[quote name='gargus'] how exactly can someone get upset over a guy filming someone in a public place? If she didnt want to be recorded by him perhaps she shouldnt have been in the middle of the street in new york.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Wolfkin']the girl as she's walking away says "I'm only 17 you pervert"[/QUOTE]
I just watched it again to see that and the 2nd time watching this I was laughing my ass off. It became very humorous, every person in it. I think what makes it creepy is the guy's voice. I love how he knocked the biker over and said you just got dropped yet 2 seconds before that the biker was claiming physical superiority. Funny shit even if he is physically superior.
The girl looks older than 17 due to her physical build. So does age determine whether someone is being perverted or does the age someone looks like determine it? Some young people look old and some old look young.
[quote name='J7.'] So does age determine whether someone is being perverted or does the age someone looks like determine it? Some young people look old and some old look young.[/QUOTE]
I would say attractiveness makes the difference. If that guy filming her looked like george clooney on the other hand, she would been doing flirty things or whatnot and he wouldnt have been a pervert at all. Unattractive people are generally the weirdos but attractive people are just fine for some reason.
[quote name='J7.']I love how he knocked the biker over and said you just got dropped yet 2 seconds before that the biker was claiming physical superiority. Funny shit even if he is physically superior.[/QUOTE]maybe I kept blinking because I never actally saw what happened at that point. I didn't actually believe the cam dude actually pushed the biker down. I thought maybe he tripped (and the cam was being a goober saying he got put down) or maybe that mediator guy accidentally pushed him over. If cam pushed him down that IS hilarious.
[quote name='J7.'] The girl looks older than 17 due to her physical build. So does age determine whether someone is being perverted or does the age someone looks like determine it? Some young people look old and some old look young.[/QUOTE]that was the basis of our discussion with my friends back in the day. Everyone but one guy basically agreed on the same point. If she's hot, she's hot whether she's 16,17, or 20. If the body looks ripe, then we're gonna look. Now when we find out she's only 15 or something any reasonable man will back away. maybe slow maybe fast but we're all backing away. heck my roommate wouldn't date a girl if he finds out she's younger than him. In this situation the camera man had no way of knowing she was underage until the girl shouted I'm only 17 at the very end. I'm actually going to put it on the mother. Instead of coming in my face and asking me not to do crotch shots how about you point out she's 17 and maybe the fear of child porn charges will get me to stop.
My friend who didn't agree with us. His stance was that it doesn't matter what she looks like he's not attracted to 17 year olds. Not even the hypothetical 17 year old girl who is 2 months away from 18 and has the body of Stacy Dash in Clueless (good jesus I just checked she was almost 30 when that movie came out that is one fine, almost impossibly ageless, woman). I'm 90% sure he just thought we were all trying to trick him and call him a pervert (like 'gay trap' in Cougar Town).
[quote name='gargus']I would say attractiveness makes the difference. If that guy filming her looked like george clooney on the other hand[/QUOTE]i think he was talking about the girl. The girl is attractive so he must be a pervert as opposed to the girl is 'normal' looking so he must be enraptured by her perfect ballet form.
Idon't know if she was shooting an album cover or some promoshots or whatever but my sister said her skillswere laughable even to her and she hasn't practiced ballet since she was in middle school.
but for the record you're point is also perfectly valid. If he had a mellow voice like say James Earl Jones.. or myself then soon as he spoke there'd be a different level of respect given and alternate assumptions taken.
i can't speak to his looks because we only assume he looks creepy. he probably does but it's unconfirmed.
[quote name='crunchb3rry']He should have said "If she's old enough to pee, she's old enough for me." and REALLY piss off her mom, lol.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't put that past him.
more then half the states in US legal age is actually under 18, which is why its always confused me on why people are always freakin out about being 18
It is child porn if you film a 17 year old in clothes? Wow you guys really need to do some research.
I always hated peoples views on legal ages ect. It's so hypocritical. Like they don't ever do anything "illegal", but if a chick is super hot and 16 they back away like their parents are cops; then go back to underage drinking, speeding on the freeway and drug use. What makes you the moral police that get to judge what others do?
If the chick is hot, she is hot. Quit lying to yourself. You don't have to rape her, but you can still admire - you wont go to jail.
