2 years in Jail for taking pictures?

acludem said:
The article didn't say the pictures were "up a kid's skirt" it said 12 of them were of specific parts of people's bodies. Unless these people were naked, they weren't nude photos. The law they quote is overly broad and I doubt this case will stand. Any photo or image can be used for sexual gratification, it's all in the eye of the beholder. It is ridiculous to use that as a standard to go after someone for taking pictures of fully clothed individuals at a public event.

acludem

Have you gone onto google and done as I suggested yet? Young girls are victimized regularly on those up-skirt and down-shirt websites. The assumption is that he was taking pictures of people randomly and not specifically when the story states he was taking pictures of specific parts. What those sites usually do is show a picture of the innocent first, then a picture of up their skirt or down their shirt. Some of the pictures are likely of girls just walking around, it is the up-skirt etc pictures that were likely the ones that got the guy arrested.

Now, if the guy was simply innocently taking pictures the case will be thrown out of court. If he was doing as I suspect it is likely that he might serve some time. This is what Juries are for, they can even decide to nullify a law by refusing to convict even if he were guilty.
 
I will say again. If someone had pictures of that nature of my daughter, he's lucky the police officer got to him first.

If he is innocent, it will come out. He won't even go to court. Prosecutor will look at the pics, talk to the guy and it might all go away.

If not, he should fry.
 
no1tovote4 said:
Have you gone onto google and done as I suggested yet? Young girls are victimized regularly on those up-skirt and down-shirt websites. The assumption is that he was taking pictures of people randomly and not specifically when the story states he was taking pictures of specific parts. What those sites usually do is show a picture of the innocent first, then a picture of up their skirt or down their shirt. Some of the pictures are likely of girls just walking around, it is the up-skirt etc pictures that were likely the ones that got the guy arrested.

MAy i ask exactly how the girls are victimized? Now the girls on those sites are 16+ years of age. The age the presumably are already having sex. Secondly they dont even know that the guy is doing it. Thirdly, what guy doesnt try to catch a peak of a girl bent over or a peak down her shirt? If you say you dont then your gay.

How again are they victimized and why then does this require someone to be placed in jail?

Now if you want to talk legal rights of privacy that might be different. Taking someone's picture in public or staring at them lewdly without them knowing is not a crime. However using someone's likeness for financial gain without consent is a crime. These girls would have a legal right to sue these pervs if they ever used their images on the internet for financial gain as in these sites that you see. By and large though, most don't even know their picture is taken. Who then has been hurt?
 
GotZoom said:
I will say again. If someone had pictures of that nature of my daughter, he's lucky the police officer got to him first.

If he is innocent, it will come out. He won't even go to court. Prosecutor will look at the pics, talk to the guy and it might all go away.

If not, he should fry.

Why should he fry? Now if a father found these pics of his daughter or wife, then he IMO would have every right to go over and beat the shit out of the guy and they could then sue the guy for using their likeness without consent for profit. But the police and the government should not be arresting people for taking pictures.
 
insein said:
Why should he fry? Now if a father found these pics of his daughter or wife, then he IMO would have every right to go over and beat the shit out of the guy and they could then sue the guy for using their likeness without consent for profit. But the police and the government should not be arresting people for taking pictures.

Why would it be ok for the father to beat the shit out of him but not ok for the police to arrest him?

If it is bad enough for dad to beat the shit out of him, it is bad enough to be arrested?

Here is a question for you.

You and your 13 year old daugher are at the beach. She has a "normal" 2-piece bathing suit for her age (you approve, etc). She is laying on her towel. You come back from a little walk down the beach and find a guy taking pictures of her.

I guess that is ok?

Now..before you beat the shit out of him, a police officer sees the same thing. Detains him and ... lo and behold...upon further investigation it seems there are a doze or so pictures of other females of all ages, say...10 - 30 - all in the bathing suits. Some closeups of breasts, their crotch, etc.

The cop wants to arrest him. Are you going to tell him to stop - that there is nothing wrong with him taking those pictures?
 
insein said:
...
Now if you want to talk legal rights of privacy that might be different. Taking someone's picture in public or staring at them lewdly without them knowing is not a crime. However using someone's likeness for financial gain without consent is a crime. These girls would have a legal right to sue these pervs if they ever used their images on the internet for financial gain as in these sites that you see. By and large though, most don't even know their picture is taken. Who then has been hurt?
Don’t look now, but legal rights of privacy is pretty much what it’s about.
As far as who has been hurt by an unknown intrusion goes, logic would follow
that we should stop prosecuting peeping Toms too.
 
GotZoom said:
Why would it be ok for the father to beat the shit out of him but not ok for the police to arrest him?

If it is bad enough for dad to beat the shit out of him, it is bad enough to be arrested?

Here is a question for you.

You and your 13 year old daugher are at the beach. She has a "normal" 2-piece bathing suit for her age (you approve, etc). She is laying on her towel. You come back from a little walk down the beach and find a guy taking pictures of her.

I guess that is ok?

Now..before you beat the shit out of him, a police officer sees the same thing. Detains him and ... lo and behold...upon further investigation it seems there are a doze or so pictures of other females of all ages, say...10 - 30 - all in the bathing suits. Some closeups of breasts, their crotch, etc.

The cop wants to arrest him. Are you going to tell him to stop - that there is nothing wrong with him taking those pictures?

Is the girl harmed? Is she emotionally distraught that she can no longer liver her life? How is a picture different from another perv just looking at your 13 year old daughter? If the guy had the audacity to come right up and start taking pictures of my daughter and i saw it, he'd be unconscious. Problem solved. He will no longer take pictures of my daughter. Let other people worry about their own kids. Now if he is talking to these kids and trying to lure them or get them to pose, that is propositioning and that steps over the line. He is taking pictures of fully clothed people then what is a person to do if the guy is not using the image without their consent to make a profit?

Its too vague a concept. I think we dont need laws that say that you cant take pictures of people in public in "sexual" ways. To me sexual ways means that they are naked and/or performing sexual acts. Some people get off to pictures of fully clothed islamic woman. How then do we stop this kind of act? Make cameras illegal so that no one has their rights violated even if they dont know it despite the government using cameras everyday to view public places?
 
I can add some first-person experience to this topic. When I was just around 15-16 years old, I was walking around the Auto Show in NYC with my boyfriend. A guy jumped up in front of me, quickly snapped my picture, and ran off. I can tell you that even though it was just a picture, I felt violated and taken advantage of. It's hard to explain, but it's true. I also felt uneasy for several days wondering what exactly he was going to do with my picture. It was a strange and uncomfortable feeling.
 
Abbey Normal said:
I can add some first-person experience to this topic. When I was just around 15-16 years old, I was walking around the Auto Show in NYC with my boyfriend. A guy jumped up in front of me, quickly snapped my picture, and ran off. I can tell you that even though it was just a picture, I felt violated and taken advantage of. It's hard to explain, but it's true. I also felt uneasy for several days wondering what exactly he was going to do with my picture. It was a strange and uncomfortable feeling.

Now how do you feel about the guy 100 feet away that took your picture also that you had no idea he was even there?

My whole point is that we're getting into an ambiguous area where we are creating laws on ambiguous situations that can be applied to other areas that no one thought about all in the name of "protecting the children." Let the parents protect the children and let the children learn to portect themselves. Do not allow the government to do it for you. Because if they can take the rights of these people away, they can take yours too.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top