Photog Arrested In Texas

Joel Stern said:

"I have a real problem with a) especially at a public street fair.
I goes against everything I have understood about shooting in a
public place. Of course this is Texas but still. Any opinions?"

I have no problem if the person is taking inappropriate pics...who
knows what his next step would be...

Click to expand...

Ohhh ... inappropriate pics? Sounds fishy that you bother reading this thread and writing such stuff ... what may your next step be? Better to prevent whatever you plan to do. Maybe you use this thread for your own sexual pleassure or go out and do some violent things. As I think of it - why not rebuild the society into a great prison. No one moves anywhere without the authorities knowing it. Wait! That has been tried - USSR. Result - negative!

JJJRRR768 said:

I have always felt a bit uncomfortable doing pics of strangers,
that is why I do mostly landscapes when not with friends or family.

Click to expand...

I understand that. Many feel that way - me included. Thats perfectly fine. But - it is not a crime to not feel that way. Some people are more open and dare to confront other people. It is quite common actually - and it is absolutely no crime - even if it can be annoying sometimes.

JJJRRR768 said:

Now for someone that is a preditor I think it is commendable for
the parents to have noticed (or whatever adult noticed) and the
police to have acted. Here is the problem, his attorney will get
this dismissed.

Click to expand...

Nope - the main problem is - you probably don't know - not until something actually have happened. A fishy looking guy with a camera might be just an ordinary strange person. And if this ordinary strange person likes girls - he might look at them and even try to get them cought in his camera. Noughty. Noughty! But - it is still not a crime.

Actually - most grave criminals that are capable to actually hurt anyone are psychopats. They often do not look fishy at all. They easily can hide their intentions.

Roland

Joel Stern said:

...Here is the problem, his attorney will get this dismissed.

Click to expand...

But this is part of the checks and balances of the system. If the "mom" or the police officer was too zealous, then the charges are supposed to be dropped. In fact, assuming the man was taking harmless shots, was NOT a pervert, and the authorities over-reacted, the photographer still comes out on the bad end: He is branded a "sexual predator" by the media (which will never be undone) and has to pay the attourney $150/hr.

--
Charlie Davis
CATS #25
PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htm
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
'I brake for pixels...'

Roland, no offense, but the opening of your post is strange...How can you make any guesses at all about posters "sexual pleasure", and just where the heck did that come from? I take it you don't have children....the police found pics that they say are sexual in nature, now I don't know what that means but whether someone is innocent until proven guilty or not we need to be very careful in our current society...Now you do make valid points, but let's not make this personal, I can be as big of a jerk as the next person if I choose. I will assume that you meant no offense but again, you choice of words is very inappropriate in your first paragraph.

BTW, while some psychopaths do blend into the environment well, and maybe this guy did too, some don't. Also, this person was noticed taking pics that may have been inappropriate, for whatever reason the police took the complaint seriously and detained him and had a look to see what he was up to. None of use will know without seeing the pics, and for some of us they may be off color and for other perfectly fine, again, we will probaly never know...the point is in a public place he may have the right to take pictures, but I should have the right to not want a stranger to take my picture...are or pornography, everyone has their own definition. I am not a prude, but I am concerned about what is happening in our society, and I bet you are too.

Joel

Roland Karlsson said:

Roland Karlsson said:

I have always felt a bit uncomfortable doing pics of strangers,
that is why I do mostly landscapes when not with friends or family.

Click to expand...

I understand that. Many feel that way - me included. Thats
perfectly fine. But - it is not a crime to not feel that way. Some
people are more open and dare to confront other people. It is quite
common actually - and it is absolutely no crime - even if it can be
annoying sometimes.

Roland Karlsson said:

Now for someone that is a preditor I think it is commendable for
the parents to have noticed (or whatever adult noticed) and the
police to have acted. Here is the problem, his attorney will get
this dismissed.

Click to expand...

