The state’s highest criminal court on Wednesday tossed out part of a Texas law banning “improper photography or visual recording” – surreptitious images acquired in public for sexual gratification, often called “upskirting” or “downblousing” – as a violation of federal free-speech rights and an improper restriction on a person’s right to individual thoughts.
In an 8-1 ruling, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals said photos, like paintings, films and books, are “inherently expressive” and, therefore, are protected by the First Amendment. The opinion supported a previous decision by the San Antonio-based 4th Court of Appeals.
The case involved Ronald Thompson, who was charged in 2011 with 26 counts of improper photography after taking underwater pictures of clothed children – most wearing swimsuits – at a San Antonio water park. He appealed the law’s constitutionality before his trial. He contended that a plain reading of the law would place street photographers, entertainment journalists, arts patrons, pep rally attendees and “even the harmless eccentric” at risk of incarceration.
“To think that it’s unlawful to look at a little girl in a swimsuit, when you have lascivious thoughts, in public? And you did not do anything to that child? That cannot be made a crime in the United States,” Peter Linzer, who teaches constitutional and First Amendment law at the University of Houston Law Center said. “The fact that some people might find that very offensive doesn’t change anything. … You can’t prevent someone in public from looking at you and having dark thoughts.”
Read the full article at the Houston Chronicle.
Who knew Texas had so many perverts and pedophiles?
Seems to me there was a time when someone was caught peeking at a Texas woman would quickly face her male relatives who would handle the problem with a bowie knife, then some tar, feathers and a pole.
The failed Scottish vote to pull out from the United Kingdom stirred secessionist hopes for some in the United States, where almost a quarter of people are open to their states leaving the union, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll found.
Some 23.9 percent of Americans polled from Aug. 23 through Sept. 16 said they strongly supported or tended to support the idea of their state breaking away, while 53.3 percent of the 8,952 respondents strongly opposed or tended to oppose the notion.
The urge to sever ties with Washington cuts across party lines and regions, though Republicans and residents of rural Western states are generally warmer to the idea than Democrats and Northeasterners, according to the poll.
Anger with President Barack Obama’s handling of issues ranging from healthcare reform to the rise of Islamic State militants drives some of the feeling, with Republican respondents citing dissatisfaction with his administration as coloring their thinking.
Read the full article at the Chicago Tribune.
So it seems the law forced on us by Socialists Democrats was written by a fruitcake so crazy he’s begging to be euthanized when he reaches 75. And Liberal Democrats are fine with this?!?
Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the masterminds behind Obamacare, has now explained that he wishes to die at age 75. In an article in The Atlantic, Emanuel writes, “Seventy-five. That’s how long I want to live: 75 years.” He explains that his daughters disagree; so do his brothers and his friends. But, he says, “I am sure of my position…here is a simple truth that many of us seem to resist: living too long is also a loss. It renders many of us, if not disabled, then faltering and declining, a state that may not be worse than death but is nonetheless deprived.”
Emanuel’s push for people to die at 75 is deeply connected to Obamacare, which insists that care be rationed for the elderly – who, presumably, must be encouraged to make the same “mature” decision about death Emanuel has made. Emanuel pushes back against those attempting to lengthen their own lives, castigating them as morally deficient.
Emanuel says he will stop having “colonoscopies and other cancer-screening tests.” He wants flu shots stopped for the elderly, as well.
But it’s not enough for Emanuel to feel that way. We all must feel that way, and we must construct policy around that belief. He believes that life-expectancy statistics should be ignored once they move beyond 75 years old. And while he insists that he is not “saying that those who want to live as long as possible are unethical or wrong,” his entire article is premised on that belief. Otherwise, why write it? And given the fact that Emanuel directs the Clinical Bioethics Department at the National Institutes of Health, his opinion carries weight.
Read the full article at Breitbart.com.
A proposed ordinance in Montville, New Jersey could give police officers broad powers – including entering private property – if underage drinking is even suspected.
Residents value their privacy in the upscale community of Montville in Morris County. But the proposed ordinance could change all of that.
Police officers under the ordinance could search homes with probable cause, and without a warrant, if they suspect underage drinking.
“I am not in favor of them just coming into the homes, because there – other people have said – there are children that do make mistakes on various occasions, and that’s more of a parent responsibility rather than a police responsibility,” said Anna Marie Cecire of Montville.
“Just coming in our houses searching – eventually, it’s going to turn into hunches and all that, and once you base it on a hunch, then it’s all downhill from there,” said high school senior Stephen McManus.
The mayor, committee members and the police chief do not appear to want to talk about the proposal, Sloan reported. None of them returned CBS 2’s calls.
Read the full article at CBS New York.