SHOCKING PROOF of electronic harassment ......

a reply to: LightSpeedDriver

The irony is in using one thing to "prove" something completely different. At no point did I say government surveillance is cool, go on about your business citizen.

Pro-tip: private businesses have far more CCTV cameras on you every single day than the government does.

I understand CCTV and such where everything can be recorded to be reviewed if needed, all this topic does is make me want to invent a personal electronics blocking system that would fry cameras with the push of a button in my pocket.

Heck one could make a fortune off of such a device... A 5 use device for 50.00... Would sale like hot cakes with the right advertising.

Of course there would be fair use laws attached to it like stating that you have such a device and intend to use it, to protect against the Assault on your privacy. That statement would be the last thing seen broadcast before the camera dies. Mind it also would be good for if it could be made to be directional great to stop House shaking Sub woofer base players.





CoBaZ

a reply to: Shamrock6

I'm not trying to prove a thing, I simply made a comment in a thread and you are the one taking offence.

originally posted by: LightSpeedDriver
a reply to: donktheclown

To illustrate the law. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy while on a public street of whatever legal term they use to define "being outside".

That's odd, if that is so then why on earth would that not also apply to public servants (police officers) ????????????

a reply to: Bluesma

It's called a joke? ha ha

a reply to: calstorm

NO IT'S DEFINITIVE PROOF!!!!

a reply to: LightSpeedDriver

You offered your perception as to what's ironic here.

I offered mine. No need to reset to default and ASSume that since I don't agree with you, I must be offended.

I'm not. At all.