Nope - the main problem is - you probably don't know - not until
something actually have happened. A fishy looking guy with a camera
might be just an ordinary strange person. And if this ordinary
strange person likes girls - he might look at them and even try to
get them cought in his camera. Noughty. Noughty! But - it is still
not a crime.

Actually - most grave criminals that are capable to actually hurt
anyone are psychopats. They often do not look fishy at all. They
easily can hide their intentions.

Roland

Click to expand...

Charlie, right you are...but maybe he was caught doing something he should not be doing, and maybe he get's off anyway for whatever reason, his lawyer finds something. We all know that the legal system turns guilty individuals loose more often than any of us is probably happy about.

We can debate this all day and I can take either side of this, but if someone is taking pics of my daughter or my lady friend not invited I will probably have an issue with it, wouldn't you? BTW, even if they are not inappropriate...are is are, go hire a model if need be.....

chuxter said:

Joel Stern said:

...Here is the problem, his attorney will get this dismissed.

Click to expand...

But this is part of the checks and balances of the system. If the
"mom" or the police officer was too zealous, then the charges are
supposed to be dropped. In fact, assuming the man was taking
harmless shots, was NOT a pervert, and the authorities
over-reacted, the photographer still comes out on the bad end: He
is branded a "sexual predator" by the media (which will never be
undone) and has to pay the attourney $150/hr.

--
Charlie Davis
CATS #25
PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htm
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
'I brake for pixels...'

Click to expand...

Your first sentence bothers me. Go back and read my earlier post (several days ago). I am concerned when people imagine crimes into existance. Those "maybes" worry me. I did some research into what was reported in the DFW media. There was nothing there to describe what he was taking pix of. As I said, it might have been feet for all we know. I also looked on the TX sex criminals list and the man arrested was not there.

As others have mentioned, there are many ways to enjoy photography. I've seen a website of house numbers. Some of them were very strange and some quite beautiful. What's the reaction when this guy goes up and takes a closeup of your house numbers. You can "imagine" all kinds of evil lurking in his brain. But, he just collects pix of interesting house numbers.

We really don't know enough to jump to conclusions about this.

Joel Stern said:

We can debate this all day and I can take either side of this, but
if someone is taking pics of my daughter or my lady friend not
invited I will probably have an issue with it, wouldn't you? BTW,
even if they are not inappropriate...are is are, go hire a model if
need be.....

chuxter said:

Joel Stern said:

...Here is the problem, his attorney will get this dismissed.

Click to expand...

But this is part of the checks and balances of the system. If the
"mom" or the police officer was too zealous, then the charges are
supposed to be dropped. In fact, assuming the man was taking
harmless shots, was NOT a pervert, and the authorities
over-reacted, the photographer still comes out on the bad end: He
is branded a "sexual predator" by the media (which will never be
undone) and has to pay the attourney $150/hr.

--
Charlie Davis
CATS #25
PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htm
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
'I brake for pixels...'

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Charlie Davis
CATS #25
PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htm
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
'I brake for pixels...'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

Well then, keep your foil hat on and keep believing that 19 Saudi hijackers outfoxed the entire zillion-dollar U.S. security/intelligence/police/military apparatus and planned the whole thing from some cave in Afghanistan. Now that really is a wild conspiracy theory!

But if, one day you decide to take it off, you may want to look at the book by David Ray Griffin, "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11", which the author summarizes in this interview:

http://www.larryflynt.com/notebook.php?id=100

Kenneth Margulies said:

on the one hand, the usa is so messed up that it can't even run the
war in iraq correctly, yet on the other, you see bush's
well-planned and brilliantly executed plots and conspiracies
everywhere...

Click to expand...

Joel Stern said:

Roland, no offense, but the opening of your post is strange...How
can you make any guesses at all about posters "sexual pleasure",
and just where the heck did that come from?

Click to expand...

