Pervert videotapes a girl's butt in Time Square

[zinfamous]

with this thread being 4 pages long i expected something a tad more than that creepy video.

fixed for more happiness? :hmm:

 

[smitbret]

Doesn't anyone realize that the biker had the same right to stand between the creepy guy and the girl as the creepy guy had to videotape her? He should have just stood there and said, "Oh am I blocking your shot? I apologize, but I have every right to stand here."

 

[eits]

Your joking right? if this girl was just walking along the street and some creep starting taping her then yea, but lets face it, she's bent over a chair with a tight pair of shorts on with her (fine) ass just sitting there blaring out "look at me", WTF did she expect?..

By your logic, it's ok for a girl to be raped if she wore shitty clothes. If it's unwanted, its unwanted. Rationalizing that the girl was asking for it is stupid.

Besides, it was a photo shoot. She dressed for the camera, not the public.

 

[eits]

so change the hypothetical. at what point do you find what this guy was doing objectionable? your girlfriend lying next to you on the beach... he stands by her feet focusing in on her crotch. your daughter at the playground on the swing... him standing in front of her with his camera. etc. etc.

Yes, of course there's the famous "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" from Evelyn Beatrice Hall/Voltaire, but frankly I'm not sure they were equating political speech with weirdos filming girls' crotches.

It's already been said, but there's a difference between what's technically legal and what society will generally tolerate. I'd like to think that a creepy guy filming a ballerina's crotch is more the latter than the former.

This

 

[darkswordsman17]

By your logic, it's ok for a girl to be raped if she wore shitty clothes. If it's unwanted, its unwanted. Rationalizing that the girl was asking for it is stupid.

Besides, it was a photo shoot. She dressed for the camera, not the public.

Wow, nice ridiculous leap of logic there.

Your second point is senseless given that the shoot is being shot in a public place.

 

[theeedude]

He may be an A-hole pervert, but he's an A-hole pervert well within his rights. You have no right to privacy if you are showing your crotch to everyone in Times Square. He was not shooting anything that was not visible to every other bystander there.

 

[manlymatt83]

meh

 

[arrfep]

Wow, nice ridiculous leap of logic there.

Your second point is senseless given that the shoot is being shot in a public place.

lol. There needs to be a version of Godwin's Law for probability of someone saying "I guess you think it's okay for scantily clad women to be raped" whenever an argument breaks out like this.

 

[theeedude]

The guy is Joey Boots from Howard Stern show. http://www.youtube.com/user/joeyboots

 

[esun]

so change the hypothetical. at what point do you find what this guy was doing objectionable? your girlfriend lying next to you on the beach... he stands by her feet focusing in on her crotch. your daughter at the playground on the swing... him standing in front of her with his camera. etc. etc.

Yes, of course there's the famous "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" from Evelyn Beatrice Hall/Voltaire, but frankly I'm not sure they were equating political speech with weirdos filming girls' crotches.

It's already been said, but there's a difference between what's technically legal and what society will generally tolerate. I'd like to think that a creepy guy filming a ballerina's crotch is more the latter than the former.

In this case, the point at which I find it objectionable is if I politely ask the person to stop and he doesn't. You have the right to leave yourself and you do so. You don't try to block his view or curse him out; you leave. That's your legal, responsible recourse against him. Of course, if he starts following you then you call the police.

The problem is how they handled the situation. Everyone tends to get angry so quickly and forgets to just talk calmly with people. First, the person that's being filmed should politely ask the person to stop. Not with hostility, but, just a polite, "Hi I noticed you were filming me. I'd appreciate it if you didn't, it makes me feel uncomfortable." If he responds to that with, "It's my legal right, you're doing this in public, I have the right to be here and film you," then you say, "I understand that what you're doing is legal, what I'm asking for is a favor to stop filming me because it makes me feel uncomfortable." I'd bet almost anyone (except the biggest a-holes) would stop after a request like that.

However, if he continues, then you leave.

This is also not comparable to either situation you mentioned for various obvious reasons. If your girlfriend was lying on a crowded beach obviously modeling clothes for a fashion shoot and some bystander videotaped the it, would you object?

Also, your last sentence made no sense unless you intended to contradict your original point.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Watching the video, and more or less, I don't see a problem with what happened. The guy is being creepy and and people wanted him to stop, so he acts like an asshole and then someone comes in to act like an asshole back. It might be his right to be a perv, but its also their right to ask him to stop and get pissy when he doesn't.

