And that's the issue right there. I think you and I are arguing about completely different things. In terms of the person who stole the photos and posted them, yes there is no middle ground--that person 100% committed a crime and needs to be punished.

However, in terms of responsibility of people for putting themselves in the position to be victimized, there is a huge range of possibilities--but often this range of possibilities isn't examined for fear of someone shouting "Blaming the victim!" The link I posted above goes to great lengths to point out that the criminal who commits the crime is 100% responsible for the criminal act (by virtue of having made the choice to commit it) but that the victim can in fact also have contributed to the crime in a continuum of ways starting with not at all (100% innocent, as in a child who is abused) to fully responsible (as in the case of a rapist who is killed by a potential victim in self-defense during the rape attempt--in this case the rapist becomes the "victim" of a shooting that he brought completely upon himself). There is lots of middle ground between these extremes.

Let's examine a simple case:

I am walking down the street in LA during the early evening in a neighborhood that normally has very little crime. A homeless man shambling past me suddenly pulls a knife, rams it into my chest, and steals my wallet which happened to contain several hundred dollars. I think we can agree in this situation I've no responsibility for this incident occurring. I could not have predicted it would happen and there is little I could have done to anticipate or prevent it. I am 100% an innocent victim in this scenario.

Now let's change the situation. I go down to Skid Row in the early evening and start showing all the homeless people there wads of $100 bills and telling them how worthless they are and how if they only got off their asses and worked hard like me they could have money too. Again, I get shanked in the chest and my money is stolen. Am I 100% an innocent victim in this case? It seems a bit absurd to say yes, doesn't it? My actions (choosing to go to an area that is not often policed, at night, alone, and flash money while belligerently accosting random people who don't have a lot left to lose) are directly linked to the stabbing.

Note that in both cases the person committing the crime is still 100% responsible for their own actions--they chose to stab me and steal my money. But in one case I clearly could not have foreseen or prevented the attack coming whereas in the other it was reasonably foreseeable that my actions were going to lead to problems (not necessarily a stabbing but at the very least some sort of altercation, unless the most patient and forgiving homeless people on Earth happened to be gathered on Skid Row that day). Does that mean the stabber in the second case should get a lighter sentence? No. But it does mean I have some responsibility for what went down and can be justly criticized for my actions. I can't hide behind the "don't blame the victim" catchphrase. I still deserve justice, though, despite being an offensive idiot.

Back to the case at hand.

You are correct, the woman did nothing "wrong" in the moral or legal sense, and the person who violated her privacy is 100% responsible for making the photos public. But I dislike the idea that because she's a victim of a crime, her actions can't be criticized. She might not have done anything "wrong" but she did indeed make a huge error of judgement when she decided to snap naked pics of herself and post them to a social network which is known for dodgy privacy practices. Given the state of technology today, one should be able to infer that there is a pretty high risk that racy photos are going to get leaked at some point, particularly if posted online. If you are okay with that risk, go ahead and post them. And if they are leaked, by all means prosecute the offenders. But don't expect people not to criticize you for gambling that nothing is going to happen, especially when there is plenty of evidence to believe the contrary.

"Hey Malkovich, think fast"

(that movie is about my only association with this 'New Jersey Turnpike' thing)

What the heck happens at 0:38, something else is ramming into that truck, right?

haha he missed at 10 seconds in. Stupid ram.

"See, now I'm thinking, maybe it means you're the evil man, and I'm the righteous man, and Mr. 9 millimeter here, he's the shepherd angry ram protecting my righteous ass in the valley of darkness. Or it could mean you're the righteous man and I'm the shepherd angry ram and it's the world that's evil and selfish. I'd like that. But that shit ain't the truth. The truth is, you're the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men. But I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd angry ram."

When he came upon him in the brush I expected the ram to be taking liberties with the bag.

Your video, Angry Ram destroys a punching bag, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 241 Badge!

Angry Ram destroys a punching bag has been added as a related post - related requested by newtboy on that post.

not exactly a secret.
elites by the very definition feel themselves superior to the befuddled herd (actual term used) and therefore feel compelled to "guide" them and "control" them.
this attitude crosses partisan lines.
so on one side you have educated,indoctrinated elites who disdain the masses but use the language of empathy and compassion to manipulate and on the other side of the aisle you have a perverted aynrand/jesus monster to manipulate the masses.

either way....you are being manipulated.

and there aint NO way the republicans are getting rid of obamacare.only the largest bailout gimme to big pharma and the health insurance industry.that would be political suicide.the entire policy was written by the heritage foundation for fucks sake! not exactly a bastion of liberal ideologies.

just as no republican will repeal roe vs wade.
they will use abortion like a battering ram to get their religious base into a frothy frenzy of hate and self-righteousness,but no way would they EVER let go of that boom stick.

this video is stupid and is only being used to create a platform so a certain someone can jump on his soapbox and preach his religion.

fuck that shit.go on a street corner and peddle your wares.this video has zero relevance.

downvote*

Interesting. I just reread info about the 1989 explosion in turret 2 of the battleship Iowa that killed 47 sailors. Looks like it was due to over-ramming unstable powder as part of an unauthorized 'experiment' using 5 bags of the wrong powder instead of the standard 6. Of course, the Navy covered all this up and blamed a sailor for killing everyone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion

SWAT/Police consoling a terrified child in a house they've ram raided? How old is that clip?

Nowadays, they bust into the wrong house, throw a flash bang into a toddlers crib, causing critical burns to the childs body, a hole in his chest and needed to be put into a medical induced coma. The aftermath of which the child wakes up screaming every night in terror and when the family ask for compensation for medical bills, they refuse

Your video, Ramming a 9 ton sailboat into a rock ledge at 9 mph, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Garbage truck rams tow truck carrying a car, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think it rammed the car, which spun the tow truck over.

I think it will really come down to pricing. If it has really good price, and when you want some part to be upgraded (like a better camera, more ram, better screen) and the parts are cheap, then I think it's definitely worth it.