I just wanted you to react - and think - that maybe it is too easy to come to conclusions. For some people - reading this thread is a sign that you are fishy. Not for me - but it is more than possible. For some people it is even fishy to surf the web at all. Lots of nasty stuff out there. So - if you say that you shall stop things before they happen - you have to be very careful.

JJJRRR768 said:

I take it you don't
have children....the police found pics that they say are sexual in
nature, now I don't know what that means but whether someone is
innocent until proven guilty or not we need to be very careful in
our current society...Now you do make valid points, but let's not
make this personal, I can be as big of a jerk as the next person if
I choose. I will assume that you meant no offense but again, you
choice of words is very inappropriate in your first paragraph.

Click to expand...

I apologise - they were somewhat to provocative - yes.

But this entire topic is problematic. Lots of very subjective feelings mixed with actual formal things - like our laws. This is not easy stuff. There are lots of odd people - and most aof them are more harmless than most of us.

JJJRRR768 said:

BTW, while some psychopaths do blend into the environment well, and
maybe this guy did too, some don't.

Click to expand...

True - some people look very criminal - no "ordinary" person would ever think of acting and looking that way. So - sometimes it is very easy to be near to 100% sure. And - in theory - it would be nice if you just could lock them up. But - you can't. You have to charge them for something substantial. Often thos criminals also go free even if when they have made something - due to some technicalities in the law - or something. Irritating.

JJJRRR768 said:

Also, this person was noticed
taking pics that may have been inappropriate, for whatever reason
the police took the complaint seriously and detained him and had a
look to see what he was up to. None of use will know without seeing
the pics, and for some of us they may be off color and for other
perfectly fine, again, we will probaly never know

Click to expand...

Yepp - thats correct. In a previous post of the same kind of topic someone pointed to a female photo artist that took photos of her own family, as an example of acceptable nude photos of kids. If it would be me that decided what should be done to her - I think I would prefere a long holiday in a prison and a high monetary compensation to her poor kids.

JJJRRR768 said:

...the point is in
a public place he may have the right to take pictures, but I should
have the right to not want a stranger to take my picture...are or
pornography, everyone has their own definition. I am not a prude,
but I am concerned about what is happening in our society, and I
bet you are too.

Click to expand...

Of course - but you shall not overreact.

A small story. When my kids were small (in the mid 80-ies) in Sweden - then almost none used bikini - it was almost totally monokini. Nice days - lots of girls on the beaches of all ages with bare breasts, even in the middle of Stockholm. Very nice actually. So - I took some photos of my kids on the beach - and of course on those pictures there was several bare breasted ladies and also younger girls. No one though that was anything odd. I am just an ordinary person - without any thoughts about doing more than that. Those girls are totally safe. But - I must admit that I don't dislike looking at those old photos - not at all. Might even feel some pleasure. Nice memories. Now - what takes?

Roland

would that be the Pearl Harbor that caught the USA by surprise or the Pearl Harbor that Roosevelt knew about in advance?

marcuson said:

Well then, keep your foil hat on and keep believing that 19 Saudi
hijackers outfoxed the entire zillion-dollar U.S.
security/intelligence/police/military apparatus and planned the
whole thing from some cave in Afghanistan. Now that really is a
wild conspiracy theory!

But if, one day you decide to take it off, you may want to look at
the book by David Ray Griffin, "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing
Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11", which the author
summarizes in this interview:

http://www.larryflynt.com/notebook.php?id=100

Kenneth Margulies said:

on the one hand, the usa is so messed up that it can't even run the
war in iraq correctly, yet on the other, you see bush's
well-planned and brilliantly executed plots and conspiracies
everywhere...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Roland, I have to laugh, you and I are not so far apart, and I bet I would like that beach too...As I get older I get more conservative, and here in the states we have a very interesting society developing and our legal system is in need of repair.....I won't see it but one day America will not be the biggest of superpowers and there may even be a revolution and a revamping of our political and legal system...but for now it is the way it is for better or worse...in any case you were provocative, and you got my attention, but this thread got my attention. I did not read the whole thing, I read selected posts, so I do not know the entire flow of it. And yes this person is presumed innocent before his trial, if there will be one...., and yes, people over-react very often....and yes, we, none of us really knows what happened.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.

