Here's a cheerleader's outfit, an exotic import, that ought to do the trick.
Posted on 02/13/2003 6:50:23 PM PST by Coleus
Focus is on photographer with an eye for cheerleaders
BY STU POSPISIL
LINCOLN - Metro Conference athletic directors and the Nebraska School Activities Association will be watching their high school basketball sidelines more closely after Omaha police detained a 74-year-old man for training a camera on high school cheerleaders.
Omaha Marian Athletic Director Jim Miller said Wednesday that cheerleaders from his school became uncomfortable because of the man's apparent picture-taking at a Jan. 30 girls basketball game at Omaha South.
Miller said the girls alerted Marian's dean of students, who told South administrators. School officials called police, who interviewed the man. The man told authorities that he was a fan of Omaha Marian and Omaha Creighton Prep and was just there to observe the game.
Sgt. Dan Cisar said police took an information report, and the man was ordered to leave the building.
The girls later told Miller they had seen the man at other games.
The man could not be reached for comment Wednesday.
School officials have expressed concerns to the NSAA that if photographs of cheerleaders were taken, they could end up being sold to a Web site that contains pornographic or offensive material.
Copies of a photograph of the man, taken from South's video security monitoring system, were distributed this week at the Metro Conference's monthly meeting of athletic directors.
The man's photo also was sent to the NSAA because of its state basketball tournaments at various sites in Lincoln next month. The girls state tournament is March 6 through 8, and the boys tournament is March 13 through 15.
NSAA Assistant Director Jim Angele said copies of the photo have been forwarded to floor managers at the tournament sites in Lincoln.
"We hope this person won't show up at the state tournament," Angele said. "We'll have to police our sidelines more to make sure only those with credentials are there."
The NSAA does not have a uniform policy regarding the management of spectators at sporting events, other than to ask for good sportsmanship. The obligation to police spectators is left up to individual schools. That means school administrators can decide whether to prohibit admission to a particular spectator. It is common at events such as high school basketball games to see numerous school staff in attendance for the sole purpose of monitoring the crowd.
Miller said amateur photographers, such as family members, may be asked to provide identification if not recognized by officials of the host school.
"We're telling our workers that if they don't know somebody taking photographs, they may want to check it out," Miller said. "It's not a good situation for someone to be going to games and taking photos of cheerleaders only. It sends up a red flag."
What law does it need to violate?
Here's a hypothetical for you:
Do you think that in taking photographs of the cheerleaders (creating a marketable product) and posting or selling them to a shady website for profit or pleasure, that this 74 year old man should at some point get the permission of the subjects or perhaps get a signed release?
Even if that was not his intent, it's time to stop playing stupid here. What purpose did he have in mind for these photographs? It is part of the job of the school staff to protect these children. And that's what they are...children.
This guy wasn't at a Laker's game taking pics of the Laker's Girls. And if he was, how long do you think the LA Forum Security would put up with that?
It's time to stop protecting these pervs under the guise of Civil Liberties.
BINGO!!!
Libertarians are the social autistics and narcissists of our culture. They generally have no clue how individual behavior can adversely impact the larger community in terms of costs and lives. In their minds, all of society exists to pander to, tolerate, and protect their individual greed and obsessions regardless of external costs to others, and all of society can die and go to hell before the libertarian will suffer the least personal inconvenience.
They are the first to scream like stuck pigs and to demand statist intervention if reasonable, socially aware, and personally responsible people take an exception to the costs.
Here's a cheerleader's outfit, an exotic import, that ought to do the trick.
Technically, probably none, other than the Law of common sense.
Of course, if he chooses to snap opportunistic pictures of young girls in compromising positions and post 'em on the web,
than I can't blame said young girls father if he takes the guys camera and smashes it to pieces on the bridge of this perverts nose.
There's a reason this culture is spinning around the drain, and it stems from exactly the kind of legalistic permissiveness that you've suggested.
So, are you suggesting that all photography be prohibited at sporting events where there are cheerleaders, or beaches, or anywhere someone may get their picture taken, just because a photo MAY be posted on a website? How else would you control or prevent photos from being posted.
