Hidden sex cameras may soon be banned

CNN.com ^ | April 17, 2002 Posted: 11:36 AM EDT (1536 GMT) | Reuters

[gd124]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Hidden video cameras in bedrooms, bathrooms and other private places would be outlawed under a bill introduced in Congress Tuesday that would also limit pornographic Web sites to an online red-light district.

Television star Angie Harmon and privacy activist Susan Wilson joined Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu to announce a bill that would make it illegal to film someone for a "lewd or lascivious purpose" without that person's consent.

[supercat]

I may despise the hidden cameras discussed here, but where does CONGRESS get jurisdiction to impose such prohibitions in cases where the recordings are not sent inter-state?

Obviously some states need to get on the ball, but that's not Congress' job.

[IronJack]

The American government does not own the Internet. Their attempts to regulate it are sheer hubris.

[umgud]

I would like to see porn related sites have their own domain area, but not by gov't fiat. As stated in the article, hate speech would also be relegated to the other domain with the porn sites. Who decides what is hate. I can assure you a Janet Reno justice dept would relegate FR to the trashcan if possible.

[southern rock]

This reminds me of that "lost episode" of Married with Children.

[Cold Heat]

We just put a fellow in prison for ten years in my little town for putting a camera in the tanning area of a apt. house. We just gave a pair of meth makers 52 years for getting caught with the stuff to do it. They never made a gram or got the chance to.

The point is that states do what they need to do. We don't need federal feel good crap.

[AdA$tra]

Does that apply to GOVERNMENT OWNED CAMERAS?

[ofMagog]

Apparently, the cameras I installed have to go.

[cricket]

"Wilson found she could not pursue criminal charges against the voyeur because secret video taping, unlike audio surveillance, is illegal in only a handful of states." Personally, find this incredible that it would even be considered 'legal'. . .is this not a form of theft? Could this not be considered a kind of 'terrorism'?

To place a camera in someone anothers domain, and literally steal their life and then pass it around - for profit yet - is the sleaziest, most disgusting venture that only someone lower than swampgrass could consider. . .

Do not know why this would be considered legal. . .it is as immoral as theft; and is more like the crime of rape. . .

[Registered]

One too many X-10 pop-up ads!

[SauronOfMordor]

This would also make illegal a husband leaving a video camera running in the bedroom to see what the wifey is up to while he's at work

[stimulate]

Feel good instead of real good.

[Don Myers]

"This would also make illegal a husband leaving a video camera running in the bedroom to see what the wifey is up to while he's at work"

The war between the sexes goes on.

[Capitalist Eric]

Pics?

[stimulate]

I agree, that's a State decision. If there is no State law it won't be enforced.The FBI doesn't have the manpower.It's an election ploy for Senator Landrieu.

[FreedomCalls]

It would also make it illegal to leave a camera running to catch your baby sitter brutally slapping your 3-year old while you are out celebrating your anniversary.

It would also make it illegal for the local Quick-E Mart to place a surveillance camera to film a thug shooting 9mm slugs into your teenager as she works part-time as a cashier.

[Snow Bunny]

ROTFLMAO

[Random Access]

I do not get C-SPAN, so a hidden cameras in a whore house is the only time I would get to see my congressman.

[garibaldi]

What part of the constitution covers this?