The creepy men were creepy, the rest was hilarious/good. And so concludes the adventure into CR voyeurism.

The votes disagree with your assessment. Everyone is not you, everyone is the lowest common denominator.
>> ^choggie:
hmmmm, maybe if you tried to post something that everyone could give a fuck about, like art, good music etc., instead of stooping to the lowest common denominator of voyeurism, finger-pointing, and sensationalist hoo-ha, the dupe factor would be minimal.
Who gives a fiddler's fuck about Pat Robertson anyhow? He's a goddamn snake-oil piece of shit, drunk on his own cult of personality.

hmmmm, maybe if you tried to post something that everyone could give a fuck about, like art, good music etc., instead of stooping to the lowest common denominator of voyeurism, finger-pointing, and sensationalist hoo-ha, the dupe factor would be minimal.

Who gives a fiddler's fuck about Pat Robertson anyhow? He's a goddamn snake-oil piece of shit, drunk on his own cult of personality.

Yea it tugs at our heartstrings but this vile exploitative "voyeurism" only cheapens the event as the baring souls were sold to pimp the local San Antonio's local news station. Not to mention it's a slap in the face for those who experienced a different version of reality where their daddy didn't come home.

Naw MW, my opinion is that you DON'T see, and ya don't respond rather, you react. Case in point, the message I sent to you on your profile which is public for restrictions not my own, the same restrictions soon to be discarded. I approached you attempting to explain my motivations rather, by singling-out a comment of yours on this thread, that publicly and rather smugly, poo-poohs my observations and manner. Can't slight ya for the offense to my manner and could give a giggity-goddamn-....CAN if you attack me with a view to putting a feather in yer clever-cap...as do all other users with the same manner.

Such is the nature of the freedom of speech with a view to enlightenment or otherwise, such is the nature of the website I enjoy to be a part of.

Dude...My opinions are like my asshole. I got one like everyone else and it's dear to me. On the contrary to yer insights...EVERYTHING I SEE AFFECTS ME. Be it a screen-shot, a title, a mood, turn of phrase, or another's particular take on something I've seen before...EVERYTHING. To deny that anyone you know is the same, would be like lying when describing your own fantasies to another.

Ignore is an illusion as well. who can ignore the voyeur?? Who can ignore a naked human in public? Who can ignore hunger? A better man than I, that's fer sure....

You're such a voyeur, siftbot. I wish you hadn't posted those things making fun of me - I don't handle it well, when people (or bots) make fun of me. But if you want, then we can agree that it was stupid of both of us and move on. I would rather be friendly than angry.

In reply to this comment by siftbot:
I'm watching you.

Phew...from the title of it, I thought you got some voyeur footage of my girlfriend and I.

wow. eco voyeurism. this is worse than 2 girls one cup.

Bring the justice, bull! Hit those snuff-voyeur fuckers.

1. Analogies are not literal. The Salem Witches are an appropriate comparison, because violence was used in the persecution of others. The poster was not suggesting that opening a truck door and burning someone at the stake are equivalent, but they are based on the same principle - that the ends justify the means - if someone is "immoral" per your stance, you have the okay to violently persecute them. Failing to realize this is failing to understand the concept of analogy.

2. Prostitution is a victimless crime. For a crime to have a victim, you must be able to identify a victim in all possible manifestations of that crime. If there is even one counter example, it is a victimless crime. Think to yourself for a moment, can you dream up any possible circumstance wherein one person could pay another for sex, and neither would feel victimized? To help, flip it around - put yourself in the potential-victims shoes - are there any instances in which you would have sex with someone for money, and not feel like a victim? How about $1 trillion to have sex with that one girl at your work, you know who I'm talking about. Would you feel victimized? This is as solid as 2 + 2 = 4, you cannot argue it. If there is a victim in only certain circumstances, it is another, different crime that was committed. Human trafficking is one example used here - another example would be patting someone on the back - legal after a football game, illegal if you are standing on the edge of a cliff. Prostitution is a victimless crime, end of story.

3. Videotaping in a public place is not a crime. The (legal) line was crossed when the "do-gooder" opened the truck without permission of the owner. The fact that he was videotaping them naked, having sex, makes it a sex crime. Voyeurism, peeping-tom-ism, is a sex crime in America - and rightfully so. What he did was equivalent (in principle) to kicking open a bathroom stall and videotaping someone on the toilet. The do-gooder here should justly be charged, and registered as a sex offender.

