New link in the top of page "IRC Chat".
Register | Login
Views: 107000960
Main | Memberlist | Active users | Calendar | Last Posts | IRC Chat | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album
05-28-22 02:39 AM
0 users currently in General Chat.
Xeogaming Forums - General Chat - Mother SHOCKED that pervert videos teen daughter spreading legs in Times Sq | |
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
User Post
Bitmap

#1 Enhancement Shaman US Ravenholdt








Since: 09-05-04
From: His Laughin' Place

Since last post: 3648 days
Last activity: 3641 days
Posted on 08-28-10 06:51 AM Link | Quote
Copy-paste from the SA Thread. Because this is hilarious.


A teenage girl wearing short-shorts is trying to do some kind of split or some shit in the middle of Times Square in NY. There's a bunch of people watching and taking pictures. At about 2:50, the mom...oh, did I mention the girl's mom is there? The mom takes offense to one of the perverts at the scene. The pervert rebuffs the mom and asserts his right to video teen snatch as long as it's in public. Cue the "white knight" bike rider...



I recognized the guys voice as Joey Boots, a long-time caller on the Howard Stern show.

*too lazy to host image*

What's even stranger is that Joey came out of the closet three years ago.

EDIT: BONUS! Help I need a cop, I'm being filmed! The fun begins at about 1:20. "Goodbye crazy woman!"

Joey knows the law, goddamnit! "The law is the law ma'am!"


I watched this guy's videos and oh my God are they ridiculous. I dunno what is worse. That the fact this guy has to videotape everything around him. Or the fact that this guy has to be an asshole.



Now, videotaping in public places is legal, granted. But this guy has no respect for people at all. Take this for example. A homeless man, who asked repeatably to not have his picture taken. But yet he had to be an asshole and keep on keeping on. This man who has the luxery of having a camera has absolutely no soul whatsoever.

I guess he really is a Goober.


(Last edited by Bitmap on 08-28-10 06:52 AM)
True Flight

The One








Since: 08-21-04

Since last post: 1993 days
Last activity: 1978 days
Posted on 08-28-10 07:31 AM Link | Quote
well.... she should know short shorts and tank tops are very provocative XD
Topos

Goomba
Banned for flaming and flamebaiting








Since: 08-28-10

Since last post: 4290 days
Last activity: 4290 days
Posted on 08-28-10 08:41 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by True Flight
well.... she should know short shorts and tank tops are very provocative XD

lol this isnt even funny, it's pretty illegal to be filming teens without parental consent
Cteno

Super Shotgun
Moderator








Since: 01-11-05

Since last post: 931 days
Last activity: 52 days
Posted on 08-28-10 09:18 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Topos
Originally posted by True Flight
well.... she should know short shorts and tank tops are very provocative XD

lol this isnt even funny, it's pretty illegal to be filming teens without parental consent

Unfortunately, no it's not.
Topos

Goomba
Banned for flaming and flamebaiting








Since: 08-28-10

Since last post: 4290 days
Last activity: 4290 days
Posted on 08-28-10 11:50 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Gunmetal Badass
Originally posted by Topos
Originally posted by True Flight
well.... she should know short shorts and tank tops are very provocative XD

lol this isnt even funny, it's pretty illegal to be filming teens without parental consent

Unfortunately, no it's not.

Unfortunately if you do that to my daughter your ass will be in prison for quite a while.
http://communications-media.lawyers.com/privacy-law/Photography-or-Video-Taping-Consent.html
Lord Alexandor

Knight
Discord Manager








Since: 10-15-06
From: Dayton, OH

Since last post: 475 days
Last activity: 10 days
Posted on 08-28-10 12:21 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Topos
Unfortunately if you do that to my daughter your ass will be in prison for quite a while.
http://communications-media.lawyers.com/privacy-law/Photography-or-Video-Taping-Consent.html

Well, your link doesn't seem to go anywhere. But, I think you meant to link here:
Photography or Video Taping Consent
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure the guy filming isn't violating any laws and probably can't be sued.

Generally, it's perfectly legal to videotape or photograph any person and anything while on public property...


