Troublemaker.
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
It’s not a good time to challenge this in the courts. Look at the Supremes ruling over campaign contributions. I think it’s time for some new Amendments.
#1 What do you mean? The Court upheld the First Amendment. What makes you think they would not uphold the Forth Amendment?
On an other unrelated matter, did the above paragraph have way more words that started with a capital letter than most paragraphs?
crazy idea , but is it possible to claim that by taking a body scan that their also violating copy rights. That one owns there own copy right to their naked body. I say this since naked bodies sell and make money for people.
Just wear a suit of armor in through the machine. I can wear my nerd uniform through the machine. I am making a suit and tie out of chain mail. Don’t think it goes through metal.
Is everyone who goes into into that court room subject to the same search procedure? Including the judge, the security guards, the court personnel, etc? If the judge doesn’t have to go through this process, then no one should.
Imagine if airport TSA guards were required to go through a TSA check-point before they could start each shift. Do you think they’d be a bit nicer?
Why is he so worried about his naked image?
It’s not like he has the look for GQ or Playgirl…
It seems that he doesn’t want either to be scanned or searched. Good luck with that.
Some people just don’t get it. They are so paranoid about a particular issue that they become obsessed with it. At the most its a inconvenience. I wonder what this guy would say if they allowed somebody with a gun into a court room and that person shot him. I bet he would not be so inclined to fight the search requirements.
I was impressed with the professionalism of the police officers. They didn’t treat him like an idiot or a criminal, they just performed their duty.
“Mr. Fielder was not allowed into the court. He was told he had a choice to be scanned even though they would not allow him to enter without being scanned.”
not true
he was told we had a choice to be scanned or pat down he said no to both option and then was not allowed to enter.
Why are so many in the US so uptight about there bodies? get over it.
Oh and I don’t care how HOT,fat or ugly you may think you are the person who has to look at hundreds of you a day will not care ask any radiologist.
The real problem is, this type of machine’s a health hazard. It’s proven to damage and disrupt DNA.
I’d rather undergo the strip search, at least there are no photos, no health hazard, no biometrics being stored, etc.
#7:
>>I wonder what this guy would say if they allowed somebody with a gun into a court room and that person shot him. I bet he would not be so inclined to fight the search requirements.<<
But, don't you think that allowing law abiding citizens to be armed in there wouldn't have a chilling effect on said "somebody with a gun"?
A friend of mine happened to be the only one in Judge's Chambers legally armed one afternoon when a defendant's mother decided to question her son's sentence. With a gun…. He had to terminate her appeal…. While I don't have much to say that's nice about the Court folk who were in the room, better her than them, and my friend almost never carried his gun in the PD building or the adjacent courthouse. Metal detectors went up the next day, and guess who started carrying all the time….
Body scan to get into the court house – are you kidding me??? More people shot in shopping malls and schools and universities. No body scanning there. Tells you about priorities and the power protecting itself.
The terrorist paranoia has gone completely haywire. Welcome police state in the name of ‘security’.
Oh, NOW you’ve done it, Watcher!
Common sense is not allowed here at DU!
Tthor…wild guess here, but the percentage of people in the courthouse who are real and dangerous criminals might be slightly higher than at the mall. ??? Plus, you have judges…we all know what happens when they’re not adequately protected, look at Colombia.
Went to the courthouse today, and they made me take off my belt, but shoes stayed on. No phones or comm devices allowed in.
It’s only those who have something to hide who usually object to the cavity searches, naked body scans, video monitors, wire taps, pat downs, interrogations, bio IDs, domestic searches, internet postings, and so forth needed to ensure our basic rights are protected.
RBG
#11
“But, don’t you think that allowing law abiding citizens to be armed in there wouldn’t have a chilling effect on said “somebody with a gun”?
when a defendant’s mother decided to question her son’s sentence. With a gun…. He had to terminate her appeal….
No I think if the gun toting mother was not allowed to carry a gun into that court room no one would have need be terminate.
Metal detectors should have gone up years ago. To many emotions in a court room for weapons of any kind.
Your friend can have his legally carried gun when he exits the curt room.
The video is of the Douglas County courthouse in Castle Rock, CO. I just completed jury duty there last week (which is compelled by law) and was forced to go through the scanner to complete my service. I did feel rather violated and uncomfortable about the procedure.