4. Intolerance is not bad, in fact its very good, its the process by which we define our entire culture. Examples of things we are rightly intolerant of in increasing order of severity: not washing your hands after the bathroom, not covering your mouth when you cough, interrupting others while they are speaking, infidelity, racism, holocaust-denial. Do you go out and burn an racist at the stake? Do you slap people when they don't wash their hands? Do you throw people out windows when they interrupt you? Do you kick open a door and videotape them? Do you beat them with a stick? No...you choose not to be their friend, or associate with them, or ignore their views - just like any other jackass on the street. That is how society and culture are defined. Imagine life without intolerance - where all societal action was open-game and nothing was (nonviolently) condemned. Life would be an unending episode of Jerry Springer.

5. Intolerance as expressed through violence, however, is not okay for the very simple reason that violence is not okay. It has nothing to do with the intolerance motivating it, because as we just realized, intolerance is a good thing. An act of violence always has a victim. Opening a truck door that is not yours is an act of violence, as much as kicking in someones front door. They are different in degree, not kind. Denying the holocaust is not kosher, and you should be very intolerant of such a person, much more so that someone who doesn't wash their hands after going to the bathroom for that matter. But what they are doing is different in degree, not kind. You have every right to nonviolently protest - to videotape them publicly denying the holocaust and put it on youtube, and forward it to their boss. However, you don't have any more right to burn a holocaust denier at the stake than you do to burn someone who doesn't wash their hands. A failure to understand this is a failure to differentiate between concepts of varying degree, and concepts of varying kind.

Wild guess, this guy 1/4 part "citizen crusader" and 3/4 part voyeur who gets off to videos of people having sex. I mean seriously, what he did was akin to someone opening your front door and videotaping you having sex in your living room. He should be charged as a sex offender ala "illicit watching of sexual activity."

I would also sue the shit out of him if I was the Lowes guy.

>> ^longde:
Why does there need to be a whole dramatic scene in the first place?

>> ^longde:
Why does there need to be a whole dramatic scene in the first place?
This guy could throw sand in the hookers' game everytime by simply showing the potential johns the camera and throwing a sharp word or two ("hey buddy, I know what you're up to!") as they stroll the block.
But nooooooo....we HAVE to have a whole dramatic chase, topped off by a voyuer film, and then a righteous lecture. This guy is vying to be the next Dog the Bounty Hunter: same M.O.
How many other hookers scored johns in front of playing kids, while the cameraman wasted so much time to get the Lowes guy arrested? Plenty of quickies near the playground, I'm sure.



IT IS fucking RIDICULOUS to expect this guy to walk around his neighborhood everyday, as apparently he has been doing!, enforcing the frigging law and telling people hey asshole you shouldn't be picking up hookers over here by where our kids play. I mean wtf .. this is obviously an ongoing problem over there and he is exposing it. I guess for you that's a voyeur film.

The reason Bill-O is so terrified of "voyeurism" or things being taped and coming back to haunt others is because of this.

Don't worry Bill-o, that kid is cool so the "ethernet" will treat him well...unlike you.

The amount of spin in 2:53 of video is astounding.

"Hurting America First" - Didn't it hurt America to start using torture in the first place? One of the key states to fight against the policies of Nazi Germany, the Stasi, the KGB and Khmer Rouge. One of the main founders and signatories of the Geneva convention?

"Showing military men and women in bad light" - Torture policy was top down not bottom up, we are to hold those who put these policies forward not those made to carry them out as orders. John Yoo, David Addington, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney. It was not a few bad apples.

"Voyeurism" - Was it voyeurism to cite 9/11 in almost every campaign speech during the elections? Was it voyeurism to acknowledge the victims of the holocaust? More diversionary spin. Such steps would assure these events will never occur again. One must see the mistakes of before to learn from them lest we repeat this again.

"Acts that have ended" - The acts were supposed to have ended with the Abu Ghraib scandal, but they didn't. It was a policy that was implemented and carried out before and after the scandal broke and would have kept going had the information not been leaked out.

"Hurting our National defense/Reason for suicide bombers" - The reasons for suicide bombing and attacks on America are plentiful for those who choose to do so. The way the statement is framed doesn't acknowledge that actually carrying out torture has been a great boon to creating more terrorists, or that its continual oppression and denial only furthers the case that America has a hypocritical stance. "It's bad when others do it, but its okay for us to do it."

"Replayed in the Arab world" - This is a lie. I live in the Arab world, we have enough of our own issues, the accusations of torture coming out were not surprising as the Arabs already know that Americans do not really care about the plight of the Arab people given the long history of political meddling in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Palestine, Iraq and Iran.

"Hurt the military" - Again an example of attacking the grunts instead of attacking those who created and put this forward these policies.

"Reveal intelligence gather techniques" - There has not been a single document published by the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, the US military nor any other intelligence gathering component of the US government that has showed unequivocally that torture had prevented attacks and or has made America safer in anyway. What it has do is cost America the moral standing, the support of the international world and created strained relations across the world providing fuel for terrorist organizations to attack the US more then ever.

Fulfills the voyeur in me greatly. I like watching people.