Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

would you let this happen to your kid?

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Heisenberg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Heisenberg1


    silverharp wrote: »
    who cares if he had heroin on him, it was a domestic flight , its supposed to be an anti terrorism measure not a fishing exercise for contraband. After 10 seconds it would be clear he wouldn't have had anything on him that would bring down a jet.
    Also grandpagropesalot was being creepy, pretty much everywhere he used back of the hand he went over again with the front of his hand.

    Who cares if he had Heroin on him? I've heard it all now.


  • Options
    #63
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Heisenberg1 wrote: »
    Who cares if he had Heroin on him? I've heard it all now.

    to be more specific why should the TSA care, below is their mandate in a sentence. they aren't customs. they were set up after 9/11 if my memory is correct.
    If you don't mind having your children's genitals fondled by adults I admire you liberal views on parenting but I'd be furious
    The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is an agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that has authority over the security of the traveling public in the United States.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #64
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    Last time I went on holidays, they (the irish they, not the tsa they!) patted down my 6 month old daughter in her mothers arms in Dublin Airport!
    The look on her face was comical, but when I tried to take a video they reacted like I'd just shouted Alhahu Akbar and pulled out a suspicious looking push button.
    I can still picture her face, it was hillarious:D


  • Options
    #65
    Heisenberg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Heisenberg1


    silverharp wrote: »
    to be more specific why should the TSA care, below is their mandate in a sentence. they aren't customs. they were set up after 9/11 if my memory is correct.
    If you don't mind having your children's genitals fondled by adults I admire you liberal views on parenting but I'd be furious

    But he didn't overly path down the groin area or concentrate on that area so why faux outrage.


  • Options
    #66
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    silverharp wrote: »
    to be more specific why should the TSA care, below is their mandate in a sentence. they aren't customs. they were set up after 9/11 if my memory is correct.
    If you don't mind having your children's genitals fondled by adults I admire you liberal views on parenting but I'd be furious

    There was no fondling going on in that video.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    If you have nothing to hide you've nothing to fear.

    That argument just doesn't hold water - if you've nothing to hide why don't you give me the keys to your house and i'll go have a nose around.
    I won't take anything, i'll just look through your stuff, read your mail, go through your family photos, check out your wifes knicker drawer, all that shít (not literal shít I hope:))

    Just cos you've nothing to hide doesn't mean you want the world knowing your business. There is such a thing as privacy you know!


  • Options
    #68
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,983 ✭✭✭conorhal


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Last time I went on holidays, they (the irish they, not the tsa they!) patted down my 6 month old daughter in her mothers arms in Dublin Airport!
    The look on her face was comical, but when I tried to take a video they reacted like I'd just shouted Alhahu Akbar and pulled out a suspicious looking push button.
    I can still picture her face, it was hillarious:D


    In all honesty, the kind of people that whip out phones and start filming people that are just trying to do their job are exactly the kind of people that deserve the rubber glove treatment.
    How would you react if if sombody, instead of behaving like an adult, started agressively waving a camera in your face and suggesting they were going to try and make a fool of you on the internet?
    .


  • Options
    #69
    BENDYBINN
    Registered Users Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭BENDYBINN


    My question is if it was a seventy yr old man in shorts and tshirt would he have carried out the search in the exact same way?
    I'm not so sure.


  • Options
    #70
    papu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Last time I went on holidays, they (the irish they, not the tsa they!) patted down my 6 month old daughter in her mothers arms in Dublin Airport!
    The look on her face was comical, but when I tried to take a video they reacted like I'd just shouted Alhahu Akbar and pulled out a suspicious looking push button.
    I can still picture her face, it was hillarious:D

    In all honesty you have no right to film them performing their duties without their consent. Filming pat down and security checking procedures is not welcomed as that information could be used to locate vulnerabilities.

    I also hate how clickbaity this title is.


  • Options
    #71
    the_pen_turner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,505 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    BENDYBINN wrote: »
    My question is if it was a seventy yr old man in shorts and tshirt would he have carried out the search in the exact same way?
    I'm not so sure.

    They did that to my 70 year old grandmother 20 years ago.
    That was before 9 11 .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    conorhal wrote: »
    In all honesty, the kind of people that whip out phones and start filming people that are just trying to do their job are exactly the kind of people that deserve the rubber glove treatment.
    How would you react if if sombody, instead of behaving like an adult, started agressively waving a camera in your face and suggesting they were going to try and make a fool of you on the internet?
    .

    Bit harsh, no?
    Or are you talking about the woman in the video? I haven't seen it.

    All I was doing (well trying to do) was get a funny picture of my 6 month old daughter. I was laughing, the mother was laughing, even the baby was laughing - there was no aggression at any stage.
    papu wrote: »
    In all honesty you have no right to film them performing their duties without their consent. Filming pat down and security checking procedures is not welcomed as that information could be used to locate vulnerabilities.

    I also hate how clickbaity this title is.

