- Joined
- Oct 18, 2007
- Messages
- 31,346
- Reaction score
- 19,889
- Location
- East Coast - USA
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
(CNN) -- 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.
Dontcha know we're living in the days when anything goes?
Massachusetts court says 'upskirt' photos are legal - CNN.com
WHAT???? How can upskirt photo taking NOT be an invasion of privacy?????
Dontcha know we're living in the days when anything goes?
Massachusetts court says 'upskirt' photos are legal - CNN.com
WHAT???? How can upskirt photo taking NOT be an invasion of privacy?????
No expectation of privacy in a public domain. Plus they want you to - that's why they wear skirts.
People who do this are pigs, but if you're wearing undies then it's not like they're photographing anything special. You've seen one... you've seen them all.
Thought blaming the victim was discredited years ago.
There is no victim here, since there is no crime. Next.
It's a man's world for sure......ain't it.
There is no victim here, since there is no crime. Next.
So a dude sticking a cell phone up under the skirt of your wife or daughter isn't doing anything that should be illegal?
There's nothing "special" to be seen up under there?
A "wedgie" can be pretty revealing.
Thongs can be pretty revealing.
Some panties are pretty sheer.
It's an invasion of privacy.
Only because the legal system hasn't caught up with technology yet.
I was simply assuming you were being sarcastic.
Well I didn't get the memo!
Massachusetts court says 'upskirt' photos are legal - CNN.com
WHAT???? How can upskirt photo taking NOT be an invasion of privacy?????
This is another glaring example of our judges out of control.
No, not really. It's becoming a world where essentially anything is acceptable, and no matter what you do, it will be justified and excused by someone, for some reason. It's a me me me world these days. Wanna look up my skirt? Why of course. Go ahead. It's only following your natural impulse.
If women were openly quite so brazen, and the shoe were on the other foot, would you be saying it's a women's world these days too?
It's a pretty scuzzy thing to do, but I can understand why the ruling is what it is. Do we arrest women who take their toddlers to a public pool in revealing bathing suits?
I did, but I'm so damn rebellious, I refuse to cooperate. :lol:
What would be the female equivalent to being upskirted?
Men makes the laws. I assume it was men who decided these kinds of pictures were legal.
Would female judges make that call?
Would female judges make that call?
"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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?