Child Porn at British Airports

061201_ap_airport_xray_02.jpg


this is the breast safety device i've ever seen...


boobs.
 
Feath said:
British Laws on Child Pornography.

Do try to keep up.
Click to expand...

You think this is pornography?

Tyguy said:
061201_ap_airport_xray_02.jpg
Click to expand...
Then you are a moron.

Do you even know what pornography is?


-Pornography or porn is the depiction of explicit sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexually exciting the viewer. ...

-creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire

-pornographic - Containing an explicit depiction of sexual activity; Depicting something in details, usually unnecessarily

-Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.


You better get to the art museums and censor all of the famous paintings in there. Maybe just blur out the breasts, because that's hardcore porn for you.

Patriots are so pathetic.
 
VirusType2 said:
Like what, a right to privacy? What about bag searches, isn't that violating privacy?
Click to expand...

Its a matter of scale. Someone rummaging through your clothes is not even in the same ballpark as someone studying your naked body for discrepancies.

I am going to refuse to travel by air if/when/since these things are installed. Sucks for the Air travel industry.
 
VirusType2 said:
You think this is pornography?


Then you are a moron.

Do you even know what pornography is?


-Pornography or porn is the depiction of explicit sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexually exciting the viewer. ...

-creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire

-pornographic - Containing an explicit depiction of sexual activity; Depicting something in details, usually unnecessarily

-Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.


You better get to the art museums and censor all of the famous paintings in there. Maybe just blur out the breasts, because that's hardcore porn for you.

Patriots are so pathetic.
Click to expand...

This is a gross over-reaction, boyo.
Feath isn't being patriotic, he's just bringing up the point that it isn't at all clear whether or not these scanners break the law. That's what the controversy has come from, as reported in the news. Quite rightly, people are worried about this, because they're already being put to use, before it's been clarified whether or not they're even legal. It's possible that this breaches the human rights of children. Like many anti-terrorism Things, they've been rushed out before anyone has really had the chance to consider if they're legal or morally correct.
 
"Try and keep up." Very condescending.

If the law says that artistic nudity or nudity for medical or security use is pornography, then the law is wrong, because it certainly isn't pornography by definition.

Even nudity in public isn't porn. If I were to strip down and run down the street - it's indecent and against the law, but it's certainly not pornography. Trying not to facepalm.

That's why I didn't even know what he was talking about, and assumed he was talking about violation of privacy.
 
Its obviously not pornography. Yalls need to shut up about that. The issue is privacy. And frankly, it sounds like its unconstitutional.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Click to expand...
 
VirusType2 said:
"Try and keep up." Very condescending.

If the law says that artistic nudity or nudity for medical or security use is pornography, then the law is wrong, because it certainly isn't pornography by definition.

That's why I didn't even know what he was talking about, and assumed he was talking about violation of privacy.
Click to expand...

Oh, don't let him rile you. The point really is that the law just hasn't been clarified, when it comes to these things. It may well be that this could be classed under some artistic license or anti-terrorism stuff - but I wonder if that would really be justified all the same. I read that they've been rolled out across 50 airports in the US, and they're being used in a few airports here in the UK.

A scanner that can see through my clothes is impressive technology, but it's also really disturbing that they're so readily accepted just because it's in airports.
 
I've been using this at the local mall for years... D:
 
Krynn72 said:
Its obviously not pornography. Yalls need to shut up about that. The issue is privacy. And frankly, it sounds like its unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
Right, exactly what I've been saying all along.

I could literally repost what I originally said (god damn it), and I will:
VirusType2 said:
What about bag searches, isn't that violating privacy?
Click to expand...
It was a valid question, but he seemed to get defensive and condescending about it. Or maybe he's like that all the time, I don't know.

The law pretty much states that searching personal belongings (like luggage) is unwarranted and illegal.
A scanner that can see through my clothes is impressive technology, but it's also really disturbing that they're so readily accepted just because it's in airports.
Click to expand...
OK yeah.
 
Is the TSA a government institution? I've always wondered how it was constitutional for them to search people's baggage. I figured if the TSA wasn't government then it would make more sense that they could get around the law/consitution (capitalism is wonderful).

But I guess even if it isn't, it could be constitutional if you agree to it when you buy your ticket and its written in the fine print. Not like they're forcing you to fly on airplanes.

Still, I doubt there is anything that says they can search everyone's body without cause.

What would happen if you refused to submit to a cavity search at an airport, and chose to simply leave and not board any airplanes? Would you be allowed to do so?

Also, everyone watch the colbert report's skit about this. Watch from ~5:00 on.

http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/mon-january-4-2010-erick-erickson

spoiler:
121kr.jpg
 
Krynn72 said:
What would happen if you refused to submit to a cavity search at an airport, and chose to simply leave and not board any airplanes? Would you be allowed to do so?
Click to expand...
That's a good question. Really only police have the authority to do something like that. Maybe Homeland Security has police authority at airports.

I know that The Department of Homeland Security has been working with airliners, so these scanners wouldn't have been a surprise at all in the US - in fact they may be required by law! (I don't know, I'm just saying)

However, the US government has often been using the current terrorist threat situation as a means to circumvent normal laws. The Patriot Act, for example. They make new laws that supersede normal laws.
 
I used to work for a company contracted by the TSA for screening at my local airport... not entirely sure what I'd think of using something like this. And I've given thousands of pat-downs (though only men). I wonder if they'd do men and women lanes.
 
VirusType2 said:
You think this is pornography?


Then you are a moron.

Do you even know what pornography is?


-Pornography or porn is the depiction of explicit sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexually exciting the viewer. ...

-creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire

-pornographic - Containing an explicit depiction of sexual activity; Depicting something in details, usually unnecessarily

-Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.


You better get to the art museums and censor all of the famous paintings in there. Maybe just blur out the breasts, because that's hardcore porn for you.

Patriots are so pathetic.
Click to expand...

The law says it's pornography.

There's two things I'm saying.

1) The Law says that Child Pornography is a certain thing.
2) The Scanners produce an image that violate that specific law.

And that's it.

I'm not being patriotic, I'm defending the sodding Guardian. Saying that the Guardian is causing some sort of Moral panic is a bit like someone linking to Fox News and people complaining about the story being too PC.

I don't like the scanners for the reasons Farrow (and Krynn) mentioned. I was trying to explain why the scanner story wasn't a "CHILD PORN FOR AIRPORT WORKERS. IT MAKES ME SICK" story.
 
Krynn72 said:
What would happen if you refused to submit to a cavity search at an airport, and chose to simply leave and not board any airplanes? Would you be allowed to do so?
Click to expand...

I caught a plane here the other day - the line through security was long, and I was bored. Apparently you are free to refuse to be checked, and if you do that then they're free to refuse you entry past security. So, yeah, you could just walk away - unless the police then rolled up with some jurisdiction to search you.
 
Everyone would probably think you're carrying something if you refused. :/
 
they should just actually go through and do the checks their supposed to at airports rather than spend money getting a bunch of shit like that.
 
They should just stop with all these expensive security measures because none of them ****ing work and are just ways for politicians to launder money.

The terrorists over christmas break got on the plane and were caught by the passengers. Just like it would have been without any of these overly elaborate security measures.
 
Krynn72 said:
They should just stop with all these expensive security measures because none of them ****ing work and are just ways for politicians to launder money.

The terrorists over christmas break got on the plane and were caught by the passengers. Just like it would have been without any of these overly elaborate security measures.
Click to expand...

Just put a sign up. "NO TERRORISTS ALLOWED"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top