Focus is on photographer with an eye for cheerleaders

Omaha.com ^ | 02.06.03

[Boot Hill]

weaponeer says:   "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'."

But they are different because the standards for each are different. The "stop and question" requires only an "objective suspicion" of criminal activity, while an arrest requires "probable cause" that a crime has been committed and by that person.

Are you suggesting a police officer needs "probable cause" just to stop and question a person? And if you are, are you also saying the Supreme Court is wrong for permitting such a stop and question under circumstances less than probable cause?

--Boot Hill

[GrandMoM]

In a sane America (pre-ACLU, pre-Woodstock, pre-LP and pre-MTV) this elderly man would have been given the bum's rush to the nearest trainyard for a one-way ride out of town.....yes, but ,in that sane America, women, ( including cheerleaders) did not dress so scantily as they do today!

What women of today need to learn, is that they cannot pick & choose who is looking or photographing them.

....many, many insane wierdo's are lurking in the background wishing to do them harm.

[Eagle Eye]

You have implied that you are a Christian. If that is the case, then Jesus' words should hold some weight with you.

Jesus said that you can judge what is in a man's heart by his what comes out of his mouth, ie, his words. 'Out of the abundance of the heart man speaks.'

Everyone should notice that you are terribly preoccupied with perversions, vices, and sins. I had never imagined cartoon or virtual pornograpy until you described it. Then you went into detail about virtual child porn and its evils.

Why is that? Could it be that you are overflowing with sinful lusts you then assume that everyone else is?

Of course, Ive mentioned this to you before, and you quiet down for a while, but then you are right back at it.

[Protagoras]

In a sane America (pre-ACLU, pre-Woodstock, pre-LP and pre-MTV) this elderly man would have been given the bum's rush to the nearest trainyard for a one-way ride out of town.

Are you advocating vigilanteism?

[weaponeer]

Interesting that you assumed such a suggestion when I made none at all. I saw the discussion thread, have an extensive amount of experience in ONE of the areas relating to the debate, and merely submitted information that I felt would help broaden understanding for those attempting to determine a solution. A handly little step in resolving a problem is fully defining exactly what the problem is ;-)

Sorry, you're right. I shouldn't have made the assumption. But you stated the information in a way that made it seem like you thought that the posting of pictures on a porno or similar website was a bad thing. I naturally wondered what you would propose to alleviate such a bad thing.

Maybe it's because I belong to a military culture where a problem is never raised without a suggested solution. Not always a good thing.

[E Rocc]

I fail to see how taking photographs at a public event can be restricted by the government.

Try taking pictures of one of the new "professionalized" federal security checkpoints at the airport and watch what happens.

-Eric

[weaponeer]

Are you suggesting a police officer needs "probable cause" just to stop and question a person? And if you are, are you also saying the Supreme Court is wrong for permitting such a stop and question under circumstances less than probable cause?

Yes and yes. Unless there is reason to believe that I have committed, or am about to commit (e.g. pouring gasoline on a building) a crime, I do not where there is any need to have any interaction with the "authorities."

[AppyPappy]

In other words if other parents allow their daughters to participate in cheerleading squads then they are fair game?

If the cheerleaders are not dressed properly, my daughter will not be participating.

There is actually a website somewhere that has cheerleader beaver shots. I have no idea what the address is so don't ask. It was in my Yahoo spam.

[Protagoras]

There is actually a website somewhere that has cheerleader beaver shots.

The Cedar Rapids Beavers vs the Iowa City Tigers. It was a great game. The pics were on ESPN's website.

[AppyPappy]

When our local high school had the dump the Indian mascot, several people tried to get Beavers.

[Protagoras]

When our local high school had the dump the Indian mascot,

PC run amok.

[Palladin]

Thanks for your voice of experience.

In other times, photographing cheerleaders or other children would have been an innocent endeavor. Today, depending on circumstances, it could prove very harmful to the children.

I always take photographs of the neighbor children visiting my home on Halloween in costume--BUT I always ask the parents permission first. I won a local photog contest with one of these pics.

[Palladin]

BTW, Tamsey, Cyberangels is a great organization. Thanks for all you do to prevent cybercrimes against our children and grandchildren.

[Palladin]

Wow, Kevin, you don't mince words. I agree that most Libertarians are extremely weird, especially whenever the subject of child abuse and pornography come up on FR.

I wonder if Michael Jackson is a Libertarian?

[Brookhaven]

what law does this "violate?"

Thee are plenty of things that are OK in moderation, but if carried to the extreme can cross the line.

[berserker]

Some of the cheerleaders

became nervous

after

he

focused his attention

on them

[Robert_Paulson2]

Hey it's not good form for you to malign folks, without doing it to their face.

---

"It isn't fear that leads them to laugh the Eagle Eyes and OWKs of the world to scorn. It is common sense. " --Kevin Curry

---

You should have the "common sense decency" to page to a thread those you seek to malign with your personal and offensive attacks. There now, I did it for you. You are welcome.

[Tamzee]

You are right, too, I didn't make it clear in my posts whether I was siding with particular proposals and I probably should have said so. To answer your specific statement about posting images on porno websites, first we have to separate two issues... pictures of adults versus pictures of minors.

When it comes to images of children, I am very opposed to their being posted to any adult or sexually oriented site. As far as how to "alleviate such a bad thing", now we are getting into an enormously complicated issue which would really take a book ... hence my deliberate lack of suggestions earlier in this thread ;-)

For practical purposes alone, controlling images of children on the Internet is a logistical nightmare when it comes to jurisdictional matters... I'll give you a scenario that might help. A pedophile takes a picture of a child in Austria, loads it up on the PCU, then uses a dial-up account to an ISP in Germany to get on the Internet. He then uses an anonymous proxy server in Canada to log into a child porn website that is registered to an address in Russia and posts the image there. An American then can download the image from the Russian website, probably making use of an anonymous proxy server in Canada or otherwise himself. At each step of the way, the countries differ as far as what legally defines child porn, freedom of speech, requirements of ISP's to log Internet activity and what types of logging information the server is required to provide to local LE and/or other countries. Usenet is literal free-for-all as posters take advantage of high level encryption remailers to post just one image which is then flooded throughout the world and held on servers worldwide. Soooooo... you see my point? ;-)

As far as what we can do in our own individual countries is identify the dangers that arise from this situation and protect our children from becoming one of these images or being molested by someone who accesses them. One of the many issues involved is this one, the current topic regarding this particular photographer and the cheerleaders... and we slam right into two critical but competing types of values. The photographer has a right to freedom of expression, movement, presumption of innocence... the community has a right to protect the child's privacy and safety. How to go about finding a balance that satisfies everyone's rights in this situation is going to take our country a very, very long time. In the meantime, schools/police/parents navigate this situation as carefully as possible encountering landmines all along the way. If they infringe on the photographer's rights, they can be sued, harassed, condemned. If they allow the photographer to continue and he posts a picture entitled "Caitlin, St. Thomas Junior High, Freehold, New Jersey" and a cheerleader winds up exploited, molested or killed, we blame the school/police/parents for not doing their jobs properly...

I don't feel equipped to propose a solution because there isn't one that I know of that really can satisfy everyone's rights in this case. We have two competing values that we highly cherish but are diametrically opposed to each other.... that's what gets us every time ;-)