Joel

Roland Karlsson said:

Joel Stern said:

Roland, no offense, but the opening of your post is strange...How
can you make any guesses at all about posters "sexual pleasure",
and just where the heck did that come from?

Click to expand...

I just wanted you to react - and think - that maybe it is too easy
to come to conclusions. For some people - reading this thread is a
sign that you are fishy. Not for me - but it is more than possible.
For some people it is even fishy to surf the web at all. Lots of
nasty stuff out there. So - if you say that you shall stop things
before they happen - you have to be very careful.

Roland Karlsson said:

I take it you don't
have children....the police found pics that they say are sexual in
nature, now I don't know what that means but whether someone is
innocent until proven guilty or not we need to be very careful in
our current society...Now you do make valid points, but let's not
make this personal, I can be as big of a jerk as the next person if
I choose. I will assume that you meant no offense but again, you
choice of words is very inappropriate in your first paragraph.

Click to expand...

I apologise - they were somewhat to provocative - yes.

But this entire topic is problematic. Lots of very subjective
feelings mixed with actual formal things - like our laws. This is
not easy stuff. There are lots of odd people - and most aof them
are more harmless than most of us.

Roland Karlsson said:

BTW, while some psychopaths do blend into the environment well, and
maybe this guy did too, some don't.

Click to expand...

True - some people look very criminal - no "ordinary" person would
ever think of acting and looking that way. So - sometimes it is
very easy to be near to 100% sure. And - in theory - it would be
nice if you just could lock them up. But - you can't. You have to
charge them for something substantial. Often thos criminals also go
free even if when they have made something - due to some
technicalities in the law - or something. Irritating.

Roland Karlsson said:

Also, this person was noticed
taking pics that may have been inappropriate, for whatever reason
the police took the complaint seriously and detained him and had a
look to see what he was up to. None of use will know without seeing
the pics, and for some of us they may be off color and for other
perfectly fine, again, we will probaly never know

Click to expand...

Yepp - thats correct. In a previous post of the same kind of topic
someone pointed to a female photo artist that took photos of her
own family, as an example of acceptable nude photos of kids. If it
would be me that decided what should be done to her - I think I
would prefere a long holiday in a prison and a high monetary
compensation to her poor kids.

Roland Karlsson said:

...the point is in
a public place he may have the right to take pictures, but I should
have the right to not want a stranger to take my picture...are or
pornography, everyone has their own definition. I am not a prude,
but I am concerned about what is happening in our society, and I
bet you are too.

Click to expand...

Of course - but you shall not overreact.

A small story. When my kids were small (in the mid 80-ies) in
Sweden - then almost none used bikini - it was almost totally
monokini. Nice days - lots of girls on the beaches of all ages with
bare breasts, even in the middle of Stockholm. Very nice actually.
So - I took some photos of my kids on the beach - and of course on
those pictures there was several bare breasted ladies and also
younger girls. No one though that was anything odd. I am just an
ordinary person - without any thoughts about doing more than that.
Those girls are totally safe. But - I must admit that I don't
dislike looking at those old photos - not at all. Might even feel
some pleasure. Nice memories. Now - what takes?

Roland

Click to expand...

chuxter said:

We really don't know enough to jump to conclusions about this.

Click to expand...

Yes, you are right, but that goes both ways on this one...So he is either a pervert or not, that is what we know.. I won't defend someone if I don't know, but I shouldn't throw stones either....of course we will not know the outcome, too bad, it would be interesting.

Roland

You Swedes have a much more liberal view of such things and I applaud you for that.

Remember we are talking about Texas here, which has the highest rate of executions in the US and former home of the Branch Davidians.

And they are worried about some guy taking pictures at a street fair.

