Pantsachusetts by Wishimay

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Pantsachusetts

POSTED BY: WISHIMAY
UPDATED: Monday, March 10, 2014 12:52
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 891
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:32 AM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574391/Judge-rules-upskirt-ph
otos-taken-without-consent-NOT-illegal-long-victim-wearing-panties.html

So, under this, if ye wear a skirt you are asking for pervs to take a picture of your (or your child's) crotch area???

I guess then, that said pervs are asking for me to take a picture of their liver, with some fava beans and a nice Chianti???

Seriously, WTF?????????????????????

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 6, 2014 2:35 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

What can I say ... there's the golden rule, and there's laws. Until such time as we can find a way to cleanly write the golden rule into law, there'll always be a gap between humane behavior and legal behavior, and someone there to exploit it.

Though it does give me an idea for a fitting punishment - if you're supposed to do unto others as you would have them do unto you, maybe a fitting punishment would be to plaster pictures of the guy on every ad space in the subway - in worn, dirty, thin, tatty underwear.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 6, 2014 10:04 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Yeah, this was kinda flabbergasting. The reason why women wear skirts is to cover up their crotch and panties. So, it's OK to take pix anyway? WTF??? Who ARE these judges????

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 6, 2014 10:17 AM

WISHIMAY

Skirt Haters??
I dunno, I just don't get this one at all...

Is this one of those "Make it legal so someone can be outraged and sue so they can make it definitely NOT legal" things?

Someone has to be victimized, before we have rights? Shouldn't whoever it is that GETS victimized be able to sue the government for allowing a law that LETS them be victimized??

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 7, 2014 2:24 PM

WISHIMAY

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2575762/After-ruling-Massachus
etts-bans-upskirt-photos.html

And reality falls back into alignment, a bit...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 9, 2014 11:48 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574391/Judge-rules-upskirt-ph
otos-taken-without-consent-NOT-illegal-long-victim-wearing-panties.html

So, under this, if ye wear a skirt you are asking for pervs to take a picture of your (or your child's) crotch area???

I guess then, that said pervs are asking for me to take a picture of their liver, with some fava beans and a nice Chianti???

Seriously, WTF?????????????????????

Hey Wish,

I believe you're reading it wrong (well... you're probably reading it exactly as they intended you to read it).

Please allow me a counter-point on this....

On a dare, as a very young child (I'm thinking kindergarten or 1st grade), I remember getting on the floor and looking up under Stacy's skirt. She kinda jumped and the girls just giggled and they scurried away after her. I didn't even understand the reaction. I was totally set up, as I didn't even know why I would do it and was just being a lemming. I'd hate to think that I'd get kicked out of school for that lemming-like behavior today, especially considering I honestly had no idea what my teacher gave me a nasty look for. All my teachers loved me, and for good reason. It would have broke their hearts to have to expel me from school for something innocent and stupid like that......

We didn't have hand-held cameras that gave instant results, unless you were one of those rich kids who's family had a Polaroid, so the only snapshots of this that probably remain are between my own ears.

On that, I have ZERO argument with the base ruling. Kids do a lot of shit today, just as they did in our day and generations before them. Unlike before, kids have access to a TON of tech shit today.

All I read here is that the act of taking pictures is NOT illegal, no matter the "clothed", and/or otherwise legal topic.

Here's a list of what I DIDN'T read.....

1. It's okay to show these pictures to friends, without consent.
2. It's okay to post these pictures on flickr, without consent.
3. It's okay to post a video on youtube, without consent.
4. It's okay to post anything regarding anyone underage online without express written consent of a parent or guardian.
5. It's okay to use any of the above methods, as well as methods not mentioned here, to ruin another person's reputation and/or lives who was the focal point of said pictures or videos.

I think, looking at it this way, that you can agree with me here Wish.

The act of taking a photograph should never be made illegal. The law that prevents 15 year old cousin billy-bob from taking pics of his 12 year ol' cousin tammy-may and her friends might be the very same law that prevents you from submitting photo proof of your alderman taking bribes.

Read the fine print. :)

As for you or your child's neither-regions, I'm quite certain their safe if you wear anything remotely resembling lady-like attire, which I would never believe to be a problem with you, Wish.

If some perv on the train is kneeling or lying on the floor in front of you or your daughter and snapping pics, not only will he get his ass beat 2 seconds later, but that camera will have been stripped and destroyed long before it could be evidence in the trial.

Let's be real about it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 10, 2014 12:52 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Hope I didn't kill another thread Wish :(

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE