www.nbc5i.com/news/5086442/detail.html
A photographer in a Texas mall was arrested for taking lewd shots of women and children. Apparently under Texas law you are committing an offense if, a) you're taking a picture of a person who hasn't given you consent to do so, and b) that picture is for the sexual gratification of any person.
My knee jerk reaction is to protest the photographer's rights. After all, photogrpahy is a form of expression and is, therefore, guarnateed under the First Amendment. In contrast the right of privacy, as the Bushies keep telling us, is NOT in the Constitution.
I also wonder why the camera is an issue. Would the cops have acted differenblty if the perp's camera was empty? ... or just out of focus? What if instead of a camera the perp was using a sketch pad and creating lewd drawing of women and children in the crowd. Would that be acceptable?
Or ... suppose I am sittin in the mall and as I sit there, a very beautiful woman walks by. I write, "she is has such beautiful breasts, if only I could strip of that blouse. Her name must be Mrilyn, I can see her in a negligee, a sheer negligee, her hands bound, her feet in mules with 4 inch heels, kneeling before me ...." "If only she would bend over ...."
Disgusting? Is it only disgusting if it is written down or expressed as a photograph? Would it be legal to think these words or only to write them? If someone sees me staring at Marilyn and she complains, do the cops have a right to see what I am writing?
1 comment:
Agree completely Stephen. As I posted over at DPReview. I cannot believe that people are so willing to concede their rights when the "right" button is pushed. There are variables here that I do not and can not know, and I am as against child molesters as the most rabid person you might know. It does not mean we should surrender our rights (and insist that others should too) because of what the alleged intent of the photographer was....BEFORE WE EVEN KNOW WHAT IT WAS!
Post a Comment