I also found these on the same site, similar subjects:
Video Taping and Photographs in Public
Videotaping and Photography on Private Property

TL;DR - I Am Not A Lawyer, but it seems that videotaping from public property is totally legal unless you plan to sell the video. Guy may be a perv, but it seems to be legal.
Topos

Goomba
Banned for flaming and flamebaiting








Since: 08-28-10

Since last post: 4290 days
Last activity: 4290 days
Posted on 08-28-10 12:23 PM Link | Quote
Obviously you don't do law since you missed

Although normal photographic activities should not cause problems in public forum areas, extreme or suspicious behavior could expose a photographer to prosecution under disorderly conduct and loitering laws. Disorderly conduct laws prohibit people from engaging in any behavior that causes substantial inconvenience, annoyance or alarm through disruptive behavior. For example, taking a few photographs of someone in a public place will not constitute disorderly conduct even if the person is annoyed. Extreme behavior, such as repeatedly taking close-ups despite someone's objections or failing to obey police orders at a crime scene could constitute disorderly conduct.
Lord Alexandor

Knight
Discord Manager








Since: 10-15-06
From: Dayton, OH

Since last post: 475 days
Last activity: 10 days
Posted on 08-28-10 12:39 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Topos
Obviously you don't do law since you missed

Although normal photographic activities should not cause problems in public forum areas, extreme or suspicious behavior could expose a photographer to prosecution under disorderly conduct and loitering laws. Disorderly conduct laws prohibit people from engaging in any behavior that causes substantial inconvenience, annoyance or alarm through disruptive behavior. For example, taking a few photographs of someone in a public place will not constitute disorderly conduct even if the person is annoyed. Extreme behavior, such as repeatedly taking close-ups despite someone's objections or failing to obey police orders at a crime scene could constitute disorderly conduct.


Obviously you didn't read the "I Am Not A Lawyer" line I wrote. Also, I highlighted some key words in your post that strengthen my stance that it isn't illegal.

Also, you do have a point in the italicized sentence. ("...repeatedly taking close-ups despite someone's objections...could constitute disorderly conduct.")

It really depends on the age of the teen, in this case. If she is under 18, then yes, he is probably guilty of disorderly conduct with a camera AFTER the mother says he needs to stop. He is, IMHO, disorderly with the guy on the bike at the end. HOWEVER, if the teen is 18+, then (remember, IANAL), IMHO, the mother doesn't have the right to say that he can or cannot film her, only the girl can say that.

Also, please note that I think the guy is a perv and shouldn't be filming people the way he was. I also think he was very rude. But, I also don't think much, if anything, will come of this in terms of the law.

Topos, if you would like to argue with me about this, I'd be more than happy to do so, but not here. If you want to argue, PM me and we shall continue this argument/debate.
Lord Vulkas Mormonus

Vile
High Xeodent of Xeomerica.








Since: 10-29-04
From: North Carolina, United States. World, Sol System, milky way

Since last post: 1613 days
Last activity: 694 days
Posted on 08-28-10 12:51 PM Link | Quote
But then we can't discover the discussion's conclusion, xD.

Seriously though, regardless of whether or not its legal for him to be making this video, I still find him highly disrespectful and impolite, even perverted. If you want any real evidence of that, watch how he tries to go in for that same shot at first, but then when she switched positions, he moved the other way.

So yeah, he might be gay, but he wanted this video to give him more hits on Youtube, and clearly that backfired a bit.
Topos

Goomba
Banned for flaming and flamebaiting








Since: 08-28-10

Since last post: 4290 days
Last activity: 4290 days
Posted on 08-28-10 12:54 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Lord Alexandor
Originally posted by Topos
Obviously you don't do law since you missed

Although normal photographic activities should not cause problems in public forum areas, extreme or suspicious behavior could expose a photographer to prosecution under disorderly conduct and loitering laws. Disorderly conduct laws prohibit people from engaging in any behavior that causes substantial inconvenience, annoyance or alarm through disruptive behavior. For example, taking a few photographs of someone in a public place will not constitute disorderly conduct even if the person is annoyed. Extreme behavior, such as repeatedly taking close-ups despite someone's objections or failing to obey police orders at a crime scene could constitute disorderly conduct.


Obviously you didn't read the "I Am Not A Lawyer" line I wrote. Also, I highlighted some key words in your post that strengthen my stance that it isn't illegal.

Also, you do have a point in the italicized sentence. ("...repeatedly taking close-ups despite someone's objections...could constitute disorderly conduct.")

It really depends on the age of the teen, in this case. If she is under 18, then yes, he is probably guilty of disorderly conduct with a camera AFTER the mother says he needs to stop. He is, IMHO, disorderly with the guy on the bike at the end. HOWEVER, if the teen is 18+, then (remember, IANAL), IMHO, the mother doesn't have the right to say that he can or cannot film her, only the girl can say that.

Also, please note that I think the guy is a perv and shouldn't be filming people the way he was. I also think he was very rude. But, I also don't think much, if anything, will come of this in terms of the law.

Topos, if you would like to argue with me about this, I'd be more than happy to do so, but not here. If you want to argue, PM me and we shall continue this argument/debate.