If this poor guy is found innocent of the charges what is his life going to be like from now on? We have people in this forum who have already convicted him just based on what the police have said he was doing.

There is alot of discussion here about what might be considered an in appropriate photo.

A head and shoulders shot of a good looking women? After all it may include her fully clothed breasts.

Maybe he grabbed a full length shot of a child which also included the fully clothed butt of another child in the background or off to the side.

I guess I was safe with this shot because she is holding a placard in front of her chest. But then again maybe not because this picture was taken at an anti war rally. I'm glad it was taken in Madison, WI and not Texas.In Texas I may have been arrested for being unpatriotic and shouldn't be posting stuff that does not support their favorite son, GWB.

With appoligies to my aunt and cousin who live in Texas It would be ok with me if Texas reverted back to an independent country.



--
Pixelseeker

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.-Benjamin Franklin

chuxter said:

As others have mentioned, there are many ways to enjoy photography.
I've seen a website of house numbers. Some of them were very
strange and some quite beautiful. What's the reaction when this guy
goes up and takes a closeup of your house numbers. You can
"imagine" all kinds of evil lurking in his brain. But, he just
collects pix of interesting house numbers.

Click to expand...

I like to photograph interesting doors and stairways.

This whole business is making me paranoid as an amateur photographer.

My daughter got involved with a weird guy who liked to take pictures of her little girl. Later it came out that his father had molested a foster girl they had, and he said some red-flag-raising things on the phone to me. I was glad when she got him out of her life. But he could have been totally innocent. There is so much of this out there now. So many things never get reported to the authorities, not that he should have been, insufficient evidence, but others should have been and were not. So many get falsely accused and then have to live under a cloud the rest of their lives.

Having been through that and a couple of similar incidents, I do tend to project pervert tendencies on some guys, and it's a darn shame for the totally innocent. I didn't grow up thinking like that, but once you cross that threshold, there is no going back. Men are suspect unless you know them very, very well, and even then . . .sometimes you can never be sure now.

Here's the thing, the police can question anyone, anytime, without the need for suspicion that they comitted a crime. I've been questioned myself (yes, I live in Texas) taking pics at a park. The parents get nervous about a strange man taking pictures where their kids are playing, someone calls the cops, they show up, and no, they didn't throw me to the ground and beat me, they just asked what I was taking pics of. I told them, and they asked if they could see the pics. At that point I wasn't under arrest, I had done nothing wrong, and they weren't treating me like a criminal, they simply said "some of the parents are nervous and wanted us to check it out", period. I could've refused to show the pics, but since I had nothing to hide, I showed the pics, he said "go about your business", and told the parents there was nothing to worry about. I think it is likely that something similar happened in this case. Someone told a cop there was someone taking pics of kids, the cop questioned the guy, he came across as suspicous, and may have refused to show the pics.

Now, refusing to show the pics marks you, in the eyes of a cop, as one of two kinds of people: a) someone guilty of something that they want to hide, or b) someone who wants to make a point about their rights. Either way, they'll probably arrest you and look at the pics anyway. A large part of their job is judging you by your appearance and actions. If you look nervous and flighty, you look suspicious. If you look calm and you don't object to their questions or requests to look at your pics, you'll look like you're doing nothing wrong. And believe me, a cop can always find a reason to arrest you if they feel they need to.

In Texas, all of these laws depend on what a "reasonable person" would think in the same situation, and "reasonable" is determined by a conscensus, not by an individual. So if the cop saw the pics and thought they were sexual in nature, but a jury later determined that the cop was not represenetive of their idea of "reasonable", they guy would be let go and apologized to. The key sentence in the news article, to me, was where it said he had at least 12 "...suggestive photos of specific body parts..."

To me, that pretty clearly says he was photoing boobs, or crotches, or something like that, although it was pretty vague. Now, maybe it's abstract work, maybe he was making collage people (put together from photos of parts of different people), or something like that, but without investigation, there is no way to know. What the police did was investigate further, and that's their job. I have no problem with cops being able to ask questions without anything more than a hunch as cause. That's their job, and when those hunches turn out to be right, everyone thanks them. But for every right hunch, there has to be dozens of wrong ones, and that is the cost of safety.

