DVD Talk
New Jersey wants to make it illegal to photograph a child without parental consent [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : New Jersey wants to make it illegal to photograph a child without parental consent


RoyalTea
05-05-11, 06:44 PM
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/A3500/3297_I1.HTM

So, if I go to a NJ Devils hockey game and take a picture of the arena and there's a couple of 17 year olds within the frame of my shot, I'd be a criminal if I didn't obtain parental consent first.

If I go to a park and take a photo of my niece and there's someone else's kid in the background, I'd be a criminal.

And I sure hope that "well, I don't think anybody would press charges for something like that" isn't used as a legitimate defense to this kind of big government bullshit.

NORML54601
05-05-11, 07:10 PM
Jesus :rolleyes:

fishingleatity
05-05-11, 07:22 PM
It looks like it pretty much allows an easy defense for public places... there just needs to be a posting stating that you are subject to surveillance etc.


Not that I agree with the law

BearFan
05-05-11, 07:48 PM
Stupid idea. I can see not letting you take pics of minors for the sake of taking pics of minors w/o parental consent. But not if you take crowd shots.

RoyalTea
05-05-11, 07:59 PM
I can see not letting you take pics of minors for the sake of taking pics of minors w/o parental consent.

why?

BearFan
05-05-11, 08:39 PM
why?

Something seems creepy about going around and purposley taking pics of kids .. where that is the goal. My thought was going up to kids and asking them pose for pics and that sort of thing.

But, if I am in a public area and I want to take a pic of the area, I should not need to get IDs from everyone there.

RoyalTea
05-05-11, 08:49 PM
Something seems creepy about going around and purposley taking pics of kids

creepy ≠ illegal

Suppose I'm at a park and I'm taking pictures of my 5 year old nephew. He's playing with another random child and I take a picture of the two of them because it's just cute. Should I have to ask around the park asking other parents/guardians to find out who's child it is and to sign a release?

BearFan
05-05-11, 09:21 PM
Fair point, the thing the law is missing is anyting about intent.

RoyalTea
05-05-11, 09:28 PM
intent to what?

NORML54601
05-05-11, 09:40 PM
Fair point, the thing the law is missing is anyting about intent.

Under what circumstances should it be illegal to take pictures of children in public places?

mosquitobite
05-05-11, 09:47 PM
Someone needs to think of the children!

focker
05-05-11, 11:01 PM
People in public should have no expectation of privacy. If parents don't want their children seen or photographed, they shouldn't allow them in public. This is absolutely ridiculous.

Photographers are already unjustly and illegally harassed by police all the time while taking pictures in public. There is no need to give the cops ammunition to do this even more.

kvrdave
05-06-11, 12:46 AM
If I get consent, is child porn legal?

wendersfan
05-06-11, 08:19 AM
Fair point, the thing the law is missing is anyting about intent.Ooh, thought crimes! Nice.

movielib
05-06-11, 08:48 AM
This is a contender for the stupidest thing I've ever seen.

al_bundy
05-06-11, 09:58 AM
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/A3500/3297_I1.HTM

So, if I go to a NJ Devils hockey game and take a picture of the arena and there's a couple of 17 year olds within the frame of my shot, I'd be a criminal if I didn't obtain parental consent first.

If I go to a park and take a photo of my niece and there's someone else's kid in the background, I'd be a criminal.

And I sure hope that "well, I don't think anybody would press charges for something like that" isn't used as a legitimate defense to this kind of big government bullshit.

under circumstances in which a reasonable parent or guardian would not expect his child to be the subject of such reproduction.


failed reading comprehension in elementary school?

Tracer Bullet
05-06-11, 10:01 AM
Ooh, thought crimes! Nice.

:lol:

Groucho
05-06-11, 10:38 AM
Under circumstances in which a reasonable parent or guardian would not expect his child to be the subject of such reproduction.What does that mean? Who defines "reasonable"?

