Perverts rejoice! Upskirt pictures are legal in MA

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,255
1,063
Screw the privacy of a woman......

Massachusetts' highest court ruled Wednesday that it is not illegal to secretly photograph underneath a person's clothing -- a practice known as "upskirting" -- prompting one prosecutor to call for a revision of state law.
The high court ruled that the practice did not violate the law because the women who were photographed while riding Boston public transportation were not nude or partially nude.

"A female passenger on a MBTA trolley who is wearing a skirt, dress, or the like covering these parts of her body is not a person who is 'partially nude,' no matter what is or is not underneath the skirt by way of underwear or other clothing," wrote Justice Margot Botsford of the state Supreme Judicial Court.

CNN legal analyst Sunny Hostin said the law has not caught up to technology and called it an assault on a woman's right to privacy.

"I think the courts got it wrong," Hostin said. "The spirit of the law makes it clear it is about the person's privacy."


The ruling stems from the case against Michael Robertson, 32, who was arrested in 2010 and accused of using his cell phone to take pictures and record video up the skirts and dresses of women on the trolley, according to court documents.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/us/massachusetts-upskirt-photography/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
 

citizenzen

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2010
1,433
11,628
Seems like an invasion of privacy to me.

But I don't possess the wisdom of that judge ... I guess.
 

iJohnHenry

macrumors P6
Mar 22, 2008
16,505
15
On tenterhooks
That shouldn't even matter.
OK, explain it to me then.

What harm is done to the 'target', if they are unaware of the perversion? They sure as Hell can't be identified from that particular angle.

It's not like the pervs are scanning through their clothing, which I believe is propitiatory to the TSA.
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
OK, explain it to me then.

What harm is done to the 'target', if they are unaware of the perversion? They sure as Hell can't be identified from that particular angle.

It's not like the pervs are scanning through their clothing, which I believe is propitiatory to the TSA.
And what harm is it to us if the NSA listens in on our calls if we don't know it? See where I'm going?
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
Deflection??

Your aside is a threat to your freedom, taken to extreme.

The subject of the thread is some pervert satisfying his peccadilloes, hopefully with no impact on anyone else.

Hardly in the same league.
Your whole point was ..... what someone doesn't know shouldn't hurt them.
What harm is done to the 'target', if they are unaware of the perversion? They sure as Hell can't be identified from that particular angle.
According to your logic, it's okay to be a victim as long as you don't know about it. That's kind of ironic since you consider Snowden Nobel Peace Prize material.
 

iJohnHenry

macrumors P6
Mar 22, 2008
16,505
15
On tenterhooks
According to your logic, it's okay to be a victim as long as you don't know about it.

That's kind of ironic since you consider Snowden Nobel Peace Prize material.
How can you be a victim if you are unaware? What injury has occurred?

As to your second point, I fail to see the link. Is the U.S. the victim, for surely they now know about it.

Snowden? He knew full well what he was doing, so how is he a victim??
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
How can you be a victim if you are unaware? What injury has occurred?
If someone stole something from you and you didn't realize or miss what was stolen, does that mean your not a victim?

As to your second point, I fail to see the link. Is the U.S. the victim, for surely they now know about it.
But according to your logic ..... Why should anyone care when the citizens of US didn't know?

Snowden? He knew full well what he was doing, so how is he a victim??
Nevermind, Your misunderstanding every comment I make.
 

iJohnHenry

macrumors P6
Mar 22, 2008
16,505
15
On tenterhooks
Never-mind, you're misunderstanding every comment I make.
Finally, something I can agree with.

Look, if you are upset because some perv will get his jollies from taking these pictures, just say so.

Until you can show other evidence, it appears to be yet another victimless 'crime'.
 

citizenzen

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2010
1,433
11,628
Until you can show other evidence, it appears to be yet another victimless 'crime'.
These photos get circulated on the internet.

Are you so sure that these people can't be identified?

I wouldn't be so quick to label this victimless.
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
Finally, something I can agree with.

Look, if you are upset because some perv will get his jollies from taking these pictures, just say so.

Until you can show other evidence, it appears to be yet another victimless 'crime'.
And if you're(OMG correct usage) upset that the government might be collecting your data and listening to your calls, just say so. But it's just as much as a victimless act according to your logic. Saying it's not would be very hypocritical of you.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't child porn illegal even without the face?
 

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2003
1,340
2,833
Anchorage
Step 1: Upskirt woman with husband present.
Step 2: Get the crap beat out of you.
Step 3: Sue.
Step 4: Profit.