Pervert films underaged girl - and then gets pissy when told to stop.

the guy is probably a pervert... but are they not doing this out in the open? technically he can film it all he wants..
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']meh,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7zb8YXrmIA&feature=player_embedded[/QUOTE]

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.
 
Yeah. My question is this: If she didn't want to be seen / filmed....well....wasn't that Times Square or something? And she's bending herself into poses? And doesn't want to be viewed? I don't get it. Plus, the guy might be a perv, but he didn't do anything illegal. I just don't get the premise.
 
[quote name='Jesus_S_Preston']This guy sounds like how I picture most of the users on gamefaqs.[/QUOTE]

They're too busy playing Hurt & Heal on the Super Mario RPG forum to think about sex.
 
i agree hes within his rights to film her regardless of what we asumme hes going to use the footage for later. my question is if he was that annying or distracting to them why not move the shoot elsewhere then if he follows them then they have smething to complain about. ot damn greenbay kicked the shit out of the colts.
 
Yeah, if I saw a hot girl doing that in public, I wouldn't use a camera, but I would "film" her with my eyes for later use. That's called being a "man", not a "pervert".
 
[quote name='Stoneage']Yeah. My question is this: If she didn't want to be seen / filmed....well....wasn't that Times Square or something? And she's bending herself into poses? And doesn't want to be viewed? I don't get it. Plus, the guy might be a perv, but he didn't do anything illegal. I just don't get the premise.[/QUOTE]

She had ballerina shoes on doing ballet poses for some kind of photos that I'm guessing had something to do with ballet. Regardless, posing for photos doesn't mean "hey everybody come zoom in on my ass!"
 
Everyone involved was an idiot.
Guy really had no business filming, on the other hand if they are going to be so sensitive she shouldn't be doing whatever the hell that was, dressed like that, in public. If you are going to wave your crotch around like that you have to expect people to look.
 
[quote name='crunchb3rry']What's that, Times Square? And nobody knocked the guy out? NYC, I'm disappointed in you.[/QUOTE]
Disappointed in new york? wasnt' there an incident where women were being molested by a mob in central park on film and nobody gave a shit.
 
[quote name='shosh']Disappointed in new york? wasnt' there an incident where women were being molested by a mob in central park on film and nobody gave a shit.[/QUOTE]


happens once a year in atlanta too lol.
 
[quote name='SpazX']She had ballerina shoes on doing ballet poses for some kind of photos that I'm guessing had something to do with ballet. Regardless, posing for photos doesn't mean "hey everybody come zoom in on my ass!"[/QUOTE]

Actually it does.


If you are on public property anyone can do anything that is within the laws. If you dont want creepy guys doing creepy things then get a private location. Thats why you rarely see us profession doing things outside with 20 security guards. Have you never watched the news and seen that douche jumping around in the background? Why does she need to be in time square for a ballet photo op anyway?

Is the guy creepy? Yes, but being creepy isnt against the law. Is everyone involved in that project a flaming fucking idiot for even thinking for a second that there wouldnt be a problem shooting in what looks like the middle of time square? Yes.

[quote name='porieux']Everyone involved was an idiot.
Guy really had no business filming, on the other hand if they are going to be so sensitive she shouldn't be doing whatever the hell that was, dressed like that, in public. If you are going to wave your crotch around like that you have to expect people to look.[/QUOTE]

Again, in this case the creepy guy is right in all accounts. He can film whatever the hell he wants in a public place. Does it make him creepy? Yes...but he does have business filming if he so chooses.
 
Apparently the difference between art and perversion is all about the angle.

Kinda like penetration shots. Over the top? Passe, trashy, garbage.

From the bottom with the manbag swinging in rhythm? fucking inspired.
 
[quote name='MisterModest']Yeah, if I saw a hot girl doing that in public, I wouldn't use a camera, but I would "film" her with my eyes for later use. That's called being a "man", not a "pervert".[/QUOTE]

qft
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']meh,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7zb8YXrmIA&feature=player_embedded[/QUOTE]

If someone was cutting/sawing chains so nonchalantly in the open, unafraid of others passing by, it's a natural reaction not to think that he was doing anything wrong. Maybe he lost the keys to his lock.

Sure, anyone actually stealing the bike can do the same thing, and this is a huge problem, but you can really blame the people walking by and not thinking anything is wrong. Some people did do a double take, but dismissed it after seeing how casually the guy was "working"
 
Pervert Films Teen Photoshoot Until Her Mom & Concerned Citizens Go Ham!- But someone who's not a pervert reposted this on youtube to show the world what again... the pervert... or the footage of the girl?
 
[quote name='Viol8tor']That dude was straight up recoding some Fap material for later on. Jezuz.[/QUOTE]

So....?

The best part of freedom is the part where you have to tolerate others with the same rights. I like how everybody got so defensive about a guy filming what another guy was photographing. What's good for one and not for another is down right hypocritical and needs to stop NOW.
 
At first I thought the pervert was going to be the guy laying on the ground with the DSLR camera taking what I thought were crotch shots. Turned out what he was doing is legit, and it was the videographer himself who was the perv.
 
[quote name='Habbler']At first I thought the pervert was going to be the guy laying on the ground with the DSLR camera taking what I thought were crotch shots. Turned out what he was doing is legit, and it was the videographer himself who was the perv.[/QUOTE]

^^ this.

Also its pretty absurd to expect any sort of privacy when you're dressed like that and doing a photoshoot in public.

