Texas ‘Upskirt’ Law Ruled Unconstitutional

[Stonepounder]

This country has lost its mind! An appeals court in Texas has ruled that its OK to take upskirt photos as they are protected by the 1st amentment! I am simply speechless.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday struck down a part of the state penal code that banned people from taking photos or videos up women’s skirts in public. The state’s highest criminal court, in an 8-1 decision, said the statute violated the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech by criminalizing photos taken for sexual gratification.

In her summary court opinion, Judge Sharon Keller said the First Amendment protects expressive speech -- in this case a “person’s purposeful creation of photographs and visual recordings.” She called the camera “essentially the photographer’s pen and paintbrush.”

http://www.ibtimes.com/texas-upskirt-law-ruled-unconstitutional-anti-creepshot-privacy-statutes-face-legal-1691321

[silverweb]

1. Next up...

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Peeping Toms with cameras. It's free speech!

[Blue_Tires]

2. Well, sensationalist headline aside

it's clear that the law is too broad, too vague and has too much leeway in interpretation:

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/PE/5/21/21.15

It's up to the Texas state legislature to draft a more specific, narrowly-tailored law

[Archae]

3. This law was overly broad.

It would have outlawed taking pictures of kids, filming police, and so on.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Sharon Keller again! That name brings up memories...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Keller

[Lancero]

5. What? Texas coming out with a anti-woman ruling?

How shocking, I mean who could have ever expected that Texas would do this!

[Boom Sound 416]

6. Seems to be a wedge issue

[NYC_SKP]

7. Apparently, there are companies that sell "Shoe Cams"...

Curious, I Googled.

http://www.wondcam.com/man-shoe-camera.html

http://shop.omejo.com/productsshow.php?id=657

[yuiyoshida]

10. "Missed it by that much!!!"

"Sorry about that Chief!"

[littlemissmartypants]

8. Apparently, she wears pantaloons.

Another idiot, self righteous, religious zealot, republican with a very bad track record. I'm sure she wouldn't stand still for a crotch shot.

[DreamGypsy]

9. I wonder if Justice Keller is aware of the toilet cam...

...in the lady justices' restroom in the Texas Supreme Court building.

ps. Don't search for 'toilet cam' unless you are prepared to be thoroughly disgusted. I have never follow any of the search results but a friend was looking for visual evidence that water drained counterclockwise in the Southern Hemisphere...and was, uh, surprised at the results (at least that's the story he told me).

[salin]

11. right to violate right to privacy trumps right for "free speech"

So folks - you have no right to assume that what is underneath your clothing - if you are wearing a skirt or dress - is private - even when your dress/skirt covers all private areas. Those private areas are not private in the face of a resourceful photographer. And the rights of the photographer trump yours.

Not a ruling by a single judge - but by 8 of 9 judges.

So the only protection - if you where a skirt or dress, and don't want your privates/underpants exposed - wear an extra layer of clothes such as shorts. 8 of 9 judges declared this as law. The clandestine and spying photographer has rights that trump yours. Perhaps these judges are suggesting that if we don't wear Burkas... that we are asking for such violations and having those violations become public?

Yikes!