Or is it just Dirty Old Men that you're worried about? I'll bet younger men post to some of those sites also.
Libertarianism, like its siamese twin marxism, is an inherently unhealthy and dysfunctional ideology in practice. Society can only tolerate pure libertarianism (which is anarchy, really) in small and limited doses. Parasitic ideologies such as this need a healthy host to survive. The United States, with all it "statist rules," gives them the greatest opportunity to be free, wealthy, and healthy of any country on earth.
Libertarians like to make the claim that most people "fear" libertarian freedom. In truth most people instinctively realize that libertarian "freedom" is the Hobbesian freedom of the life of a feral dog--nasty, brutish, and short. It isn't fear that leads them to laugh the Eagle Eyes and OWKs of the world to scorn. It is common sense.
RITTER confirms his mental incompetence, calls Bush biggest threat to Democracy (HURL ALERT)
OK, lets have it your way. We'll give the principals (or some person designated by the parent-elected school board) complete authority to eject whoever he wants, for whatever reason he wants, without need to explain or justify his reasons: dirty old men with cameras, teens wearing gang colors, young black males who don't seem to "belong", dykey-looking women who pay too much attention to the cheerleaders, etc.
My point is that the "right to exclude" naturally belongs to private groups, privately-funded. Once you have an activity funded by public tax dollars (like public schools) you lose a lot of rights to exclude who you don't happen to like
My kids do not go to public school. The principal of my kids school has the right to exclude whoever he wants from school grounds, for completely arbitrary reasons, and keeps a shotgun around with which such exclusions can be enforced. (I'm the principal. We home school)
The quality of your erudition does nothing to hide the vacancy of your arguments.
Slur, slur, ad hominem, ad hominem.
Boring.
The neighborhood I grew up in was Italian/German. The teens in my neighborhood had a custom: if we saw somebody walking around the neighborhood who didn't look like he "belonged" (like a minority), he would be made unwelcome. Depending on circumstances and time of evening, he might get the crud kicked out of him. Illegal as hell? Sure.
Later on the custom declined. So did the neighborhood.
My point is that private people have the natural right to eject tresspassers from private property (however much activist courts have lately tried to abridge this right). And a group of people, who collectively own some common property (like a gated community), have a colective right to exclude. But when you have "public" property, you start losing your right to exclude.
Do I oppose a right to exclude? No. I'm in favor of people having the right to exclude whoever they want from their property, and for people to come together, collectively buy property, and to write into the rules the right to exclude whoever they want, whether it's Whites excluding Blacks, Blacks excluding Whites, Jews excluding Gentiles, etc. But to do that, it needs to be PRIVATE property, with rules arrived at by consensus of the owners
Cultural Jihad asks: "In other words if other parents allow their daughters to participate in cheerleading squads then they are fair game?"
I guess I'm going to have to go with SauronOfMordor and AppyPappy here, CJ. Neither I, AP nor SOM are suggesting that the other girls could be considered fair game, but telling your 14 year old daughter that you "decline to allow her to appear in public dressed in a manner that would appeal to 'dirty old men'" is an obvious common sense self-defense tactic.
The failure of mothers and fathers to set such common sense standards of modesty for their young daughters would be as crazy as me streaking naked through the downtown capital of Saudi Arabia, with a copy of Playboy in one hand and a bottle of booze in the other hand, while singing Onward, Christian Soldiers and expecting to exit the other side of town unscathed!
Regards,
Boot Hill
Kevin Curry said: "Libertarians are the social autistics and narcissists of our culture."
Those quotes are a pair of keepers.
Boot
If the good people of freerepublic think you're a disruptive liberal then do they have the right to demand that you be banned?
Sorry, I have to disagree. IMO, as soon as you have been prevented from going about your business as you please, you have been "arrested." You can even call it "detained" if you like. For either, you should have done/been suspected of doing something illegal. No where was it even alleged that the DOM was doing anything illegal, just something that made a Mom uncomfortable.
Lots of people make me uncomfortable. Can I call the police and have them "move along." If so, then both they and I are Jack Booted Thugs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.