Camera Phone Law

[daleduke17]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c111dbr2af::

And this is the most important thing Rep. King has to worry about?

Edit: And he's a Republican? That sounds more like a Democrat's idea.

[Greenday]

Link doesn't work.

[daleduke17]

HR 414 "Camera Phone Predator Alert Act"

A BILL

To require mobile phones containing digital cameras to make a sound when a photograph is taken.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Camera Phone Predator Alert Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDING.

Congress finds that children and adolescents have been exploited by photographs taken in dressing rooms and public places with the use of a camera phone.

SEC. 3. AUDIBLE SOUND STANDARD.

(a) Requirement- Beginning 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, any mobile phone containing a digital camera that is manufactured for sale in the United States shall sound a tone or other sound audible within a reasonable radius of the phone whenever a photograph is taken with the camera in such phone. A mobile phone manufactured after such date shall not be equipped with a means of disabling or silencing such tone or sound.

(b) Enforcement by Consumer Product Safety Commission- The requirement in subsection (a) shall be treated as a consumer product safety standard promulgated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission under section 7 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2056). A violation of subsection (a) shall be enforced by the Commission under section 19 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 2068).

[anriana]

"Children and adolescents?" I'm sure that has happened, but the only context I've heard this in is with upskirt photos, which the Supreme Court just ruled are legal. This seems like an interesting way to counter that ruling.

[Sylvia727]

Utter bullshit. There are not so many predators running around that the entire population has to sacrifice their privacy. I would really like to see the "findings" that expose all these dangerous predators in our children's dressing rooms. The bill doesn't require this for normal cameras either, which means that technology is fine so long as you don't combine your gadgets into one, or something, what? If this passes, which I highly doubt, I'll be buying the shiniest non-sounding phone I can find and then maintaining it until the plastic disintegrates under the weight of years. Yes, I am stubborn, why do you ask?

BUT THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

ETA: I'm not surprised this is a Republican; the Patriot Act, anyone? Liberal and conservative are on a different axis than authoritarian and libertarian.

[Greenday]

Oh, wow, that's just stupid as hell. Why not make a low that's enforceable and works? I'll just continue to keep the sound off from when I take pictures with my phone. The sound is annoying as crap.

[Rapscallion]

From what I understand, the majority of child abuse (including photographs etc) is by members of the family and the children involved know about it, though they may not necessarily understand it. I may be wrong, but I don't think I am, and as such I doubt this is going to make any noticeable difference.

Rapscallion

[crazylegs]

I doubt this is going to make any noticeable difference.

No, it won't. What it will do is make the originator look tough on child protection issues without having to spend and money whatsoever.

[Sylvia727]

Or it will make the originator look like an incompetant peacock more interested in fluffing his feathers than getting any real work done. Oh yeah, and his "feather fluffing" makes literally millions of people's lives minutely more frustrating and irritating while fractionally eroding the rights of privacy and personal responsibility, without accomplishing anything worthwhile.

There are very, very few predators taking pictures with camera phones in dressing rooms, and most of their victims are adult women. The majority of victimization occurs from someone you know, and that's even higher for children than it is for adults. I want to see the study that found such alarming numbers of predators in our children's locker rooms. It cannot be legitimate and ethical if it finds this. More likely, it dances around the actual topic and the bill takes its statements even further out of context.

[daleduke17]

No, it won't. What it will do is make the originator look tough on child protection issues without having to spend and money whatsoever.

Sounds like someone wants to up his resume for reelection.

[PepperElf]

i'm jsut horrified that congress approved the practice of taking up-skirt photos of unwilling targets

it's one thing to take a photo of someone in public
but to purposefully look up the skirt to see the panties against their will?
and then have congress say "it's ok" WTF?

[anriana]

i'm jsut horrified that congress approved the practice of taking up-skirt photos of unwilling targets

it's one thing to take a photo of someone in public
but to purposefully look up the skirt to see the panties against their will?
and then have congress say "it's ok" WTF?

As far as I know Congress didn't approve the practice, the Supreme Court ruled that it wasn't illegal.

[bandita]

There are very, very few predators taking pictures with camera phones in dressing rooms, and most of their victims are adult women. The majority of victimization occurs from someone you know, and that's even higher for children than it is for adults. I want to see the study that found such alarming numbers of predators in our children's locker rooms. It cannot be legitimate and ethical if it finds this. More likely, it dances around the actual topic and the bill takes its statements even further out of context.

But there are plenty of horrid highschool bitches and horny guys who absolutely ADORE snapping naked shots of girls in the locker room and then posting them on the internet without their knowledge. Just saying.

I doubt this will actually pass, and even if it does, I don't see it preventing creepers from ogling children with regular cameras.

[Sylvia727]

While I'm sure that's true, that's bullying, not necessarily sexual predation. High school bullying is a whole 'nother rant. However, the victims of camera phone bullies should have a safe appeal within their school. Even with those incidents added in to the score, I highly doubt that the numbers are high enough to justify eroding the freedom and privacy of the population of an entire nation.

[otakuneko]

People will find a way to disable it anyway.

This also has been law in Japan for quite some time.