Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on June 15, 2018, 11:13:11 AM
-
Good that the UK govt is backing this being made illegal in England and Wales
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jun/15/upskirting-to-become-a-criminal-offence-punishable-by-two-years-in-jail
-
Yep.
-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/154641658@N06/42813488731/in/dateposted-public/
-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/154641658@N06/42813488731/in/dateposted-public/
But the Marilyn Monroe character deliberately stood on the subway vent in The Seven Year itch. Nobody was following her with a camera on a selfie stick ...
-
And it is blocked by just one Tory - words fail me!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427
-
Yes, was just about to post the same link. Quite unbelievable
-
This is the culprit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope
Not surprisingly his wiki page is subject to some annoyed editing
-
And he was working in conjunction with the odious Philip Davies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Davies
-
And the odious Davies then filibustered this PMB covering use of force in mental health units
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/health-and-care/illnesstreatments/opinion/house-commons/94458/steve-reed-mp-treat-mental
-
And the odious Davies then filibustered this PMB covering use of force in mental health units
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/health-and-care/illnesstreatments/opinion/house-commons/94458/steve-reed-mp-treat-mental
So, he admires Donald Trump and is a complete break Brexiteer. His record makes him seem to be a fifth-columnist for the BNP. Why hasn't his constituency Tory Party not deselected him? He brings them no glory.
-
Good that the UK govt is backing this being made illegal in England and Wales
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jun/15/upskirting-to-become-a-criminal-offence-punishable-by-two-years-in-jail
My first reaction was: "is it not illegal already?"
-
So, he admires Donald Trump and is a complete break Brexiteer. His record makes him seem to be a fifth-columnist for the BNP. Why hasn't his constituency Tory Party not deselected him? He brings them no glory.
The constituency party probably has a number of Trump admirers and complete break Brexiteers in it.
-
This is the culprit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope
Not surprisingly his wiki page is subject to some annoyed editing
I see he has got form
On 12 March 2010, he was responsible for the blocking of a bill to protect poor countries from "vulture funds", despite his party's support for the bill.[14]
On 11 October 2011, Chope raised an eleventh-hour objection to the Hillsborough debate taking place because he believed a debate about MPs' pensions was more important. Cries of "shame" echoed around the chamber and Labour MP Jamie Reed said that the perpetrator should be "named and shamed" for raising the objection.[15]
In December 2013 Chope objected[16][17] to the second reading of the Alan Turing (Statutory Pardon) Bill in the House of Commons. Because of this, the Government decided to act under the royal prerogative of mercy. On 24 December 2013 Queen Elizabeth II granted Turing a free pardon.[18][19]
He came under criticism in late 2014 for repeatedly blocking a bill that would ban the use of wild animals in circus performances, justifying his actions by saying "The EU Membership Costs and Benefits bill should have been called by the clerk before the circuses bill, so I raised a point of order".[20]
On 28 November 2014 Chope, a private landlord, filibustered a Liberal Democrat bill with cross party support intended to make revenge evictions an offence.[21]
In October 2015, Chope joined fellow Conservative members Philip Davies and David Nuttall in extended speeches, known as a filibuster, against a private member's bill that would have placed restrictions on hospital parking charges for carers. Their actions caused the bill to run out of time.[22]
On 15 June 2018 Chope blocked the passage of a private member's bill that would have made upskirting a specific offence by calling "object" in the House of Commons, which drew immediate criticism from fellow MPs, including some in his own party. Chope also forced a delay to final debate on the 'Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill', or Seni's Law
-
But the Marilyn Monroe character deliberately stood on the subway vent in The Seven Year itch. Nobody was following her with a camera on a selfie stick ...
Firstly, no she didn't. It was completely unexpected, and took everyone by surprise, but they decided to keep it in.
Secondly, I was being a touch light-hearted: you're taking it too seriously.
-
Firstly, no she didn't. It was completely unexpected, and took everyone by surprise, but they decided to keep it in.
Secondly, I was being a touch light-hearted: you're taking it too seriously.
Taking what too seriously?
-
Taking what too seriously?
My post, which contained a link to the famous shot of Marilyn Monroe hlding down her skirt, in 'Seven Year Itch'. Not the issue of upskirting, which is serious.
-
There was a lively exchange on Five Live last night with a former MP, a writer who had had a most unpleasant experience of this photographing when she was 15, another woman, and Stephen Nolan. The writer wanted the MP to agree that Christopher Chope's action was disgusting, but after some to-ing and fro-ing, he explained why to use that kind of word would not be helpful or correct behaviour for MPs. And the others had to agree because his explanation was sensible. This did not mean that the former MP thought that particular amendment to some previous bill should have been rejected, on the contrary, he thought it was a necessary amendment.
-
I think that the focus has been on the wrong piece of legislation.
It’s not actually hard to follow Chope’s argument. This is a piece of legislation that will result in people going to jail and being placed on the sex offender’s register, and being a caricature Tory he doesn’t know what upskirting is. According to reports he’s agreed to meet Gina Martin so she can explain that one. It’s not right and it is unnecessary, but I can at least understand the POV that the legislation needs proper scrutiny. And the government will get this law passed one way or another, even if they have to add it to another piece of existing legislation rather than as a private members bill.
