[Alberta's Child]

That’s exactly right. Your expectations of privacy go out the window once you’re in public.

[DoughtyOne]

They do not!

If they did, any guy could walk up to a lady in public, strip her bare, and gawk away.

Hey, she has no right to privacy. /s

[Olog-hai]

That’s what the Bolsheviks said. It’s why they turned the USSR into one giant prison.

[Steve_Seattle]

"That’s exactly right. Your expectations of privacy go out the window once you’re in public."

So I can go lift up a woman's skirt because she's in public? No? Why not? Because it's assault? Why? No harm is done. Because I don't have a right to touch her? Why not? After all, she's in public.

[DoughtyOne]

I have been basing this on the headline, which made a categorical statement that was not accurate.

The upskirt photo law was not thrown out.

Part of the upskirt photo law was.

The part that was thrown out, was probably thrown out reasonably.

If all this guy did was take public photos, I have a hard time seeing it a crime. I would have to join you in that. I might not like the opening it would give stalkers, but the general public has a right to take photos in public.

If say a family member is at an event, of course the parents or relatives are going to be taking pictures, and not just of the relative. If a member of the public goes to an outdoor event, they have a right to take a photo to remember the event by.

On the point I’ve been making, I still believe I am correct. On the issue of this person, I believe the court and you are probably correct.