Single Japanese males emigrating to New England en masse

[yanpa]

Massachusetts court says 'upskirt' photos are legal

(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.

"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.

...more...

[wagyl]

In a mirror of the "not all foreigners are native English speakers" post, I suspect that not all of the 盗撮 team are single.

[GomiGirl]

I am not sure if this is done by people who are simply tragic or people who have an unhealthy sense of entitlement. Is it the "thrill" of perhaps being caught or are they hoping for a wank-worthy image for their collection?

It ain't that hard to get porn - and good porn - with images of every imaginable scenario enough to satisfy the viewing pleasure of pretty much everybody so it can't be for the sake of getting a naughty photo. It seems like way too much effort. But then perhaps that is the point.

[Mike Oxlong]

I am not sure if this is done by people who are simply tragic or people who have an unhealthy sense of entitlement. Is it the "thrill" of perhaps being caught or are they hoping for a wank-worthy image for their collection?

It ain't that hard to get porn - and good porn - with images of every imaginable scenario enough to satisfy the viewing pleasure of pretty much everybody so it can't be for the sake of getting a naughty photo. It seems like way too much effort. But then perhaps that is the point.

Probably because they're the first-person shooter, so to speak.

[matsuki]

I am not sure if this is done by people who are simply tragic or people who have an unhealthy sense of entitlement. Is it the "thrill" of perhaps being caught or are they hoping for a wank-worthy image for their collection?

It ain't that hard to get porn - and good porn - with images of every imaginable scenario enough to satisfy the viewing pleasure of pretty much everybody so it can't be for the sake of getting a naughty photo. It seems like way too much effort. But then perhaps that is the point.

Probably because they're the first-person shooter, so to speak.

Not very good ones though...with all the spy camera shit available nowadays, they have to be pretty shit at it to get caught.

[yanpa]

I am not sure if this is done by people who are simply tragic or people who have an unhealthy sense of entitlement. Is it the "thrill" of perhaps being caught or are they hoping for a wank-worthy image for their collection?

It ain't that hard to get porn - and good porn - with images of every imaginable scenario enough to satisfy the viewing pleasure of pretty much everybody so it can't be for the sake of getting a naughty photo. It seems like way too much effort. But then perhaps that is the point.

Probably because they're the first-person shooter, so to speak.

Not very good ones though...with all the spy camera shit available nowadays, they have to be pretty shit at it to get caught.

A friend told you so?

[yanpa]

In a mirror of the "not all foreigners are native English speakers" post, I suspect that not all of the 盗撮 team are single.

Good point, for "single" substitute "loser".

[yanpa]

Too late...

Massachusetts bill outlaws Peeping Tom photos

Massachusetts lawmakers have approved a bill targeting those who take photographs of "the sexual or other intimate parts" of people in public.

It comes a day after a state court ruled a man who took photos up the skirts of female passengers on Boston's subway did not break the law.

The bill makes such offences punishable by up to two-and-a-half years in jail and a $5,000 (£3,000) fine.

...more...

[wagyl]

What kind of legal language is "the sexual or other intimate parts?" That just begs further questions. They should use the precise jargon "the middle bits."

[Mike Oxlong]

What kind of legal language is "the sexual or other intimate parts?" That just begs further questions. They should use the precise jargon "the middle bits."

The comedian David Cross helped develop some of that language...

(Skip to 3:39)

[matsuki]

I am not sure if this is done by people who are simply tragic or people who have an unhealthy sense of entitlement. Is it the "thrill" of perhaps being caught or are they hoping for a wank-worthy image for their collection?

It ain't that hard to get porn - and good porn - with images of every imaginable scenario enough to satisfy the viewing pleasure of pretty much everybody so it can't be for the sake of getting a naughty photo. It seems like way too much effort. But then perhaps that is the point.

Probably because they're the first-person shooter, so to speak.

Not very good ones though...with all the spy camera shit available nowadays, they have to be pretty shit at it to get caught.

A friend told you so?

Nah, I've been researching wireless night vision cameras and such for the temple and most of the "customers who purchased this item also purchased these" ads have all kinds of wacky spy cam this and spy cam that. Everything from cigarette boxes, pens, alarm clocks, to DIY pinhole cameras for "security." None of them seemed to loop the video though, making them pretty useless as a security cam

That being said, I'll admit to haven taken up skirts....with an SLR to boot! During a insanely overcrowded matsuri many years ago...some assholes decided it was ok to create their own path literally through our area, trampling over the blanket, our belongings, and us...and like the tools they are, people eventually formed a line and started following them. After I had my fingers stepped on, chuhai spilled on me, I had enough and started shooting upskirts...err yukata of the bitches walking on top of me. (Yes, I mean on top of me...I was sitting down and they were stepping over me, stopping, all the while I was literally inside their Yukata as they walked over me) Nothing ninja about it either, I had the flash on, while telling them to get the fuck off me and our stuff....yet they kept on walking over me. The shots were fucking horrible. Pimply asses, unshaven legs, granny panties....all in in HD. I can't understand the appeal of making a hobby of that shit.

[wuchan]

I am from MA and have made money from video based on the current law. NO IT WAS NOT UPSKIRT. The current law was designed to protect union videographers from prosecution when filming in public areas which allowed movies to be made in Boston. BOA, StateBank, Prudential, and J.Hancock all tried to sue the union for profit after international reliesed films had their buildings in the background without payment. The state responded by making all public filming legal, everywhere. It was never intended to allow upskirt fliming but never said it was ilegal.






My personal point of view: If a girl rides the college bound green line without underwear on a friday night, cameras are the least of their worries. Whores getting banged on the B line (at the back of the train) between Kenmore and Harvard St. between wednesday and sunday was totally normal and was incouraged by horny cheering crowds. BU is a "party school" complete with slutty whores.

[yanpa]

Texas court upholds right to take 'upskirt' photos

Judges strike down part of statute, saying ‘inherently expressive’ medium of photography is part of right to free speech

A court has upheld the constitutional right of Texans to photograph strangers as an essential component of freedom of speech - even if those images should happen to be surreptitious “upskirt” pictures of women taken for the purposes of sexual gratification.

Criticising an anti-“creepshot” law as a “paternalistic” intrusion on a person’s right to be aroused, the Texas court of criminal appeals struck down part of the state’s “improper photography or visual recording” statute which banned photographing, broadcasting or transmitting a visual image of another person without the other’s consent and with the intention to “arouse or gratify … sexual desire”.

...
At least 151 inappropriate photography cases have been filed in the Houston area alone since the law’s introduction in 2001, the Houston Chronicle reported.

One saw a 12-year-old girl convicted and sentenced to a year’s probation for taking a surreptitious photograph of a classmate in a school dressing-room, though the image did not show nudity and was swiftly deleted.
...
...more...

[Samurai_Jerk]

Looks like the new place to be is Oregon.

Oregon judge: taking photos up girl's skirt not illegal

An Oregon judge has acquitted a 61-year-old man who admitted taking photographs up the skirt of a 13-year-old girl as she shopped at a Target store in suburban Portland, lawyers in the case said Friday.

Washington County Circuit Court Judge Eric Butterfield ruled on Thursday that Patrick Buono did not break the law when he surreptitiously took the pictures of the girl in January 2013, said his defense attorney Mark Lawrence.

"He did not deny it and he feels real bad about it too, by the way," Lawrence said.

The girl did not notice his actions, Lawrence said, but another woman in the store alerted officials and film from surveillance cameras later confirmed Buono's act.