I think i was the one who mentioned child porn. that was just a joke. but my idea is still sound. You can know all the legal precident in the world but once someone accuses you of child porn or rape or touching little kids that's pretty much it for your life. Unlike say speeding, or underage drinking, or even drug use to an extent. that's something that will follow you regardless of if you were completely innocent and falsely accused. The point is it's better to avoid being accused than beat the bad rap. I remember a substitute teacher who was accused of hitting a kit. There was footage and everything. that dudes lost ALL his certification and pretty much his livelyhood. the fact that the full footage revealed that the student attacked him and he was just defending himself and was later exonerated didn't help him get his job back. That's WHY people sue in situations likethis because no matter where he goes people willdo a background check and this will come up and suddenly none of the parents will want him to teach in their schools
So while I may feel free to admit online or to my close friends that this 15 year old neighbor girl is hot. I wouldn't want to be /taping/ her in a creepy way. That's how you get parents to call the police on you and accuse you of being a pervert.. and from there it's one incident away from being falsely arrested and then you're in that situation I just explained.
None of this applies here of course. this guy wasn't even close to any of that. It's kinda like sure it'slegal to carry a backpack in a supermaket but i don't do it because I look like a gangster attempting to shop lift. When they call the police I'll win but by thenI've been marked by the law suddenly eyes watch you everywhere. Best to avoid the situation all together. Which is why we all use 18 as a rule of thumb. Better to wait than bang a chick, go away for the weekend and find out the next county has a older age.
Personally I generally hold myself up to that moral level. I don't do underage drinking, phone calls while driving or an of that grey area stuff. That said I'm not the moral police so I don't spend any effort to chastise anyone I don't know personally.
[quote name='Wolfkin']maybe I kept blinking because I never actally saw what happened at that point. .[/QUOTE]
The way I saw it the biker dude ran over his foot on purpose so he pushed him down :lol: That is how I will choose to view it anyways since it's so ing funny! That's what I meant, the actual age or the age she appears to be. There's no other practical way to legally decide other than age, can't really have the girl strip for everyone, though that video would've gotten mad crazy if she did. This guy should post more crazy scenarios on Youtube. Definitely agree about the attractiveness thing.
[quote name='DarkNessBear']If there is grass on the field play ball! ... if there is not go out back and play in the mud.[/QUOTE]
And don't make Billy play by himself again. Let him play with you guys or you won't get any dessert.
[quote name='TooMuchCoolness']How do you assume he's a pervert? Maybe he needed the footage for research purposes?[/QUOTE]
He's got enough material to cover a variety of topics.
For those who listen to the Howard Stern Show, it was Joey Boots who videotaped the incident. Joey Boots is a regular caller/guest of the show. Here is a video of him getting punched by an old man at the Pro Mosque rally in NYC near WTC.
[quote name='wildcpac']For those who listen to the Howard Stern Show, it was Joey Boots who videotaped the incident. Joey Boots is a regular caller/guest of the show. Here is a video of him getting punched by an old man at the Pro Mosque rally in NYC near WTC.
This guy makes some entertaining videos that actually have some value to them! I wouldn't necessarily call him a troll because he has a valid point in these 2 videos I've seen. We need opposing viewpoints less we become brainwashed. Some of those people have good intentions for opposing the mosque others do not. This pretty much shows he's not perverted but makes his videos to stand up for our rights and challenge those who want to hold "the man" down.
[quote name='benjamouth']
Anyone got any I've not heard?[/QUOTE]
"If there's fluff on the muff, she's old enough." Something like that... also "If there's turf on the field, play ball", but you pretty much got that one already.
[quote name='J7.']This guy makes some entertaining videos that actually have some value to them! I wouldn't necessarily call him a troll because he has a valid point in these 2 videos I've seen. We need opposing viewpoints less we become brainwashed. Some of those people have good intentions for opposing the mosque others do not. This pretty much shows he's not perverted but makes his videos to stand up for our rights and challenge those who want to hold "the man" down.[/QUOTE]
"opposing viewpoints" filming a 17 year old is an opposing viewpoint? He has the freedom to film, but he is still an asshole. Drooling while filming a young girl posing is not him fighting for his constitutional rights, its him being a creep.
alright well the 'opposing viewpoint' here is that you should be afraid to look at a 17 year old girl. Even with lust as long as you're not interfering with her, following her or talking to her there's nothing wrong. In a public space there's nothing illegal and therefore shouldn't be anything culturally inappropriate about looking at someone. Next thing you know that snowballs into primate territory where making eye contact is grounds for fighting.
The whole 17 thing is the weakest chink in that shield. She doesn't look 17. She looks like she could be a 18 year old or a petite 20 year old. I know girls who look like her. You have no idea how old she is until she's walking away. if she was in fact 18 would it be any less creepy*? Because that's kinda what you're implying.