Yeah, I agree with what you're saying, but I think the "underaged minors" distinction is a very important one--there's a reason that minors can't consent to a lot of things, y'know?
Rogue
If you're reading this... You are the Resistance











Since: 08-17-04

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 3 days
Posted on 08-28-10 01:48 PM Link | Quote
I may not be a lawyer, but I am a journalist. I have taken several photojournalism classes on top of being heavily schooled in media law.

The rule of thumb: anything that you can see from the street is LEGAL to photograph/video tape. That includes minors, people having sex, what have you. If you can see it while you're just walking along the sidewalk, it's FAIR GAME to shoot and publish on your blog, in your newspaper, what have you, because those are media designed to inform.

You do, however, need their consent if you are going to use the footage for something like an advertisement, etc, intending it for commercial use.


I mean, you're constantly going to have people throw a fit about recording/photographing them (celebrities, people going into courthouses for a trial, etc). If it's happening in public, you have every right to capture it on camera.

With that said, the guy on the bike had every right to get in front of the videographer and block his shot, so long as he wasn't touching him or his camera. Then you have a case of battery on your hands.


(Last edited by Rogue on 08-28-10 02:24 PM)
Stitch

Roy Koopa
Holy crap, it is the RoboCoonie!








Since: 08-20-04
From: California

Since last post: 25 days
Last activity: 25 days
Posted on 08-29-10 02:36 AM Link | Quote
Sorry, I don't trust a .com, albeit lawyers.com. I'd rather have a .gov reference. Find me the US code for that in house.gov, and I'll believe you. Otherwise, I'd sooner trust a journalist (Rogue) than some random crazy (banned) person.

Now, see Title 18 USC Sec. 1801 covers intentional voyeurism, which if that was the purpose of this person in Time Square, and imparts damages based on those actions.

See? Was that hard? Providing a legal resource that can be found in the house.gov US Code rather than a provision from lawyers.com that has no citing or resources?


(Last edited by Stitch on 08-29-10 03:06 AM)
Phoenixocracy

The one true Xeodent








Since: 01-08-10
From: Xeomerica

Since last post: 787 days
Last activity: 787 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:04 AM Link | Quote
This is a bit much. The guy is an idiot, and won't leave anyone alone. Legal or not, someone is going to hurt this guy one day.
Cteno

Super Shotgun
Moderator








Since: 01-11-05

Since last post: 931 days
Last activity: 52 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:24 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Dark Horse Xeo
This is a bit much. The guy is an idiot, and won't leave anyone alone. Legal or not, someone is going to hurt this guy one day.

Unfortunately, that would work out well for him.
Squire Vince

Storm Eagle
is watching you, he sees your every move.








Since: 04-17-10
From: Victorian London.

Since last post: 4040 days
Last activity: 4014 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:27 AM Link | Quote
Unless he died...in a firey explosion...that destroyed all remnants of him.
Phoenixocracy

The one true Xeodent








Since: 01-08-10
From: Xeomerica

Since last post: 787 days
Last activity: 787 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:32 AM Link | Quote
And that, Vince, is why I take away your candy.

In any case, I think that what he is doing is wrong, but some of the stuff is just people asking for it. If some guy was just standing there staring (no camera), there would have been rude looks and that is it.

Seriously, don't go out and do things like that without expecting some problems.

However, the homeless guy thing was just him being a jerk.
Cteno

Super Shotgun
Moderator








Since: 01-11-05

Since last post: 931 days
Last activity: 52 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:33 AM Link | Quote
Wait a second... Why was that girl doing that in the middle of Times Square, anyway? Showing off to traffic?
Phoenixocracy

The one true Xeodent








Since: 01-08-10
From: Xeomerica

Since last post: 787 days
Last activity: 787 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:41 AM Link | Quote
Good question.

She obviously wanted the publicity. And to wear short-shorts?
Cteno

Super Shotgun
Moderator








Since: 01-11-05

Since last post: 931 days
Last activity: 52 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:43 AM Link | Quote
I guess... It's like people who wear skanky clothes and are shocked when people are staring!
Phoenixocracy

The one true Xeodent








Since: 01-08-10
From: Xeomerica

Since last post: 787 days
Last activity: 787 days
Posted on 08-31-10 12:54 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Gunmetal Badass
I guess... It's like people who wear skanky clothes and are shocked when people are staring!


I get that when I dress in my birthday suit.
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
Xeogaming Forums - General Chat - Mother SHOCKED that pervert videos teen daughter spreading legs in Times Sq |



xeogaming.org

AcmlmBoard 1.92++ r4 Baseline
?2000-2013 Acmlm, Emuz, Blades, Xkeeper, DarkSlaya*, Lord Alexandor*
*Unofficial Updates
Page rendered in 0.247 seconds.
0.054