unfortunately the supreme court disagrees with our camera argument. Their view is that if you wander out into public, you're willing allowing yourself and your actions to be viewed by the general public. That same general public can take pictures of anything they see just as easily as they can sit back and view it with their naked eye. Quite honestly I don't want to live in a world where that kind of openness is illegal, and I conduct my actions in public accordingly.
To my mind there is a difference between my actions being seen by eye and those actions being preserved for all time on a permanent record (film)
without my consent or even my knowledge. The mindset that considers it ok to record people's movements in a clandestine manner (taking pictures without asking) even if the intent isn't clandestine smacks of "Big Brother" thinking. And that is what doesn't sit well with me. And the Supreme Court and Big Brother are the same thing.
Consider this....... supposing I scratch my butt when I think no one is looking but ONE person sees me do it. That one person either is disgusted or finds it funny. Now what if that person catches my butt scratching on video and shows it to the entire neighborhood? All of a sudden the whole world has access to something that should have been restricted to.... if you weren't there to see it you don't need to know about it. Big difference... the mindset that goes with those cameras is just plain
wrong! Sneaky camera operators are nothing more than high tech peeping Toms.
Back to the stupid people who allowed the child access to the gun........ Unfortunately there is always a small percentage of fools in every segment of society. Those fools will always do stupid stuff that puts everyone else in a bad light. And there will always be another segment of society that wants to squash the other segment... read that as gun owners being one segment and anti-gunners being the other.... and they will jump on any small or large incident in order to prove their point. All this is just human nature and I ran into the same kind of thing with motorcycles... every motorcycle wreck proved to anti-motorcyclists that motorcycles should be outlawed... every idiot who tore up a hillside with an off road motorcycle proved off road motorcycles destroy the environment and should be outlawed.
It's the same old baloney where the implement (gun or bike) becomes the target for new laws instead of addressing the fact that a small percentage of
people are idiots and the
people involved should be taken to task for their actions.
Ok.... I'm gonna step offa my soapbox.