I'm not saying the dude isn't a dickhead but that particular argument doesn't fly. DarknessBear didn't get my joke but his post was spot on otherwise.
*personally i say no. the dude is a creepy jerkwad. and if the girl was 22 he'd still be a creepy wanker. but that's his right i guess.
yo don't laugh SpazX, you know Swan Lake was that baby making music back in the 1870s. I bet Tchaikovsky was the R. Kelly of his day. Wouldn't be surprised if the original title was "Corset-dropping music" and the theatre made him change the title.
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']"opposing viewpoints" filming a 17 year old is an opposing viewpoint? He has the freedom to film, but he is still an asshole. Drooling while filming a young girl posing is not him fighting for his constitutional rights, its him being a creep.[/QUOTE]
Nope. Being able to film anything (not against the law) in public is an opposing viewpoint... Pointing out that some protesters of the mosque are prejudiced against Islam, flinging insults in public, getting cheers for it, pointing out what their actual motive is, and getting it on film is an opposing viewpoint. When exactly did he let someone else hold the camera and zoom on his mouth? I guess if someone was filming the Nazi's rounding up Jews it would not be an opposing viewpoint either if you want to take this scenario to a higher level.
you know i'm almost interested to see this protest mosque video everyone keeps quoting... I'm come pretty close to actually clicking a link but I got grass to watch grow. anyone want to tell me what's going on in it?
E: and for the record you can't bring another video as a counter to an argument on this video.
for the first time while i was at home last week. here's what I don't get. they make such a big deal about how the house is filled with like 21 people not counting the bait.
Why is it every time the police come they come sprinting full tilt from 2 blocks away? I never saw a single cop come from inside the house. I managed to get thru like 5-6 predators and it was always from far away. not that ANYONE tried to run. Closest to running was one guy who was *deer-in-headlights* by the 5 cops surrounding him with guns pointed at him from 12-18inchs away. He was frozen so still the cops obviously had no choice but to taser him.
That video is far too different to compare, Xevious.
[quote name='Wolfkin']you know i'm almost interested to see this protest mosque video everyone keeps quoting... I'm come pretty close to actually clicking a link but I got grass to watch grow. anyone want to tell me what's going on in it?
E: and for the record you can't bring another video as a counter to an argument on this video.[/QUOTE]
You need to watch it to get it, it's not easily explained, especially since I haven't seen it in awhile. It's entertaining though. When I saw more of the videos he posts I realized he was doing it to entertain and to look beyond their preconceptions. I just tried to view his videos again and apparently people who got offended by him got him suspended/banned from youtube by flagging all his videos. Lame. I think I read he is gay so ya he definitely was drooling when making the video...
Here's what happened: Thursday, September 9, 2010
YouTube has suspended my account for not meeting their community standards I am told regarding some of my videos. I have been aware of concerted efforts to flag my videos with the hope they woulld be removed and eventually my account shut down. I informed YouTube of this yet they obviously never took it in to account.
Now the good news: This was foreseen and a new and improved JoeyBoots.com is being constructed where I will have a new host and my own dedicated server whose standards it has to meet are MINE.
To those who feel they have ****ed me, gloat all you want now as it will be short-lived and my vengeance will be in my success as I continue to do the great things I have been doing and grow bigger than I could have imagined.
Thanx to all my supporters and friends......see ya on the darkside!
----joey boots!
Posted by Joey Boots at 9:06 AM
[quote name='Wolfkin']saw that show
which is as disgusting to watch as I expected
for the first time while i was at home last week. here's what I don't get. they make such a big deal about how the house is filled with like 21 people not counting the bait.
Why is it every time the police come they come sprinting full tilt from 2 blocks away? I never saw a single cop come from inside the house. I managed to get thru like 5-6 predators and it was always from far away. not that ANYONE tried to run. Closest to running was one guy who was *deer-in-headlights* by the 5 cops surrounding him with guns pointed at him from 12-18inchs away. He was frozen so still the cops obviously had no choice but to taser him.[/QUOTE]
Maybe the cops aren't allowed to be within a certain distance of a media sting or some crap, but they probably just do it to make the show more exciting.
The cops by law can not be in the house they have to further away from the scene to avoid entrapment. Although they rarely ever do. The last time I checked the actually stats of those guys being convicted is so low the cops barely need to be there at all. This is a guess at the figure but it was something like 2 out of 50 people where actually convicted of something even after they confessed.