    It's overkill plain and simple.
    By all means check, if you feel the need. They are there for a reason after all. But no need to be an asshole about it, and if it's something that can't be recorded for security reasons, which is a perfectly valid reason to my mind, then perhaps they shouldn't be doing in in full view of maybe a thousand people!
    It's either highly sensitive security stuff, or it aint I'm afraid. You can't have it both ways.


  • Options
    #73
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Bit harsh, no?
    Or are you talking about the woman in the video? I haven't seen it.

    All I was doing (well trying to do) was get a funny picture of my 6 month old daughter. I was laughing, the mother was laughing, even the baby was laughing - there was no aggression at any stage.



    It's overkill plain and simple.
    By all means check, if you feel the need. They are there for a reason after all. But no need to be an asshole about it, and if it's something that can't be recorded for security reasons, which is a perfectly valid reason to my mind, then perhaps they shouldn't be doing in in full view of maybe a thousand people!
    It's either highly sensitive security stuff, or it aint I'm afraid. You can't have it both ways.

    Would you be okay with someone recording you doing your job?


  • Options
    #74
    papu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    It's overkill plain and simple.
    By all means check, if you feel the need. They are there for a reason after all. But no need to be an asshole about it, and if it's something that can't be recorded for security reasons, which is a perfectly valid reason to my mind, then perhaps they shouldn't be doing in in full view of maybe a thousand people!
    It's either highly sensitive security stuff, or it aint I'm afraid. You can't have it both ways.

    Performing a to the letter search, while being recorded by someone is not overkill, its protecting yourself from being brought up by your superiors for conducting an incomplete search. Perhaps if the person hadn't recorded, such a thorough search would not have been completed? Who knows..

    But when you put a video camera on somebody they are going to follow best practices, lest they become an example on how TSA security procedures are not being taken seriously.

    There are many reasons it shouldn't have been recorded, if incidents occur, these areas are monitored by security cameras.


  • Options
    #75
    Glenster
    Registered Users Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭Glenster


    papu wrote: »
    In all honesty you have no right to film them performing their duties without their consent. Filming pat down and security checking procedures is not welcomed as that information could be used to locate vulnerabilities.

    I also hate how clickbaity this title is.

    Absolutely ridiculous.

    There is absolutely no law that says you cant record them performing a search on you or a member of your family. In Ireland.

    If there was they would let you know quick smart.

    You can record them all day, if a real garda has a suspicion that you are recording the vulnerabilities of the airport he can confiscate your phone.


  • Options
    #76
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,651 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    conorhal wrote: »
    How would you react if if sombody, instead of behaving like an adult, started agressively waving a camera in your face and suggesting they were going to try and make a fool of you on the internet?
    .

    If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear.....

    Look it works both ways biggrin.pngbiggrin.pngbiggrin.png


  • Options
    #77
    papu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    Glenster wrote: »
    Absolutely ridiculous.

    There is absolutely no law that says you cant record them performing a search on you or a member of your family. In Ireland.

    If there was they would let you know quick smart.

    You can record them all day, if a real garda has a suspicion that you are recording the vulnerabilities of the airport he can confiscate your phone.

    You should do some further investigations and calm down.
    All filming and photography at Cork Airport requires written permission in advance. Airport Security will remove anyone filming or photographing without this permission.

    Dublin airport I presume have a similar stance , as even when permission is given ,
    daa retains the right to review and delete if necessary any footage filmed on the airport campus.

    You have no rights to record anyone , and the expectation of privacy to staff is afforded.

    So no, you really can't record them.


  • Options
    #78
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,651 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    papu wrote: »
    You should do some further investigations and calm down.



    Dublin airport I presume have a similar stance , as even when permission is given ,

    You have no rights to record anyone , and the expectation of privacy to staff is afforded.

    Not restricted by any specific law so would be curious to see if it would hold up in court after the fact

    Also the prevalence of streaming software kinda makes it impossible to enforce


  • Options
    #79
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    If you have nothing to hide you've nothing to fear, I couldn't care less if they keep a record of the websites I visit if it's part of a plan to keep people safe.

    As for saying you'd rather risk being blown up instead well that's just stupid.

    I have plenty of things to hide - plenty of things which could be used to blackmail me if I were to be running for office, exposing wrongdoing, delivering hard-hitting media articles, whatever. As does everyone. One's interest in addiction counselling is not a security risk - and indeed, it may not even be for themselves that they are researching - but it could certainly be used to smear or discredit somebody.

    The NSA themselves have an entire manual about using the internet histories of suspected terrorists to look for sexual fetishes, homosexuality etc in order to discredit them - fine, you say, f*ck the terrorists, but what if tomorrow they use it to shut up the next journalist who is planning to expose a Donald Trump scandal? What if the Irish authorities could have scoured a Garda Whistleblower's internet history? If he happened to, for example, be a member of the same kink-fetish website as Graham Dwyer and Elaine O'Hara, there'd be absolutely nothing wrong with that - but as you know, both the media and certain ignorant sections of the population would run wild with that story, and the whistleblower would have been thoroughly discredited long before he could have got as far as the PAC, the Dail, etc.

