Mike Lee...Voyeurism case

[GulfBreeze]

What is the name of your state? FL

Your comments made on a thread concerning taking pics with a cell phone of upskirt images...

well, your posted case was OLD. those cases were from 1999 and 2000. Since then, there has been laws passed....read below. it comes via GOOGLE as you suggested....

Congress approves criminal "video voyeurism" law
Both houses of Congress have passed federal criminal penalties for knowingly photographing without consent a naked or underwear-clad person's "private area" when the person reasonably expects privacy.
Sep. 23, 2004 -- Knowingly photographing a naked or underwear-clad person's "private area" without consent when the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy could soon be a federal offense.

Fines of up to $100,000 and up to one year in prison could be imposed under the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act of 2004, passed Tuesday by the U.S. House. The Senate passed a similar version of the bill last year. The two versions are expected to be quickly reconciled and signed by President George W. Bush.

"Theoretically, you never want to see a criminal penalty imposed upon speech, but practically I believe this will have little effect on the mainstream media," said Kevin M. Goldberg, attorney for the American Society of Newspaper Editors.

The bill defines "private area" as "the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast."

To establish a violation, prosecutors would have to prove an intent to photograph or otherwise "capture" an image without the person's consent, and that the photographer knew that the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy. The violation also would have to occur on federal property.

Rep. Mike Oxley (R-Ohio) originally introduced the legislation in 2002, but it received little attention. It was introduced in the Senate in June 2003 by Sen. Michael DeWine (R-Ohio) and co-sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). It passed the Senate unanimously in September, but then spent nearly a year in House committees.

Do you still think it is legal to take upskirt pics in public places? you might be in for a big surprise....

 

[Curt581]

Gulf, it's very bad form to post messages to a locked thread by creating a new thread to continue the argument.

 

[GulfBreeze]

Gulf, it's very bad form to post messages to a locked thread by creating a new thread to continue the argument.

actually, this is a new discussion based on his thought that the law protects this type of behavior. i was just posting a correction to his aged comment on a internet posting he did, to set the record str8.

 

[fairisfair]

actually, this is a new discussion based on his thought that the law protects this type of behavior. i was just posting a correction to his aged comment on a internet posting he did, to set the record str8.

No it's not, it's the same old crap and it isn't the first time that you have done this.

Curt is correct and you have also been told that before as well.

 

[mike_lee]

I don't have time to look now but I'm almost certain that bill was immediately ruled unconstitutional because the supream court already had a ruling that there was no expectation of privacy in public. Which is why the government is now able to stick hidden cameras everywhere. .

 

[GulfBreeze]

I don't have time to look now but I'm almost certain that bill was immediately ruled unconstitutional because the supream court already had a ruling that there was no expectation of privacy in public. Which is why the government is now able to stick hidden cameras everywhere. .

we are not talking about the government and their use for national security..we are talking about preverts that take pics of females up their skirts without their consent for self pleasure and posting on internet.

 

[CdwJava]

I don't have time to look now but I'm almost certain that bill was immediately ruled unconstitutional because the supream court already had a ruling that there was no expectation of privacy in public. Which is why the government is now able to stick hidden cameras everywhere. .

I would think my wife or daughter would have an expectation that her underwear is not going to be photographed as long as her skirt is down. And if some perv were to try, the perv should expect to get a good, old-fashioned, ass-whippin'!

In my state you would go to jail for taking such pictures ... I popped a guy several years ago when that law first came out (late 1990s as I recall) and the guy had the camera on his shoes ... he was easy to spot, he kept jamming the toe of his shoe underneath women as the passed by, and he would follow close behind them in stores. We finally found him after several complaints and he went to jail - it was very rewarding!

- Carl

 

[quincy]

One of the video voyeurs in Michigan took a cell phone shot of a young girl's underwear and the mom ran after him and tackled him and security held him until police arrived. Never underestimate the power of a mom!

 

[mike_lee]

lets take the recent example of Britney Spears. you remember a half dozen paparazzi shots of her vagina as she was getting out of Paris Hilton's auto. Do you think those photos were legal or illegal?

And the girl who freaks out because someone saw her panties will gladly wear a bikini at the beach.

Japanese girls got the answer, they are forced to wear extremely short skirts in high school so they wear super thick , cover everything, panties. Then they can ride a bike or sleep on the train with no worries.

 

[outonbail]

Japanese girls got the answer, they are forced to wear extremely short skirts in high school so they wear super thick , cover everything, panties. Then they can ride a bike or sleep on the train with no worries.

The fact that there are any worries to begin with is truly sad. But I guess there is a lot of mental illness in this world that will never receive treatment. So I figure a good a$$kicking is the next best thing.

So if you must photograph women's underwear, go to Sears, there's all kinds hanging on the rack. Hell, you can even buy yourself a few pair. Just leave the girls alone

 

[GulfBreeze]

lets take the recent example of Britney Spears. you remember a half dozen paparazzi shots of her vagina as she was getting out of Paris Hilton's auto. Do you think those photos were legal or illegal?

And the girl who freaks out because someone saw her panties will gladly wear a bikini at the beach.

Japanese girls got the answer, they are forced to wear extremely short skirts in high school so they wear super thick , cover everything, panties. Then they can ride a bike or sleep on the train with no worries.

those are examples of
1)indecent exposure...she basically was flashing the world and knew exactly what she was doing. Suppose i wear baggy shorts that are very short and had my package hanging out...i would expect to be arrested. britt is a celebrity and pazzs key in on things like that and she was expecting it.
2)wearing a bikini in public is different than wearing panties under a skirt. females in public are not advertising to the public for pics to be taken. sex in your bedroom is legal but someone taking pictures thur the window without consent is illegal.

are you trying to justify your sick perversion?