Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 20 Aug 2012 (Monday) 14:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Making it a crime to photograph minors

 
Miki ­ G
Goldmember
1,166 posts
Likes: 343
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Ireland
     
Aug 25, 2012 01:01 |  #91

alazgr8 wrote in post #14898647 (external link)
The police said unless someone who had been video'd complained, there was no law against doing what the man was doing in NYC, and nothing they could do.

That is ridiculous. I'll assume the perv wasn't from the middle east & that it was before 9/11. Amazing how the laws can change to suit different scenarios.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
centrarchidae
Member
93 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 8
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Denver-ish, Boulder-ish, sometimes South Park-ish, Colorado
     
Aug 25, 2012 02:07 |  #92

Emphasis added to the important point.

I'd be upset too. However, in that situation, you weren't the victim. If the victim isn't willing to pursue a complaint (including committing to appear in court if it goes that far) then the police' and the prosecutor's hands are tied. They have nothing when the suspect claims "Well, she told me it was okay."

alazgr8 wrote in post #14898647 (external link)
A They made him take the camera out of the bag, and play back some video for them. After talking awhile, they ley the man leave. I went over to the cops and told them I had alerted security to this guy, and why had they let the man go. The police said unless someone who had been video'd complained, there was no law against doing what the man was doing in NYC, and nothing they could do. I would have been very angry if I had caught him videoing my wife or grandchildren like that.

Regards,

Rick


Any time you start thinking that you're a big shot, try giving commands to someone else's dog.
Direct and blunt C&C wanted, please.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
14,086 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 1202
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Aug 25, 2012 09:53 |  #93

Dan Marchant wrote in post #14903924 (external link)
This is silly. How is a person who is being secretly filmed supposed to know to complain? This is exactly the time when police should be making use of wiretap laws to prevent secret filming, instead of those states misusing such laws to stop someone who isn't secretly filming from taping the Police.

Considering that it was in a mall, I'm also surprised the mall guards didn't at least immediately eject the guy.


TANSTAAFL--The Only Unbreakable Rule in Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Aug 25, 2012 12:26 |  #94

Many times legislators do not understand what they are proposing. They are fed it through lobbyists. This is why lobbying is such a horrible, horrible thing in the U.S. Because it's special interest groups dictating what gets discussed and passed instead of the views of the region that said representative is representing!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AvailableLight
Goldmember
1,208 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Chesapeake, VA
     
Aug 26, 2012 08:14 |  #95

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #14905404 (external link)
Many times legislators do not understand what they are proposing. They are fed it through lobbyists. This is why lobbying is such a horrible, horrible thing in the U.S. Because it's special interest groups dictating what gets discussed and passed instead of the views of the region that said representative is representing!

I can't stand the whole lobbyist/lobbying thing.


AJ
Rebel T3i (600D)
18-55 | 55-250 | 50 1.8 | 60 2.8 macro | 15-85 | 430 EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 189
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Aug 26, 2012 10:13 |  #96

AvailableLight wrote in post #14908037 (external link)
I can't stand the whole lobbyist/lobbying thing.

You should start a lobby campaign to outlaw it...


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
30,669 posts
Gallery: 464 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 13136
Joined Dec 2006
     
Aug 27, 2012 09:21 |  #97

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #14905404 (external link)
Many times legislators do not understand what they are proposing. They are fed it through lobbyists. This is why lobbying is such a horrible, horrible thing in the U.S. Because it's special interest groups dictating what gets discussed and passed instead of the views of the region that said representative is representing!

I would love to debate the merits of lobbying with you, but it would need to be in another forum. But to the point, this isnt a lobbyist sort of bill. There is no group that benefits from this sort of silliness. This is one of those things a legislator comes up with on their own, or perhaps with a staffer. Its designed to have an emotional appeal to a group of voters.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Aug 27, 2012 11:17 |  #98

gonzogolf wrote in post #14912381 (external link)
I would love to debate the merits of lobbying with you, but it would need to be in another forum. But to the point, this isnt a lobbyist sort of bill. There is no group that benefits from this sort of silliness. This is one of those things a legislator comes up with on their own, or perhaps with a staffer. Its designed to have an emotional appeal to a group of voters.

Lobbying involves the advocacy of an interest that is affected, actually or potentially, by the decisions of government leaders. Individuals and interest groups alike can lobby governments, and governments can even lobby each other. The practice of lobbying is considered so essential to the proper functioning of the U.S. government that it is specifically protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: "Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people peaceably … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

--- http://legal-dictionary.thefreedict​ionary.com/Lobbying (external link)

The problem of restricting lobbying is you have to determine which interest groups are no longer protected by the constitution.

As to the proposed bill being discussed, IMO, it is highly likely the legislator putting this forward is well aware that it will not pass, and is likely unconstitutional, but he is counting on his constituents to not notice that. IOW, he is merely pandering.


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Aug 27, 2012 12:01 |  #99

RTPVid wrote in post #14912873 (external link)
As to the proposed bill being discussed, IMO, it is highly likely the legislator putting this forward is well aware that it will not pass, and is likely unconstitutional, but he is counting on his constituents to not notice that. IOW, he is merely pandering.

If you read the actual bill being proposed (I posted it long ago in this thread) it is not nearly as unreasonable as the poorly written news article makes it seem and this bill actually does have a good chance of being enacted.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Aug 27, 2012 13:54 |  #100

krb wrote in post #14913037 (external link)
If you read the actual bill being proposed (I posted it long ago in this thread) it is not nearly as unreasonable as the poorly written news article makes it seem and this bill actually does have a good chance of being enacted.

To view the actual bill as not unreasonable, you are left with an interpretation that has the bill making illegal what is already illegal. In other words, pandering.


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Aug 27, 2012 14:42 |  #101

RTPVid wrote in post #14913543 (external link)
To view the actual bill as not unreasonable, you are left with an interpretation that has the bill making illegal what is already illegal.

Is it already illegal? Can you cite the portion of existing NJ state law that this law is duplicating?


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Aug 27, 2012 15:33 |  #102

Since I'm not a lawyer, no, but most states have laws on the books modeled after this: Restatement of the Law, Second, Torts, � 652 (external link)


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Aug 27, 2012 23:52 |  #103

RTPVid wrote in post #14913940 (external link)
Since I'm not a lawyer, no, but most states have laws on the books modeled after this: Restatement of the Law, Second, Torts, � 652 (external link)

I'm not a lawyer either, but I know how to use Google and I can read English. NJ has a "peeping tom" section under trespass but it is very specific about people peeking through windows of houses. So they added a "video voyeurism" law that makes it illegal to take video or pics of people when they are having sex or when their naughty bits are exposed.

This new bill is an expansion of the existing video voyeurism law so that it includes kids when they are in places that are considered private, even when they leave their clothes on and are not having sex.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Aug 28, 2012 08:44 |  #104

Are you sure you have the entirety of the NJ criminal code at your google-tips? I'm just not invested enough in this to spend the time pouring through law web sites. Generally tort law would make such photos at least subject to lawsuits. Making something twice illegal does not have any effect on the actual behavior.


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Aug 28, 2012 12:34 |  #105

You keep saying "twice illegal" and then mentioning tort law.

Are you suggesting that civil lawsuits and criminal cases are the same thing? That we don't need laws against murder since the next of kin are able to file wrongful death suits?

Or that the only people who deserve protection under the law are the ones who have the time and money to file civil suits against their attackers?


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

12,941 views & 0 likes for this thread
Making it a crime to photograph minors
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is wkl
718 guests, 190 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.