 HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 11:16:06 AM
Now that case dealt more with money iirc
Sounds about right... For some reason my brain made a permanent link between "Hindu God Krishna" and "public forum". Probably some trick I used to remember the case name from my time at University. |
|
 Denogginizer
Male, 30-39, Western US
117 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 10:10:18 AM
I hate people like this. Technicly obeying the law, but making a spectacle of themselves, hoping to incite an incident to gain fame. In a just society, the airport offical would have been allowed to dive them from the property with a horse whip. |
|
 patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 9:29:29 AM
But they they started posted shots thought could easily identify the person and to ME that crossed the line.
Sorry but these people know what they look like. If you don't want to be a potential item of public ridicule, you should present yourself in public better. It may be in bad taste to mock, but it's not like they pulled one of these people's ass cheeks out of their jorts or anything. |
|
 HalfPintRoo
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
2029 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 9:24:18 AM
Listypoos- I was wondering about harassment and/or slander. Something to look into, just out of curiosity.
CrakrJak- So minors have rights against their picture being taken or posted or both? I figure there are no "internet laws" either. When it comes down to this issue OR starting up laws (aka censorship) on the internet, I would choose to not have the internet censored. Only because I know that once things are governed it will go far beyond reasonable.
BoredFrank- Your comment made me laugh and I did like the site when it first came out because you always saw just the ass crack. Or you saw just the ill-fitting clothes, etc. But they they started posted shots thought could easily identify the person and to ME that crossed the line. |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:37:03 AM
@HA: Exactly my point. Now that case dealt more with money iirc, but it's still been used to curb free speech in airports. I don't agree with the ruling, but if that's the current law then that's what it is. |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 7:38:30 AM
Everyone here is congratulating the police, but I'm pretty sure he was wrong. Your supreme court has upheld that airports are not considered public forums.
Indeed; International Society for Krishna Consciousness v. Lee. Now, whether or not the decision of that case was just is another matter... Either way, the airport is not a public forum currently. |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 6:33:19 AM
Everyone here is congratulating the police, but I'm pretty sure he was wrong. Your supreme court has upheld that airports are not considered public forums. |
|
BoredFrank
Male, 40-49, Southern US
1301 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 6:03:03 AM
And yes, Peopleofwalmart is still up and running, because they aren't doing anything illegal. Expectation of privacy doesn't apply to elephantine crackers exposing eight yards of ass-crack in public. Mockery may offend some, but it isn't illegal. |
|
BoredFrank
Male, 40-49, Southern US
1301 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 5:59:37 AM
The TSA is composed entirely of clueless shiiteheads who are still butt-hurt they missed being Nazis by 60 years.
Eff the TSA. |
|
 kcpd2050
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
325 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 12:31:24 AM
Good job law enforcement. The old guy was a complete ass. Who gives a crap if they hand out info and film. Whole lot of worry over nothing. The old guy just reinforced the idea of "question everything." The camera man and hot girl where being very polite and professional. Nice work. |
|
 CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
14374 Posts
|
Wednesday, December 05, 2012 12:18:15 AM
HalfPintRoo: "Crossing the line" camera wise varies state to state. In some anyone can film, they are called 'one-party consent' states. Other states require both (or all) parties to consent to being filmed, they are known as 'two-party consent' states. Each state also has their rules on legal age, in terms of filming too.
Here in Illinois, If a 16 year old boy takes pictures (non-nude) of his 15 year old GF he could be in serious trouble, because she's not old enough to give consent. |
|
Roland
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
157 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 9:10:53 PM
What was this guys so afraid of? |
|
 Listypoos
Male, 30-39, Europe
1472 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 4:44:28 PM
"Difference of interpretation I guess. My opinion is that the legal right after photographing/videotaping people stop at posting them on the internet w/hurtful captions. "
Roo, if the hurtful comments were untrue or exaggerated/just malicious then the laws of defamation may be a way of addressing it in court. If it's photos of the same person then the harassment laws here would also apply.
|
|
spbm02
Male, 18-29, Southern US
28 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 3:49:23 PM
The best "action" is at 9:50 where the cop tells the guy who dosent know anything to F off! |
|
HalfPintRoo
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
2029 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 1:31:40 PM
Difference of interpretation I guess. My opinion is that the legal right after photographing/videotaping people stop at posting them on the internet w/hurtful captions.
And yes- the cop does look like the hellraiser guy |
|
cityncolour
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
345 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 12:37:20 PM
@HalfPintRoo
That "where is the line" business works both ways. Where is the line of protection from being bullied and outright oppression of our right to know? The fact is... if you're on public or federal property, there is no line. and that's the way it should be. |
|
 McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
10187 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 12:21:43 PM
Anyone think that guy in the thumbnail kinda looks like Hellraiser???
Well without the pins of course. |
|
HalfPintRoo
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
2029 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:59:42 AM
You missed my point.
I'm asking where the LINE is drawn. I know the law. I know anyone can photograph and videotape anything and anyone they want. I'm saying, why is it then legal to POST those all over the internet with mean, hurtful, hateful comments.
Not this video- it just made me ask the question- where is the line?
There is a difference between "Stay home if you don't want to be photographed" and "Stay home if you don't want to be bullied and have your life ruined"
COME ON |
|
itzazoom
Male, 18-29, Europe
176 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:35:35 AM
the camera guy was the most annoying of all, he kept preaching his crap when the the cop already said "i wont stop you, you arent breaking any of my rules" |
|
 CoyoteKing
Male, 18-29, Southern US
2993 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:25:39 AM
officer that knows the laws > flyers and camera people >> airport douche
i also found it funny that when the airport guy is trying to get the ID from the cameraman and gets turned down, he looks to the cop and says he would like to get it from the cop and winks at him while saying it. cop continues to do his job properly and tells him he cant do that and the look on the airport guy's face is priceless as if to say "poo i've lost this fight and i cant get the cop to play along" |
|
LordJim
Male, 50-59, Europe
2401 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:02:30 AM
Polite, well-informed, even-handed cop doing his job without fear or favour. Good to see. |
|
 dankenstien
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
20 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 10:28:25 AM
What was the guys name filming? I don't recall the 1st amendment stating the freedom to be annoying f*cktards.. Who has two thumbs and will never go to whatever his site is and cares less about other peoples opinions? Hopefully everyone |
|
Reebo
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
5 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 10:20:09 AM
Cheeseb,
The application process and associated bond fee that the administrator is a rule for filming movies or other commercial ventures. This in no way relates to personal freedoms. The administrator was just hoping to use it as a loop hole to get his way. |
|
 chalket
Male, 50-59, Southern US
1473 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 10:13:18 AM
@cheeseb
The application process is to get permission for COMMERCIAL photography, as in filming a movie or documentary, and it requires proof of million dollar liability insurance. It does not apply to personal photography, your analogy is ridiculous. |
|
cheeseb
Male, 30-39, Southern US
158 Posts
|
Tuesday, December 04, 2012 9:57:51 AM
Didn't they say something about an application process? So it's fine to do this, but it's just decent to let the airport know that you want to, just like any sensible person would do.
Like if you just met someone, it would be cool if you invited them over to your house for dinner, but it's not cool for that someone to just walk in and start eating your food. |
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}