233Oct 26, 2010
Hasn't SCOTUS already ruled on this crap. I seem to recall a case where thermal imaging was deemed illegal under the constitution without a warrant. Something about if the technology wasn't readily available to an ordinary person it was a search. Of course this hinges on the government actually obeying the law, something their not well known for.
Here we go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States
1fastdakOct 26, 2010
So is it ok if we start shooting radiation at police whenever we feel like it.
Seriously I feel like I should keep a geiger counter handy. I wonder what radiation level the courts would consider acceptable. I mean can I sue when my nuts are the size of grapefruits from ball cancer.