Although it exposes these low lifes the show is just one big entrapment. The funny thing is this...you have to sign a release that allows the show to not blur your face. This is for all tv shows, cops, catch a predator, etc etc....so at some point in time these guys signed something that allows them to be shown as molesters. All they have to do is simply not sign it.
i've noticed that about cheaters. I've always figured they needed a release to show all the faces because sometimes some people are blurred for no apparent reasons. occasionally it'll be the dude/dudette who was cheating which always makes for an interesting fight scene.
I guess I'm what you might call decently educated but I never thought this was complex stuff. If someone hands you a release form after recording you do something idiotic just don't sign it. I want to be on TV as much as the next guy but not for cheating on my girlfriend. That's not something I can tape and show the homies. i can't mail a copy of that to my mother.
[quote name='n8rockerasu']Really, what's somebody supposed to do when they see a bike being stolen? I'm not confronting you and getting stabbed. The most they could do is call the cops. But by the time they get there, the thief will be long gone and how are they going to track him down...and how much motivation will they have to do so? Can't really blame people for thinking of their own personal safety.[/QUOTE]
I agree. In New york city it is very common. Personal safety is #1. People will kill you if you just look at them.
[quote name='Soodmeg']Nope, its actually part of a legal deal.
The cops by law can not be in the house they have to further away from the scene to avoid entrapment. Although they rarely ever do. The last time I checked the actually stats of those guys being convicted is so low the cops barely need to be there at all. This is a guess at the figure but it was something like 2 out of 50 people where actually convicted of something even after they confessed.
Although it exposes these low lifes the show is just one big entrapment. The funny thing is this...you have to sign a release that allows the show to not blur your face. This is for all tv shows, cops, catch a predator, etc etc....so at some point in time these guys signed something that allows them to be shown as molesters. All they have to do is simply not sign it.[/QUOTE]
That makes sense.
I thought about it more and while they run to get the guys and they're often caught right away, some of those little monsters get pretty close to their cars when they run out of the house. I don't know whether the police would car chase them if they got going since they could end up getting people killed and these cases don't seem to really stand up well in court. I guess if they were trying to make it exciting they'd let them get away and do that. :lol:
[quote name='Wolfkin']i've noticed that about cheaters. I've always figured they needed a release to show all the faces because sometimes some people are blurred for no apparent reasons. occasionally it'll be the dude/dudette who was cheating which always makes for an interesting fight scene.
I guess I'm what you might call decently educated but I never thought this was complex stuff. If someone hands you a release form after recording you do something idiotic just don't sign it. I want to be on TV as much as the next guy but not for cheating on my girlfriend. That's not something I can tape and show the homies. i can't mail a copy of that to my mother.[/QUOTE]
The thing with Cheaters is the show has some serious credibility issues so they may be blurring the faces for nothing but the show itself. There was some serious red flags raised about whether Cheaters is real or all faked.
nah it started more anonymous. click the video and imagine the title "pervert films underage girl" that's all we know.. then later we found out it was joesy boot. then we found out he was a stern groupie.. then we found out he was gay and feels hollow inside when he sees really attractive men.[quote name='J7.']The thing with Cheaters is the show has some serious credibility issues so they may be blurring the faces for nothing but the show itself. There was some serious red flags raised about whether Cheaters is real or all faked.[/QUOTE]oh boo. one of my fondest wishes in college was to use my girlfriend and a friend of ours and fake cheaters. i was gonna pretend to cheat on my friend Dette with my girlfriend. it was gonna be epic.
some of it ain't fake though. i promise you that. I still remember my fav episode when they took the cheaters crew on a boat and had the confrontation on this dudes boat. They literally boarded his boat while he was with his mistress and brought the wife along and stuff. Greatest episode ever because the dude stabbed Joey with a knife. just remembering makes me laugh and laugh and laugh. I mean wow they bombarded his boat? couldn't wait till he got back to land cheaters?
[quote name='Wolfkin']
some of it ain't fake though. i promise you that. I still remember my fav episode when they took the cheaters crew on a boat and had the confrontation on this dudes boat. They literally boarded his boat while he was with his mistress and brought the wife along and stuff. Greatest episode ever because the dude stabbed Joey with a knife. just remembering makes me laugh and laugh and laugh. I mean wow they bombarded his boat? couldn't wait till he got back to land cheaters?[/QUOTE]
That episode was one of the ones that helped show Cheaters was fake.
ed up than how it started. Internet, you never cease to amaze me.