JasonF
05-06-11, 11:25 AM
The impetus for the bill, according to the text of the bill linked in the OP, is a perv who was taking pictures of teenaged girls at a swim meet. So apparently, it would not be reasonable to expect to have your picture taken at an athletic competition open to the general public. Who knew?

dan30oly
05-06-11, 11:35 AM
The impetus for the bill, according to the text of the bill linked in the OP, is a perv who was taking pictures of teenaged girls at a swim meet. So apparently, it would not be reasonable to expect to have your picture taken at an athletic competition open to the general public. Who knew?

Public event. So, yes.

JasonF
05-06-11, 12:18 PM
Public event. So, yes.

I would think so too, but if you look at the bill, the legislative notes say:

The sponsor was prompted to introduce this bill in response to an incident in Ringwood involving a man videotaping young girls at a swimming competition.

So the bill's sponsor, at least, presumably thinks that this would address the rampant societal problem of kids being filmed at public events, which suggests that he thinks a reasonable person would not expect to be filmed at public events.

BearFan
05-06-11, 12:49 PM
Scratch anyting I said, guess I was looking for soemthing in this that made sense, but there really is not. If someone is taking actual kiddie porn pics, there are already laws for that. This is dumb afterall.

wendersfan
05-06-11, 01:21 PM
Wouldn't it be simpler to just have the league (or whatever governing body for youth sports might be appropriate) not allow cameras at swim meets? Of course, now everyone has a camera on their phone so these bans are far more difficult than they used to be.

Groucho
05-06-11, 01:23 PM
They covered this on an episode of Dexter. He handled things without getting the law involved.

guildda
05-06-11, 01:28 PM
The olympic television coverage is really going to suck if they're ever held in New Jersey

NORML54601
05-06-11, 03:00 PM
The olympic television coverage is really going to suck if they're ever held in New Jersey

:lol:

JasonF
05-06-11, 03:26 PM
Wouldn't it be simpler to just have the league (or whatever governing body for youth sports might be appropriate) not allow cameras at swim meets? Of course, now everyone has a camera on their phone so these bans are far more difficult than they used to be.

I don't think parents would be happy to be told they can't photogaph their kids' swim meets.

Groucho
05-06-11, 03:42 PM
I don't think parents would be happy to be told they can't photogaph their kids' swim meets.Especially if there are hotties on the other team!

wendersfan
05-06-11, 04:23 PM
I don't think parents would be happy to be told they can't photogaph their kids' swim meets.Then I guess the parents shouldn't be such creepy pervs, now should they? Guess they didn't think of that first, huh?

Fortunately once your idol Obama turns us all Muslim, all those girls will be wearing hajibs and we'll no longer have this problem. ;)

JasonF
05-06-11, 05:00 PM
Then I guess the parents shouldn't be such creepy pervs, now should they? Guess they didn't think of that first, huh?

Fortunately once your idol Obama turns us all Muslim, all those girls will be wearing hajibs and we'll no longer have this problem. ;)

Hijabs? What kind of namby-pamby Muslim do you think he is? It's going to be full-on burkas.

Mabuse
05-06-11, 05:41 PM
Burkini or nothing, I say!

This was an issue in Irvine, CA near where I live. A guy was photographing teenage boys at swim meets and he ran a blog where he posted the photos. He would create slide shows that mixed gay porn (with legal aged actors) and the teen swim photos. I can't remember how this resolved. Maybe there was a restraining order made to keep the guy out. I'll look into it.

Photography at HS sporting events (especially swimming) is becoming a bigger and bigger issue in the age of the internet. You can go on flickr and ogle 15 year old girls in swimsuits all day, and most of its posted by the athletes themselves, friends, parents, etc, without much consideration for how many others will see it. Adding to this is the fact that sportswear for girls is getting very revealing. I graduated HS in 1996 and things were much more conservative then. I see the girls cross country team out for a jog these days and they are in sports bras and spanks, the girls v-ball team wears skin tight spanks now too. Swim team suits are getting much smaller for the girls and especially the guys.

It's not like I blame the victim for dressing provocatively, but the revealing clothing trends are going to attract eyes. That's what they were designed for. Some of those eyes are going to be pervs. I agree that something probably needs to be done. But not by the government. I think this could be something the league and the school district could enforce themselves. Between "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" and the already tight restrictions of what can be done on a school campus I'd think they could just kick out the pervs, anyone without kids on the team, etc.