William Robb wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: OT Paranoia and stupid legislation is reserved for the US only :-(
Larry Levy wrote:
William Robb wrote:
If you are walking down the street, and I am maintaining distance of 6 inches from your nose, I can spend my entire day screaming obscenities at you, should I so desire. Doesn't matter a whit whether you feel impinged upon, you're in a public place, and have no right to expect to be treated with any sort of dignity. And if you touch me, I'll sue your sorry ass for assault.
Somewhere in the history of US law, we determined that people do have the right to not be "assaulted" in the public.
Thus, your screaming obscenities at me from a close distance is "assault," and is actionable. Your actual physical contact is "battery," and also is actionable. Hence the term "assault and battery."
Uhhh, if HE creates an assault, and *I* create the battery, is it a wash, legally?
I can't threaten you publicly without risking an assault charge, and I can't slander you without risking a lawsuit.
However, there is no reason why I cannot talk to you in public, as long as I don't touch you, or impede your progress down the street.
If I choose to do it from close range, and loudly, and you don't like it, that's your problem.
No, it soon becomes YOUR problem...
If you don't like it, stay out of public.
Nope. Not the way it works. If I don't like it, I call the cops and have THEM hassle you for hassling me.
The point I was trying to make, I suppose it got lost, or perhaps not,
No, not at all. Quite clear to me.
since it got a reaction, is that if you don't want some obnoxious asshole harrassing you, then grant people the same respect you ask for yourself.
Uhhh, who? ME?
If you have reason to believe that a person may not want their picture taken, whether they are in public or not, have enough respect for that person to not take their picture.
Absolutely so!
I'd never take a photo if there was any evidence at all the subject didn't like it.
From the number of anal posts I have seen on list regarding nudity,
and the posting of such pictures from the USA list members, I think it safe to assume that your culture has some issues with nudity.
Whose culture? We in the U.S. of A.?
Those in countries NOT the U.S. have been mislead.
I'd venture to claim that the largest percentage of American men, and surprisingly, a large number of American women, appreciate the undorned female form. Oh, not sleaze, but honest nudity.
It's not the usual man-on-the-street who has a problem with nudity, it's people like the Civil Liberties Union (what a misnomer!) and other false do-gooders in our country. No, not "the people."
I recall a certain Miss America actually lost her title when nude pictures of her were published.
Aha. More drawing of conclusions... That Miss America didn't understand (or believe) her contract, and broke it. Shame on her greedy self!
What's going on THERE is, a "Miss America" is a commodity. She's owned lock, stock and baroooms by the committee that puts on the pagent. She is marketed all over the world like there's no tomorrow.
If you or anyone else takes interesting photos of her ~ their PROPERTY ~ without permission, who knows how much money you might make from them, all without permission from her agents.
Hell, Bill me lad, this is a BUSINESS! Not a discussion of "mere" moral attitudes...
If a picture of someone with no clothes on can cause a person to lose their income, I think it safe to assume that the taking of such a picture could be considered an attempt at causing harm (assault), in much the same way that you feel that merely talking to you in public, which in no way is harming you is an assault.
As you pointed out, assault is not legal.
Again, "you" whom? Not me. Musta been someone else... My personal credo is, no assault ON me, no battery FROM me. Legal or not, you piss on me, don't expect to keep your own pantlegs dry...
William Robb
keith