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

etc etc blah blah.
 
I think the whole thing is funny. So many hypocritical egos involved. The over-defensive pervy European camera guy who knows his rights but has no moral compass, the angry self-righteous photo crew, the "what the hot girl will look like in 40 years" defensive old woman, crazy in your face biker dude and the innocent as pie young chick with shorts up to her crotch doing ballet poses who looks as though somehow she's being violated. I love it. Yay, NYC!

I would have just messed with the video guys shots and had fun with it. Call me "goober" though, and it's on! Quick trip to the hot dog vender to borrow a ketchup squirt bottle and viola, filming is over!

The guy filming sounds European, like the voice-overs from the non-American side in BF:BC2. or this...
http://www.hulu.com/watch/144708/saturday-night-live-the-story-of-frank-sinatra
 
[quote name='MisterModest']Yeah, if I saw a hot girl doing that in public, I wouldn't use a camera, but I would "film" her with my eyes for later use. That's called being a "man", not a "pervert".[/QUOTE]

That's adding to the "Spank Bank" or making a deposit if you will.
 
What's the world coming to when a teen girl in short shorts, spreading her legs for a cameraman can't get privacy in Times Square?
 
well they should have known what they were doing posing like that in times square, wearing that.

At the same time that guy should have known he had every chance of being knocked the fuck out by a protective boyfriend/brother/father or something.

I say they're all dumbasses.
 
Please, I'm surprised she didn't have a crowd of a hundred guys watching her. You can't do something like that on public property and expect any privacy, if they didn't want people to notice the girl in short shorts posing, they shouldn't have done it in public. I can't believe that anyone would think it's fine to do that in public, but that it's wrong that some guy came along and filmed it. Did the people involved think folks would just look and continue on walking?
 
well that was a depressingly deceptive OP. pretty much everything I was going to say has been said... here:

[quote name='DestroVega']the guy is probably a pervert... but are they not doing this out in the open? technically he can film it all he wants..[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Stoneage']Yeah. My question is this: If she didn't want to be seen / filmed....well....wasn't that Times Square or something? And she's bending herself into poses? And doesn't want to be viewed? I don't get it. Plus, the guy might be a perv, but he didn't do anything illegal. I just don't get the premise.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='lokizz']i agree hes within his rights to film her regardless of what we asumme hes going to use the footage for later. my question is if he was that annying or distracting to them why not move the shoot elsewhere then if he follows them then they have smething to complain about.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='blissskr']Pervert Films Teen Photoshoot Until Her Mom & Concerned Citizens Go Ham!- But someone who's not a pervert reposted this on youtube to show the world what again... the pervert... or the footage of the girl?
[/QUOTE]good point did he post his own footage and call himself a pervert?

[quote name='Habbler']At first I thought the pervert was going to be the guy laying on the ground with the DSLR camera taking what I thought were crotch shots. Turned out what he was doing is legit, and it was the videographer himself who was the perv.[/QUOTE]for real. dude wasn't even really 'zooming in on her crotch' like that. Never thought the pervert would be the actual camera man i fail to see what he did to earn group ire. He wasn't crowding her. He wasn't saying anything to her. Were his pants off or something?

Oh yeah how do we know she's underage? I was expecting the girl to look like 10 or 12. She could be legal. last night I met this really cute small girl who as it turns out wasn't like 19 but instead was 28-29ish. And the dude I thought was her boyfriend was just a family friend. I mean talk about missed opportunities. the point being that a) unless she looks like a middle schooler she could totally be legal and b) I really should pay more attention to the signals girls appear to give me.

Edit: watched it again and it turns out at the end she says she's only 17. While I've had that argument with friends on whether or not 17 yos can be attractive, I think we can all agree that in theory she could be 18 before then and he had no reason to believe otherwise. (not that it matters in the middle of times square)

[quote name='SpazX']She had ballerina shoes on doing ballet poses for some kind of photos that I'm guessing had something to do with ballet. Regardless, posing for photos doesn't mean "hey everybody come zoom in on my ass!"[/QUOTE]actually it kinda does. It's not like she had any reasonable expectation of privacy in the middle of times square. Why not wear proper ballet clothing and not have to grab at your crotch every 15 seconds.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ballet is basically soft porn to begin with. What did they fucking expect lol. The "real" photographer on the ground was taking even worst photos, but that's okay because they're "official". Everyone there was a fucking idiot the girl, the old lady, the goober, and the goobslayer.
 
[quote name='J7.']Ballet is basically soft porn to begin with. [/QUOTE]

Only if you are the type that spanks it to the Sears catalog.
 
[quote name='crunchb3rry']Only if you are the type that spanks it to the Sears catalog.[/QUOTE]you say it like that's unusual. Thought I'm sure Vickies is the preferred catalog at that level but Sears is much less conspicuous.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl7a7Ug6pyo

Here is another link - the other wasn't working for me. Not sure if this is the same one.

And everyone has said already what I think. No idea why everyone started getting pissed with him - but he sure sounded obnoxious. Those ladies should be lucky there wasn't 30 guys filming her. Only in America do people get bent out of shape for filming a girl posing in the middle of the city...

Don't go to Japan then...
2008-03-17-102.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='crunchb3rry']Only if you are the type that spanks it to the Sears catalog.[/QUOTE]

I probably did back when I was 13. :lol:
 
Says the video has been removed so I didnt see it but, 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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top