Disney finger scanning
- Thread starter SocialNumb
- Start date
J the TyranT
Thats just how it is...
privacy? what the FUCK is that???
It'd follow the tradition of old Walt anyways... dude's a psycho:
Walt Disney: Hollywood's Dark Prince is a biography by Marc Eliot, about the darker side of entertainer Walt Disney. Among the serious character flaws and deeds of Disney's of which Eliot claims are his life-long anti-Semitism (including a deleted scene from the 1933 Silly Symphony Three Little Pigs in which the Big Bad Wolf dresses as a Jewish peddler), his covert employment by the House Un-American Activities Committee as a spy against Communists in Hollywood, intense right-wing politics (claiming he wore a Barry Goldwater badge when receiving the Medal of Freedom from President Lyndon Johnson just before the 1964 election and refusing to lower the American flag at Disneyland after the assassination of John F. Kennedy) and his fear that he was the illegitimate son of a Spanish priest.
It'd follow the tradition of old Walt anyways... dude's a psycho:
Walt Disney: Hollywood's Dark Prince is a biography by Marc Eliot, about the darker side of entertainer Walt Disney. Among the serious character flaws and deeds of Disney's of which Eliot claims are his life-long anti-Semitism (including a deleted scene from the 1933 Silly Symphony Three Little Pigs in which the Big Bad Wolf dresses as a Jewish peddler), his covert employment by the House Un-American Activities Committee as a spy against Communists in Hollywood, intense right-wing politics (claiming he wore a Barry Goldwater badge when receiving the Medal of Freedom from President Lyndon Johnson just before the 1964 election and refusing to lower the American flag at Disneyland after the assassination of John F. Kennedy) and his fear that he was the illegitimate son of a Spanish priest.
Chryst Krispies
Vanilla Gorilla
spioraid
Fancy a pint? Or two?
It's not an invasion of privacy. Simply don't go. Besides, there is no such thing as a 'right of privacy'. I wish people would read our Constitution a bit closer.
egan.
daylightdies.com
It isn't really invasive if you don't have to do it.....
Since your banking, purchases, income, criminal history, address and internet browsing are all relatively easily obtained information...well, your thumb print doesn't seem all that important.....until they start using that as your ss card.
Since your banking, purchases, income, criminal history, address and internet browsing are all relatively easily obtained information...well, your thumb print doesn't seem all that important.....until they start using that as your ss card.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Fuck Disney. The way I see it is IF and when they want info it's there right to get it. It's not exactly public property.
Genius Gone Insane
http://www.¯\(°_o)/¯.com
The only reason I'm skeptical of what you say is that many of the American big dogs agree with you, and I don't trust them.
Somebody call the wahmbulance. I'm sick of these crybabies whining about privacy. Do they even know what they actually are entitled to or are they just trying to be on a bandwagon?
~006
~006
hoehlentroll
Member
I would never give away my thumb print. Imagine you go to a store and lay around some finger prints. After shopping the store gets robbed and you one of the suspects. In Germany they want to include the thumb print in the ID-Card. I will refuse to replace my old ID with the new one
Same with some video rental store. who do they think they are, asking me for my finger prints. fuck them
Same with some video rental store. who do they think they are, asking me for my finger prints. fuck them
So we don't have rights unless the Constitution gives them to us? Interesting.
Privacy should be held as a basic human right because otherwise the entirety of modern society collapses. Now, when you willingly enter someone's property and something like that scanner is a condition of entry it's not an invasion of privacy because you're doing it voluntarily.
But this interpretation that our rights are LIMITED to what's in the Constitution is fucking absurd and outright dangerous. Yeah, you might not object to having your car searched or your background checked because you don't do anything wrong - but privacy goes far beyond that. Without privacy, literally every part of modern society collapses.
Confusing 'invasion of privacy' with 'voluntary acceptance of another person's conditions for entering their property' is a no-no. But be very fucking careful when you start trying to limit people's rights - you don't have any idea what the implications of that will be, and people like you feeling that privacy doesn't exist is a big part of what brings about the clusterfuck that is today's American politics.
Jeff
egan.
daylightdies.com
Agreed. Slavery was ok with the bill of rights until 1865. That certainly didn't make it morally just.
Not to mention that the rights to freely assemble, freedom of the press, and freedom from unreasonable search & seizure certainly pertain directly to privacy rights. The entire concept of search and arrest warrants is that there is evidence that justifies violation of rights. In fact even if you argue away a constitutional privacy rights there are tens of thousands of pages of bills, laws, state constitutions and court rulings that do explicitly address privacy rights. Rights in the US aren't outlined by the Constitution alone.
Of course when people talk about a right to privacy in the US they seem to view corporate and governmental entities as under the same umbrella of rules which they certainly are not.
spioraid
Fancy a pint? Or two?
As an American I'm given some rights that other countries don't have. Spiffy. However America is far from perfect and does not cover every right. I have x number of rights protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. y number of rights that aren't mentioned in the aforementioned pieces of paper that I SHOULD HAVE I can only do so much without the government backing me on. The more I see this aspect the better looking New Zealand is.
There are forms of privacy that should be held, especially those that keep us away from nasty little things like Communism.
Conclusion that we both can agree on? America and it's unholy pieces of writ can't cover everything.
That was sarcasm, and I intended to imply that the Constitution was not the end of rights but a list of things that were not to be fucked with. It's really annoying when people act and speak as if rights were there because of paper and not because of the fact that we are sentient beings in a complicated society that needs them. You've hit it exactly on the head.
But the problem I had was that you implied that the Constitution didn't give us a right so we don't have it; that mindset, the view of the Constitution that somehow it's justified to do anything unless it's explicitly forbidden or forbid something unless it's explicitly given, is what causes much of the clusterfuck we have today.
Jeff
But the problem I had was that you implied that the Constitution didn't give us a right so we don't have it; that mindset, the view of the Constitution that somehow it's justified to do anything unless it's explicitly forbidden or forbid something unless it's explicitly given, is what causes much of the clusterfuck we have today.
Jeff
Similar threads
