Friday October 26, 2001
Anti-Video Voyeurism laws
States are passing laws to protect citizens against people who use those mini cameras to take voyeurism pictures. The Wisconsin State Assembly this week passed a law targeting high-tech peeping Toms. The Journal Sentinel reports, “The bill toughens video voyeurism sanctions incorporated in the state budget and criminalizes the distribution of such photos over the Internet. “Once a nude photo or videotape is e-mailed to others or placed on a Web site, that genie is out of the bottle forever,” said Rep. Mark Gundrum (R-New Berlin), who sponsored the measure with Sen. Kim Plache (D-Racine).”
What is your state doing? Here is a list of state laws.
At least 14 states have voyerism statues:
Hawaii, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Utah where the conduct may fit under the invasion of privacy statutes. In California, Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, New York, North Dakota, South Carolina, Ohio and Oklahoma, a voyeur may be charged with eavesdropping. And he may be a loiterer in Arkansas. In Connecticut, a voyeur may be charged with disorderly conduct if he, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, offensively or disorderly interferes with another person.
The Wisconsin bill would list the video voyeurism law among privacy statutes instead of crimes against sexual morality. The sponsors say that move could help shield it from potential court challenges that contend it violates free speech rights.
In 1997, the Legislature passed a similar law, but the state Supreme Court last year ruled it was unconstitutional because it applied to all depictions made without the subjects’ consent, including artistic, political and newsworthy photos or films.
The bill would extend the law to circumstances in which the victim had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Under the existing law, there were concerns that someone changing in a health club locker room might not be considered a victim.
The Web is full of this stuff. One site includes a “spy school” where users can get information about hidden cameras; and a chat room, where video voyeurs can trade tricks. The site also tells visitors, “Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to infiltrate by every means possible the places where subjects are least expected to be seen.”
Surprisingly enough, however, websites that post upskirting photographs and even the act of upskirting itself are completely legal. Sites such as upskirt.com are protected by the First Amendment, according to Eugene Volokh, a professor of constitutional law at the University of California at Los Angeles.
1/3rd of Teens are Unhappy (linked to drugs and drink)
About one-third of South Carolina teens express unhappiness with their friends and family — a dissatisfaction that USC researchers say may be leading to drug and alcohol abuse. The State (newspaper) says “In a study of 5,032 public high school students reported in the current issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health, researchers Robert Valois, Scott Huebner and Keith Zullig say that 30 percent of African-American males and females, 28 percent of white females and 26 percent of white males questioned in a 1997 survey reported that their appraisals of family life, school experience and friendships was closer to “terrible” than “delightful.”
Where Do Charity Donations Go?
The Chronicle of Philanthropy has this interesting story: “…The public does not understand that most donations (to the Red Cross) will not ultimately go directly to victims and their families or to rescue workers. Instead, huge sums will go to help the charity improve its own operations and “expand into new programs of aid never before required,” according to the Red Cross, including plans to handle terrorist attacks involving weapons of mass destruction and a new way to make blood supplies last longer.”
In its Web site notice, the Red Cross offered new details about the expenditures of the remaining $300 million:
$90-million to $100-million for disaster-relief efforts in New York City, at the Pentagon, in Pennsylvania, and at other sites affected by the terrorist actions.
-$50-million to cover the cost of a surge of blood donations made in the aftermath of the disaster and to help accelerate the creation of a “strategic blood reserve” that will allow the Red Cross to freeze blood and “increase the inventory of blood from the historic two-three days to more than 10 days.”
– $29-million to cover indirect costs incurred to support relief efforts, such as ” toll-free nationwide hotlines, information systems, database management, contribution processing, public information and communication, expanded audit services, accounting services, and around-the-clock activation” of the Red Cross’s Disaster Operations Center.
– The balance, $30-million to $40-million, would go to help Red Cross chapters to do such things as provide “grieving” programs and encourage “tolerance”; support people serving in the military; and assist families of foreign nationals who perished in the terrorist attacks.
Web Con
The subject line of the e-mail pleads, “Your support is needed.” When the message is opened, a window with the familiar logo of the Red Cross and photos of wide-eyed children pop up. It appears to be a donation request from the three largest fundraisers for the Sept. 11 terrorism relief effort: the American Red Cross, the United Way of New York City and the New York Community Trust.
The Chicago Tribune reports: “Contributors are asked to type in their name, address, credit card number and other personal information and to send the form on to its digitized charitable destination. It’s easy. It’s also a scam. None of the big three — the Red Cross, the United Way or the New York Community Trust — is soliciting Sept. 11 funds via e-mail, officials confirmed during the weekend, nor are they receiving any money contributed in such a manner.”