Now, don't take me for one who would give up freedom for safety, because I'm as far from that person as it gets. I have long hair and live in Texas, you can believe I've been pulled over and searched my fair share of times, but I don't hold it against the cops. They're doing their job, which is checking out anything that strikes them as suspicous and determining if they were right. In this case we're not talking about arrest without cause, or any loss of rights really. What were talking about is someone in a uniform coming up and having a conversation with you, and based on your responses and demeanor, making a judgement about whether you are suspicous or not. That's a cops job, and yes they make mistakes in both directions, but making it even more difficult for them to have those conversations certainly wouldn't help no matter which side you are on.

I would much prefer having to have a conversation with a cop now and then, rather then not being able to take my camera into public parks (which cities can outlaw by ordinance if enough people complain), which would be the real loss of freedom. Besides, it's comforting to me to be questioned by the cops when taking pics in a place like that, because I have children of my own, and if a stranger was taking pics of them, I would want the cops to at least ask a few questions.

ryanm

Burlof said:

I felt in my circumstances the guy wasn't a keen photographer. He
just had an every day run of the mill point and shoot. The smirk on
his face when my DH said something left an uneasy feeling too.

Click to expand...

You might be right. Maybe he was sickly targeting small girls on the mall. He might even be a potential raper of small girls. Who knows? Such things happen. So - it is absolutely possible. Here, there and everywhere. There is currently a rapist lose in Stockholm that have raped one kid and tried with two more. Sick! The girls was 10-15 years and in the suburb where it happened there is fear right now.

But - you don' t know. A smirk on the face might just be the very common defense most people use when they are confronted with aggrevated people. I assume your husband was angry - and it showed? Not easy to know what to do then. So - a smile might be in place.

Roland

chuxter said:

As others have mentioned, there are many ways to enjoy photography.
I've seen a website of house numbers. Some of them were very
strange and some quite beautiful. What's the reaction when this guy
goes up and takes a closeup of your house numbers. You can
"imagine" all kinds of evil lurking in his brain. But, he just
collects pix of interesting house numbers.

Click to expand...

Good example.

Yesterday I saw a guy that photographed people on a walkway. He just stood there to the side in a position where he really was not seen by the walkers. What did he do? You could imagine lots of things. You could imagine a detective story or a pervert or someone that just wants to take the best candid picture of a walkway. Whats the most likely? Hmmmm ... there are zillions of digital cameras now where I live. Everyone and their dogs seem to own one and use it in all possible and impossible situations. So .. the most likely is that he was just doing that ... using his digital camera. And for some reason he found that particular photo interesting.

BTW - so no one don't get any ideas. It is currently just above freezing point in Stockholm - and all walking there were properly clad.

Roland

morelia said:

Either way, they'll probably arrest you and look at
the pics anyway. A large part of their job is judging you by your
appearance and actions. If you look nervous and flighty, you look
suspicious. If you look calm and you don't object to their
questions or requests to look at your pics, you'll look like you're
doing nothing wrong.

Click to expand...

This is not so. If you are nervous or not depends on how easy you take being challenged by the cop. It has nothing to do with guilt. Those that are most likely to be calm are those that are most accustomed to talk to cops - i.e. criminals.

morelia said:

To me, that pretty clearly says he was photoing boobs, or crotches,
or something like that, although it was pretty vague. Now, maybe
it's abstract work, maybe he was making collage people (put
together from photos of parts of different people), or something
like that, but without investigation, there is no way to know.

Click to expand...

Maybe he was unlucky the day he collected the wrong body parts for his collage - and the camera was full of boobs. Then he is doomed. A totally harmless but strange artist put to jail and stamped as a pervert.