I will also say that I was inside that courthouse delivering toys & gifts a month earlier with the boy scouts, and was allowed to bypass the security scan. (albeit with some sheriff personnel in the vicinity). From that I would guess that certain personnel are allowed to bypass the scan on a regular basis.
OT…the kid who made the ACORN videos is back in the news…..
Ohh… I got it!
Wrap yourself in Tinfoil! Hopefully you won’t explode like in the microwave.
How is it that we have a right as citizens to a fair trial but in order to participate in this we must surrender other personal rights? You can vote…but first you have to be searched by our personnel. You don’t like the imaging system oh, well we can touch you. We have to do it for everyone’s safety. Since when is any form of our government responsible for ~100%…heck ~70%…protection of our persons?
As soon as people start placing explosives inside of their body will we be required to have a scope done? X-rays? I know I may die because there still exists treats to me and you by persons who want to do us harm. I am not wanting us to place a cork on every sharp object and/or pad every hard object. Nor do I think this(security) should EVER be the argument for encroachment of our freedoms.
Yeah, I have to agree, those officers were very professional and acted the way an officer should in this situation. If only all officers acted this way. I was pulled over the other day, and the officer was just as professional and I told his superiors I really appreciated his tact and professional manner. I hated to pay the ticket, but I don’t mind as much if the officer is professional.
“Mr. Fielder, you have a choice. We can pat you down or you can go through the scanner.”
“I, I, I don’t like to be touched. It scares me.”
“You have nothing to fear Mr. Fielder…. say, that’s a nice bulge you have there…. is that a gun tucked behind your fly?”
?! Ok, I’m going to allow you to scan me just this once then. Let’s just do it. But I don’t like this one bit.
Sorry, that’s no longer an option. Now undo your belt. I’m going to disarm you.
How do the cops get into the courthouse? Do they go through the scanner with the weapon?
If not, then why are they given ‘preferential’ treatment? Couldn’t a smart criminal…someone intent on doing harm, come up with a uniform and badge that would allow them the same access? Why do the cops need guns, in the courthouse, if no guns are allowed? Seems to be a double standard. (Yes, I know…simple argument, but truly valid question)
I agree the cops in this video maintained their professionalism and aplomb. The real difficulty is that their supervisors do not appear to have instituted a reasonable alternative here. Many people do not want their naked bodies viewed nor have someone running their hands intimately over their bodies. They may be shy or have religious constraints or, like this guy, just looking to hassle some innocent cops. The point remains, there should be another alternative (i.e. wanding?) before you refuse someone passage into a public space.
If I get scanned or patted down he does. If he doesn’t get scanned or patted down I hope he has good luck finding a new profession.
The attorney should be armed..and it should be legal for him to carry concealed. He is an officer of the court, and should be trusted.
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.
Wow.. body scanner at a courthouse. Well they gave him an option of pat-down or being scanned.. i would choose a pat down instead. If more people choose a pat down, security will get so sick of it that the scanner will be abolished. Metal detectors would solve the problem of guns and knives. If anyone managed to smuggle in a bomb of considerable size – they would still have to light it.. (electrical wiring would go off in the metal detector and x-ray scanner) and you don’t think people would react in a court room if someone starts mixing chemicals and lighting things on fire?
Ok i just noticed this.. remember the post about the german TV show and the body scanner? Albeit the scanner being different…
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2010/01/23/full-body-scanner-catches-cell-phone-misses-bomb-on-german-tv-video/#comments
Their excuse on that show was that the person need to stand sideways and that they only did a front/back scan.. well.. look at all the people that walk through while they are filming, not a single person turns around… they do one scan and then they walk out.
A lawyer? Maybe. Really he is just another LIEBERTARIAN proclaiming his love of the Constitution so he doesn’t have to obey it or the laws.
Searches at courthouses are perfectly legal. First, there is no expectation of privacy in public and second Judges have the inherent authority to control their courts. The second point not only applies to behavior, but also dress.
Although Malls may see more gun incidents, they also see tens of thousands times the number of people than does a court. A court has many very dangerous people passing through its doors.
As a lawyer, this LIEBERTARIAN should know that as an officer of the court he is bound by all the rules of the court. If he does not represent his client because he refuses to follow the rules of the court, he risks losing his license.