    What if the last FF government had been able to go through Enda Kenny's entire internet history and discovered that he had sought help for depression or social anxiety - something which is still unfairly stigmatised in society? And can you even imagine what it would have been like if the RUC or any of the militant political parties in the North had been given warrantless access to the kind of information the NSA and GCHQ collect about every single person with a computer?

    Anybody who thinks that these are freedoms worth sacrificing is simply not thinking it through. I fully stand by my original comments - I'd rather live in a society with the minute risk of being killed in a terrorist bomb attack than to know that every single thing I did was watched and recorded at all times, that I couldn't read or watch literally anything without somebody else knowing about it. And I'm not a journalist or politician, I just aspire to possibly go into that area some day if music doesn't work out as a career. :pac:


  • Options
    #80
    papu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Not restricted by any specific law so would be curious to see if it would hold up in court after the fact

    Also the prevalence of streaming software kinda makes it impossible to enforce

    Yes it is , Under Data Protection law, you have a right not to have your personal data collected, published or otherwise processed without your consent. This includes your image, and therefore covers photographs.

    These expectations are different when in public places, but since the airport is not a public space....

    Breach of privacy cases do end up in court pretty often.


  • Options
    #81
    Glenster
    Registered Users Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭Glenster


    papu wrote: »
    You should do some further investigations and calm down.



    Dublin airport I presume have a similar stance , as even when permission is given ,

    You have no rights to record anyone , and the expectation of privacy to staff is afforded.

    So no, you really can't record them.

    I can write a note on my website saying that too.

    Just writing it doesn't make it so. They'd like you to think it does...... But it doesn't.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    I love how the wellbeing of a child is going woooooooosssshhhhhh in this thread so that the legalities of filming in security areas can be discussed.


  • Options
    #83
    Glenster
    Registered Users Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭Glenster


    papu wrote: »
    Yes it is , Under Data Protection law, you have a right not to have your personal data collected, published or otherwise processed without your consent. This includes your image, and therefore covers photographs.

    These laws are created by the EU

    All cameras are illegal then.

    What about CCTV?

    Don't talk nonsense.


  • Options
    #84
    Glenster
    Registered Users Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭Glenster


    Boom_Bap wrote: »
    I love how the wellbeing of a child is going woooooooosssshhhhhh in this thread so that the legalities of filming in security areas can be discussed.

    They patted the kid down for a few minutes.

    You swear they'd sexually assaulted him or something.


  • Options
    #85
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,651 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    papu wrote: »
    Yes it is , Under Data Protection law, you have a right not to have your personal data collected, published or otherwise processed without your consent. This includes your image, and therefore covers photographs.

    These laws are created by the EU

    Fair enough but that doesn't cover what cork airport are trying to restrict or the stated reason why, if you don't catch the face of anyone involved its fine, simply record the audio or have software that auto blurs faces.

    As usual the bureaucrats are miles behind whats possible with technology


  • Options
    #86
    pilly
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭pilly


    Boom_Bap wrote: »
    I love how the wellbeing of a child is going woooooooosssshhhhhh in this thread so that the legalities of filming in security areas can be discussed.

    Ah sure the lads have to get their dicks out and prove who's right. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #87
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,651 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Boom_Bap wrote: »
    I love how the wellbeing of a child is going woooooooosssshhhhhh in this thread so that the legalities of filming in security areas can be discussed.

    TBH i didn't even watch the video......


  • Options
    #88
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,983 ✭✭✭conorhal


    VinLieger wrote: »
    If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear.....

    Look it works both ways biggrin.pngbiggrin.pngbiggrin.png

    Except it doesn't, given that in one case it's that persons job to look for what you might be hiding and in the other, irritating pillock is not a job description.


  • Options
    #89
    papu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭papu


    Glenster wrote: »
    All cameras are illegal then.

    What about CCTV?

    Don't talk nonsense.

    As I said, different expectations of privacy are given in public places.


    Using CCTV is subject to data protection and human rights law,
    data protection laws and principles regulate how an employer can collect and process ‘personal data’ about employees – which includes video footage of them recorded using CCTV cameras. Particularly, these laws and principles give employees the right to be told which data are held on them and the reasons those data are being collected and processed by serving a ‘subject access request’ on the employer. There are also limits on how long such data can be held.
    There are also signs up informing people of when they are being filmed, this means by entering that area, they are consenting to be filmed.

    Do you think before you type?


  • Options
    #90
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    conorhal wrote: »
    How would you react if if sombody, instead of behaving like an adult, started agressively waving a camera in your face and suggesting they were going to try and make a fool of you on the internet?
    .

    It would depend, does my daddy work for KPMG? :D :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Not restricted by any specific law so would be curious to see if it would hold up in court after the fact

    Also the prevalence of streaming software kinda makes it impossible to enforce


    Airports are private property, they can set whatever rules they like. If you disagree with their rules they will escort you out.


Advertisement