BTW - I say it again. With current cameras with several megapixels you can take innocent looking pictures and the crop whatever body parts you want. So - a clever pervert is untouchable.

Roland

ShudderBug said:

.. snip ..
Men are suspect unless you know them very, very well, and even then
. . .sometimes you can never be sure now.

Click to expand...

Ok, I am a man and you don't know me very, very well ...

I don't think I like the implications of your view.

Roland

JohnClif said:

marcuson said:

Similar shenanigans occurred in
2004.

Click to expand...

Bull$hit.

Click to expand...

Now here's an interesing recent devlopment:

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1529

October 26, 2005

"The latest critical confirmation of key indicators that the election of 2004 was stolen comes in an extremely powerful, penetrating report from the General Accounting Office that has gotten virtually no mainstream media coverage.

"The government's lead investigative agency is known for its general incorruptibility and its through, in-depth analyses...(this) adds crucial new weight to the case that Team Bush has no legitimate business being in the White House."

No mainstream media coverage. Hmmm...I wonder why?

Roland Karlsson said:

ShudderBug said:

.. snip ..
Men are suspect unless you know them very, very well, and even then
. . .sometimes you can never be sure now.

Click to expand...

Ok, I am a man and you don't know me very, very well ...

I don't think I like the implications of your view.

Click to expand...

Sorry if I casued offense. Can't help what happened in the past to bring me to this juncture, and I'm not speaking as having been a victim of serious assault in this area, just lots of little incidents adding up and one big huge one involving the family by an outsider.

I don't like the implications either, and am sorry I have started to think that way. How can you really screen anyone, male or female, and know who you are really involved with?

There's so much talk of this sort lately, how to address it, etc., etc., but why has there been such a rise in this sort of general misbehavior (only a small portion photography related)? Were they better at hushing it up in the past? Sometimes, but my sense is that this category of crimes is increasing exponentially, and I wonder why. That's all.

The bottom line is that if you aren't careful, your own dear spouse could have some inclinations you know nothing about could blow up by ending up in acting out and shattering your life and reputation in the community.

Someone you dearly love could be caught up in the web of sex crime registration and branded for life. We're going through this in my state. Registered sex criminals who have served their jail time are being forced to move (which isn't going to solve the problem entirely anyway). We know there is a very high recidivism rate with this type of crime. There is no known cure that I'd put any confidence in. Some of them cannot find a place to live now, and the trend is spreading to other states which don't want them crossing state lines in order to find a place to live.

For every one they get off the streets or out of your neighborhood, at least 5 more pop up with no prior record. Something is causing it. I blame some, but not all, of it on pornography. I'm sure most people have seen it in one form or another sometime in their lifetime, but some are crossing the line and acting out, and it has already changed the way responsible parents are guarding their children. The social climate in this regard has changed, and it isn't all due to paranoia.

Roland Karlsson said:

Roland

Click to expand...

ShudderBug said:

...

Click to expand...

Woa ... that was much ...

I think you are exaggerating - a lot.

Violence is mostly caused by criminality, drugs and alcohol. Most women abuse is performed within a relation. Most child abuse is made within the family. By sick people, criminals and/or addicts.

A very small amount of criminal people is also involved in violence to strangers. In Stockholm there are some gangs (mostly immigrants, but not only) that are the largest danger for you if you are moving around the city at night. I assume thats the case everywhere.

There are some sickos, without criminal record, sometimes that maybe makes a series of rapes. But - that is not the usual case.

Now - what have becoming worse - at least in Stockholm - is that the criminals have become more bold and more violent.

Now - about pornography. Maybe you are right. Personally I don't think pornography is dangerous - but the more sick parts of pornography is probably so. And in this kind of pornography the actors might even have been abused in reality. And this also may trigger some strange thougts in the minds of sickos. Wanna do that myself! It certainly have affected the language of some young people. Gangbang is not an uncommon term - one of the most humiliating you can do to someone. If a gang rapes a girl I cannot think of any punishment that is enough.

Roland