Far more difficult to understand is the talking out of the proposed changes to the MH Act (‘Seni’s Law’); I’m not sure what there is to object to. To just add to it the young man’s family were there watching.
-
Good that the UK govt is backing this being made illegal in England and Wales
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jun/15/upskirting-to-become-a-criminal-offence-punishable-by-two-years-in-jail
And tgere was me thinking only little boys looked up girls skirts. Some weird people about.
-
And tgere was me thinking only little boys looked up girls skirts. Some weird people about.
It’s just another way to shame women. It’s as much a power thing as anything else. Haters gonna hate.
-
It’s just another way to shame women. It’s as much a power thing as anything else. Haters gonna hate.
Men can't help looking at women nor visa versa we all, well most of us, have the organ stops eye moments there's a certain amount of healthy humour connected with this condition that a lot of us subscribe to, I can't think of any kind of humorous exchange about upskirting with cameras etc, to me this upskirting is so utterly distasteful.
Regards to all, ippy.
-
It’s just another way to shame women. It’s as much a power thing as anything else. Haters gonna hate.
Actually, I think it's some sort of weird sexual thing. The shaming is a byproduct.
Well, at least that's my guess. It's pretty much impossible to research motivation for up skirting on the internet.
-
I suspect it's 90% silly boys who think it's a big joke, and 10% pathetic perverts.
-
Actually, I think it's some sort of weird sexual thing. The shaming is a byproduct.
Well, at least that's my guess. It's pretty much impossible to research motivation for up skirting on the internet.
As o understand it most sex crime is about power and shaming.
-
I'd never heard of such a thing before but now that I have, I'm horrified, especially after reading this:-
"There have been a number of convictions recently, including that of Andrew Macrae, who was vice-president of ticketing company Live Nation. He was found to have amassed 50,000 images of strangers for his sexual gratification.
He was caught by an off-duty police officer who noticed a pen-shaped camera in a laptop bag that Macrae had placed between a woman’s legs at Clapham Junction station."
Yeuch!
-
I'd never heard of such a thing before but now that I have, I'm horrified, especially after reading this:-
"There have been a number of convictions recently, including that of Andrew Macrae, who was vice-president of ticketing company Live Nation. He was found to have amassed 50,000 images of strangers for his sexual gratification.
He was caught by an off-duty police officer who noticed a pen-shaped camera in a laptop bag that Macrae had placed between a woman’s legs at Clapham Junction station."
Yeuch!
If there have been a number of convictions, it must already be a crime, so why the new bill?
-
If there have been a number of convictions, it must already be a crime, so why the new bill?
Good point, Steve.
Politicians do like "to send a message" to people about things they consider important. However, this action is frequently a waste of time because it ignores the fact communication is a two-way process: there is no point in transmitting a message if the receiver is switched off.
-
If there have been a number of convictions, it must already be a crime, so why the new bill?
He was convicted for the voyeurism bits from his list of crimes. The upskirt stuff that he did is not covered by that legislation.
-
The thing about the voyeurism law is that it only applies in places where 'the victim can expect privacy'. It would apply to a bedroom, bathroom, public changing room, or office, but not necessarily a tube train or a concert.
https://www.localsolicitors.com/criminal-guides/voyeurism-laws-and-offences
As Seb says, MacRae's conviction comes from what he did to women in his home and in the workplace.
And there is also no right to privacy over the images taken by up skirting as the law stands, so they can be shared without penalty.
-
The thing about the voyeurism law is that it only applies in places where 'the victim can expect privacy'. It would apply to a bedroom, bathroom, public changing room, or office, but not necessarily a tube train or a concert.
https://www.localsolicitors.com/criminal-guides/voyeurism-laws-and-offences
As Seb says, MacRae's conviction comes from what he did to women in his home and in the workplace.
And there is also no right to privacy over the images taken by up skirting as the law stands, so they can be shared without penalty.
. . . and, regrettably, frequently are!
-
good reply to very silly article in The Spectator
https://thesecretbarrister.com
-
The delay may actually be a fantastic opportunity.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/21/call-for-upskirting-bill-to-include-deepfake-pornography-ban
-
I dislike all Tories, and I especially dislike the elderly, male, Bufton-Tufton types like Chope, but on reflection I think he has a valid point. He says he doesn't object to the principle of the bill, but thinks all bills should be subject to proper debate. I think he's right: some thoroughly bad bills have become law (not this one necessarily) on a wave of popular sentiment. The Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme ("Sarah's Law"), which allows parents and guardians to find out if people on the sex offender's register are near them, is, arguably, a case in point: it encourages vigilante actions, and drives paedophiles underground, at least arguably: I don't know whether that has happened in practice. I distrust any law popularly known as "[Name]'s Law".
-
Except his argument and indeed his behaviour on such things doesn't make much sense here. First of all in conjunction with the odious Philip Davies, Chope filibusters in the second reading debates which is surely reducing the debate that he actually wants. Second the bills are not passed at this stage, they have to go through committee when amendments can be made, and then come back to the House at which time the govt can give more time to adequately debate the bill, and then onto the HoL. In the end the question is not so much about debate but about scrutiny.
It may well be that there isn't time to debate some bills, but that's true across the board, and Sarah's Law, iirc, wasn't a Private Members Bill. Further Chope doesn't oppose all PMB's, which if it was a principle, you would expect him to.