Gotta Watch: Naked in public
A man stripped naked at Portland International Airport.
April 18th, 2012
11:14 AM ET

Gotta Watch: Naked in public

A man in Portland, Oregon stripped naked in an airport last night to protest the screening process. Whether you think he's a hero or just plain crazy, he definitely tops our list of awkward TSA patdowns. He’s certainly not the first person to have an awkward encounter in a state of undress. You’ve Gotta Watch these uncomfortable moments in public nudity history.

Naked TSA patdown

When a 50-year-old man felt that TSA screeners were “harassing” him at the Portland International Airport, he decided to strip down in protest. The police report said that some people “stepped out of the screening lanes to look, laugh and take photos.” Check out what they saw — if you dare.

Naked car chase

This woman reached 128 miles per hour in her car before getting pulled over by police. When she stepped out of the car, police were stunned to find that she was mostly naked. See how she acts in the back of the police car.

Naked on Wall Street

These performance artists tried “exposing” Wall Street with a naked protest. Their goal was to promote transparency, of course. Watch the stunt that shocked even the most hardened New Yorkers.

Post by:
Filed under: Crime • Gotta Watch • Oregon • Portland
soundoff (84 Responses)
  1. Otto Rank Sr.


    April 18, 2012 at 5:20 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Robert Peate

    Until the Supreme Court overturns warrantless searches and seizures (water bottles, really?), this man is my new hero.

    April 18, 2012 at 5:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • kmac

      Two bottles of the right chems and booom down you go. Two different people bring it on. To be really safe–nothing should be allowed as carry on.

      April 18, 2012 at 5:43 pm | Report abuse |
  3. heywood Jablowme

    so is it better to be frisked, searched or embarrassed as opposed to your airplane blowing up or flying into a building?

    If we can all attempt to think a little bit before making a comment, this board might be a bit more informative and intelligent.

    April 18, 2012 at 5:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Christopheles

      Of course, by that logic, it would be safer if nobody flew planes at all. We should ban planes entirely. Think of the children!

      April 19, 2012 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
  4. kmac

    I don't like the search either but do you really want to get on a plane that everyone on there has not been searched. How many planes need to be hijacked before we accept this. As many crazy people as there are I will accept it to be safe–and I know we cant trust crews that much either. Its not unconst. for you volunteer to be searched.

    April 18, 2012 at 5:41 pm | Report abuse |
  5. kmac

    Plus I would ban him for life.

    April 18, 2012 at 5:45 pm | Report abuse |
  6. stephendouglas

    Sorry, the screening process can absolutely be sped up, but is still necessary.

    The folks who complain about screening are the same fools who will say, gee, why didn't the government do something to protect us? when there is another highjacking.

    What is beyond my understanding, however, is why there is not a "frequent flyer" identification card with a set of finger prints and photo on it that could be presented and confirmed in seconds for anyone who is a frequent air traveler. It has been suggested over and over, but the government does not implement it. I really don't understand the problem.

    In the mean time, we'll have to see people attempting to expose the shortcomings of the TSA.... or their own shortcomings.

    April 18, 2012 at 5:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Elmor Fudwel

      Yes, the process most likely could be sped up..... if jerk wads didn't make such a scene to slow everything else down. But I'm sure the stripping got everyones attention.

      April 18, 2012 at 6:17 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Jeff

    I don't have a problem with this – after all, isn't the TSA already snapping naked photos of people and storing them on computer hard drives. So he's charged with indecent exposure for doing something that our Gov is already doing to him. Doesn't seem rational to me.

    April 18, 2012 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Elmor Fudwel

    It's simple ....if you want to fly, you have to go through security. Doesn't matter if you're a frequent flyer or not, as you might have decided to go "postal" since the last time that you flew. Just because a flyer frequently flies doesn't mean they should get to go any faster through security. Same thing as car insurance, if you don't buy car insurance don't drive.

    April 18, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
  9. N Tyler

    The Best is yet to come.So sad.

    April 19, 2012 at 2:20 am | Report abuse |
  10. Me

    Why is it that the people that do this are never super models? They are always people you don't want to see naked.

    April 19, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
  11. john

    My home airport just got those cute little machines that see through your clothing. The president of the company that makes them used to be the director of TSA – that person signs the contract to buy millions of dollars worth of machines, and then quits government and goes to work for the company that benefits from the contract that she approved... Whether the machines make flying safer or not is up for debate – but the way they were procured stinks...makes be believe that there is no added value at all....

    April 19, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Jason

    For the first time ever, I feel sorry for the TSA agents. That man is hideous.

    April 20, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4