If they had a permit to shoot then they should contact a police officer and if nothing else have him talk to the guy while they finished the shoot. If not, then walk away and if the guy follows or comes back then I'd call the police for harassment. Even if they can't charge the guy, it should be enough to get him to leave or prevent him from filming so they can finish shooting.

 

[Jadow]

whats with all the use of creepy, in a world of 2girls1cup, some medium res vid of a fully clothed girl in a public place warrants 900 uses of creepy?

 

[KeypoX]

lol goober

She said im 17

 

[Rubycon]

Ummm that's what studios are for.

A shoot (if you call it that) on a public street is a prank, set up or just to get attention. They are lucky that's all that happened!

 

[theeedude]

Watching the video, and more or less, I don't see a problem with what happened. The guy is being creepy and and people wanted him to stop, so he acts like an asshole and then someone comes in to act like an asshole back. It might be his right to be a perv, but its also their right to ask him to stop and get pissy when he doesn't.

If they had a permit to shoot then they should contact a police officer and if nothing else have him talk to the guy while they finished the shoot. If not, then walk away and if the guy follows or comes back then I'd call the police for harassment. Even if they can't charge the guy, it should be enough to get him to leave or prevent him from filming so they can finish shooting.

So you are advocating that police harass him for doing something that he's perfectly within his rights to do, for the benefit of some dumb broad who wants to lift her legs up in Times Square, one of the most visited and filmed places in the world, without anyone taking a video?

 

[AznAnarchy99]

TBH I watched the first 2 minutes expecting the film to catch another guy filming her. It wasnt until the very end where he started zooming in on her but it wasnt even in a crazy way as in trying to get her vaj.

 

[darkswordsman17]

So you are advocating that police harass him for doing something that he's perfectly within his rights to do, for the benefit of some dumb broad who wants to lift her legs up in Times Square, one of the most visited and filmed places in the world, without anyone taking a video?

If he's following them I'm not sure that he's within his rights anymore, and if they had a permit, then it is possible that he was disturbing them doing what they were granted the right to do by the public office.

It wouldn't be harassment for the cop to ask him to stop and is well within the legal rights of the people to request the cop to do. The cop, likewise could say, tough luck, no permit deal with it or leave yourselves or if they have a permit could just ask the guy to stop and possibly leave, and then depending on the guys' actions from there determine what the best way to handle the situation is.

I agree that if they wanted privacy they should have done the shoot somewhere else, but that doesn't mean they should have to put up with someone screwing with them. They were smart enough to not escalate the situation themselves and just walk away and the situation apparently stopped.

 

[RPD]

This thread delivers!

 

[Miramonti]

This thread has snarkle.

 

[L00PY]

There's a reasonable line to cross and being a perv crosses the line just like holding a cell phone cam at knee level and snapping upskirt pics of women who don't know what's happening. That's okay, right? It's in public and you're not hurting anyone, right?

Actually in Times Square it's very different and there are clearly marked lines here. What you describe there is considered Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree which is a class E felony. Subsequent offences raises it to a class C.

On the other hand, as that video was recorded where no one has any reasonable expectation of privacy, as his actions could hardly be classified as being done surreptitiously, and as the subject of the filming had knowledge that she was being recorded, it's unlikely that videographer could be prosecuted under NY Penal Code § 250.45.

 

[Capt Caveman]

He may be an A-hole pervert, but he's an A-hole pervert well within his rights. You have no right to privacy if you are showing your crotch to everyone in Times Square. He was not shooting anything that was not visible to every other bystander there.

Tell that to a female cop when you film her crotch.

 

[fantolay]

That girl sucks @ ballet.

 

[Barfo]

yum

 

[Hacp]

I'm sorry eits, but its laughable when people resort to this. You're trying to inject emotion to overcome logic. The logical facts are that the cameraman committed no crime and the cyclist did. If you want my opinion - if my sister or girlfriend were doing something like that in public, in Times fucking Square no less, I'd tell her its her own damn fault for doing it there, and that they should know better.

Then again - my sister is a strange former punk teenager type, and I wouldn't date someone so naive. And when I have a daughter, I won't raise her to be either. So I guess your hypothetical won't apply to me anyway.

Pics of sister/girlfriend? Without pants on?

 

[SP33Demon]

This happens to celebrities all the time with paparazzi. If they really cared that much about their stupid shoot, they would have had bodyguards preventing others from filming like I said earlier.