4 ms·

I have to ask: if we think privacy is a right, then why does flying in a private jet mean you give up that right?

pc86 2y ago
A couple spring to mind, none of which is specific to private jets. Airspace above the US is nationalized. It's managed by the government, which is funded by taxpayers. So they have a right to know who is doing what using that airspace. Flying secretly (or at all) is not a Constitutionally protected activity so there's nothing inherently wrong with regulating it and denying something like this. Either one of these is a good enough reason not to allow this type of thing in my opinion.
- giantg2 2y ago
  "Flying secretly (or at all) is not a Constitutionally protected activity so there's nothing inherently wrong with regulating it and denying something like this." You can use this reasoning to disclose almost anything, including online real-id schemes, public license plate info, etc.
- NovemberWhiskey 2y ago
  >Airspace above the US is nationalized. It's managed by the government, which is funded by taxpayers. So they have a right to know who is doing what using that airspace. Flying secretly (or at all) is not a Constitutionally protected activity so there's nothing inherently wrong with regulating it and denying something like this. That seems like an absolute argument against any kind of right to privacy. So you'd equally have no concern at all if there was a publicly searchable registry of every flight that every passenger was taking on a commercial carrier? The roads are managed by government and funded by taxpayers: should there be a publicly searchable record of every vehicle movement on the roads as well?
  - pc86 2y ago
    I was arguing against the right to fly a plane secretly or obscure its transponder code from public consumption, yes. > So you'd equally have no concern at all if there was a publicly searchable registry of every flight that every passenger was taking on a commercial carrier? There is a searchable registry of every flight already. The passenger thing is something you added that I never brought up. > The roads are managed by government and funded by taxpayers: should there be a publicly searchable record of every vehicle movement on the roads as well? Well the closest thing to an aircraft transponder is a license plate, and it's pretty well established case law that you have no right to obscure your license plate and that you have no right to privacy with regard to that license plate being recorded, being run by the police without cause or suspicion, etc. The fact that there isn't a publicly searchable record of automobile movements is simply because automobile movement isn't as strictly controlled as aircraft movement. If cars needed transponders in them and you needed a controller to give you permission to take an exit we'd have basically the same system for cars.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
RobotToaster 2y ago
If privacy is a right while flying, then the full body porno scanners used at airports need to be banned.

pc86 2y ago

A couple spring to mind, none of which is specific to private jets. Airspace above the US is nationalized. It's managed by the government, which is funded by taxpayers. So they have a right to know who is doing what using that airspace. Flying secretly (or at all) is not a Constitutionally protected activity so there's nothing inherently wrong with regulating it and denying something like this. Either one of these is a good enough reason not to allow this type of thing in my opinion.

giantg2 2y ago
"Flying secretly (or at all) is not a Constitutionally protected activity so there's nothing inherently wrong with regulating it and denying something like this." You can use this reasoning to disclose almost anything, including online real-id schemes, public license plate info, etc.
NovemberWhiskey 2y ago
>Airspace above the US is nationalized. It's managed by the government, which is funded by taxpayers. So they have a right to know who is doing what using that airspace. Flying secretly (or at all) is not a Constitutionally protected activity so there's nothing inherently wrong with regulating it and denying something like this. That seems like an absolute argument against any kind of right to privacy. So you'd equally have no concern at all if there was a publicly searchable registry of every flight that every passenger was taking on a commercial carrier? The roads are managed by government and funded by taxpayers: should there be a publicly searchable record of every vehicle movement on the roads as well?
- pc86 2y ago
  I was arguing against the right to fly a plane secretly or obscure its transponder code from public consumption, yes. > So you'd equally have no concern at all if there was a publicly searchable registry of every flight that every passenger was taking on a commercial carrier? There is a searchable registry of every flight already. The passenger thing is something you added that I never brought up. > The roads are managed by government and funded by taxpayers: should there be a publicly searchable record of every vehicle movement on the roads as well? Well the closest thing to an aircraft transponder is a license plate, and it's pretty well established case law that you have no right to obscure your license plate and that you have no right to privacy with regard to that license plate being recorded, being run by the police without cause or suspicion, etc. The fact that there isn't a publicly searchable record of automobile movements is simply because automobile movement isn't as strictly controlled as aircraft movement. If cars needed transponders in them and you needed a controller to give you permission to take an exit we'd have basically the same system for cars.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

RobotToaster 2y ago

If privacy is a right while flying, then the full body porno scanners used at airports need to be banned.