Up-Skirts OKFollow

If I walk by my picture window naked and my neighbor snaps a picture was s/he a peeping tom?

Depends on the state law, I imagine, but *importantly* the expectation of privacy in your home is dramatically higher than when you are on the subway.

By defining underclothes as being in private places on a person it's simply a way that the legal system could disallow these types of photos

How? Seriously. What are the criteria for 'underclothes' going to be? Do they require something covering them? Where do they end. Can someone take a picture of tights? It's idiotic. To accomplish, what, exactly? What's the damage that's been done to anyone? The "violation" of someone taking a picture of your magic underpants, because, presumably they're going to flog the dolphin to it at a later time? Again, thoughtcrime is stupid. What if Bob gets off ************ to pictures of dogs. Should we legislate against people taking dog photos?

Well if nothing else chances are if you're making a habit of running around trying to take pictures up people's skirts you're probably not on the fast track to success in life. Only a matter of time before you do something you can get arrested for.

Getting into a fistfight with someone or their boyfriend in the back of a subway for example.

Edited, Mar 6th 2014 12:20pm by someproteinguy

My paycheck from GrainySubwayUpskirts.com says otherwise

Doesn't count unless the camera leaves marks.

What if I shout "fire" up a woman's skirt?

Only illegal if she's in a theater it seems.

Edited, Mar 6th 2014 12:29pm by someproteinguy

Best idea yet.

More like, if you're wearing a skirt you don't mind people looking at your legs, generally. If you're out in public you know someone might take your picture.

It kinda makes me want to design skirts with camera-foiling underskirts just to **** off a few pervs, but I doubt the market is there, really.

Holy hell, this thread is moving.



Edited, Mar 6th 2014 12:48pm by Samira

Looking at your legs, no. But your upper thighs and groin area?

I don't care for skirts much, but when I wear them, it is not so that perverts can play peek-a-boo with my panties and their iphone. I don't really understand why that should be ok. Does that mean it's ok for someone to start snapping pictures under bathroom stalls because you're technically in a public place and you've chosen to disrobe? Or in dressing rooms? Or at the urinal in a men's room?

No because they're not technically public places?

Lets just make it so it is illegal to own and operate a camera without a licence. in order to qualify you must under go an intensive psyche exam to show that you aren't a creeper and won't take snap shots of anything that you might find sexually arousing, or other people could find as harassment. Furthermore carrying a concealed camera will result in much stiffer penalties including potential prison time, more over even licensed camera operators can not conceal a camera it must be on display to everyone at all times, so they know that you have a camera on your person and my take pictures near them.

Hyperbolic comparisons are also over rated.

Should have never let the flappers off so easy back in the 20's. Then this wouldn't be a problem.



Edited, Mar 6th 2014 4:37pm by rdmcandie

I don't care for skirts much, but when I wear them, it is not so that perverts can play peek-a-boo with my panties and their iphone. I don't really understand why that should be ok.

It's not "ok". It's just not "illegal". You can hold both of those ideas in your head at the same time, can't you? I don't like people taking picutres of my bald spot, but that probably shouldn't be illegal. It probably shouldn't be illegal even if I normally wear a hat and take it off for the pledge of aligence or whatever. I don't think it's "ok" to burn an American Flag because you're sad that gays can get married. That doesn't mean it should be illegal.

Contrary to what you've been told, the purpose of legislation isn't to enforce and inflict your personal fears and hang ups on the rest of the world. THERE ARE NO DAMAGES WHEN SOMEONE TAKES A PHOTO OF A FULLY CLOTHED PERSON IN PUBLIC. That's the point. It's not "ok" for paparazzi to expose famous cheating spouses. There are millions of things that aren't "ok" that we allow to be legal to avoid harm. Once this is illegal, then obviously "attempting" it will be made illegal. So to protect your ******* precious magic underpants, some poor sod is going to end up in prison because someone thinks he tried to take a picture of something.

It's not worth it. Not remotely.