Posting a video online of someone doing something in public is in no way, shape or form an invasion of privacy, either legally or morally. And when the public behavior is a crime for which public shaming is going to be more important to making her and others start acting like human beings than whatever weak ass crap the legal system can do about it, not posting it online would be a crime.
And, as an added bonus, posting it online resulted in you demonstrating your own pathetic public behavior so we can mock you for being an amoral fucktard.
Nope, sorry. The right to privacy is an inviolable right, enshrined not only in UK law:
But also in the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights:
See above. Just because I do something stupid in public does NOT give anyone the right to reveal my personal information.
Consequences are to be doled out by the proper authorities, not some shitheads hiding behind computer screens. This is just basic common sense.
Posting a video online of someone doing something in public is in no way, shape or form an invasion of privacy, either legally or morally
If you say so. From the link above:
“Now photographs taken of people in both private and public places, or information obtained about a person’s activities from another person may be treated as confidential. A person may be able to sue where such confidential information is published or used in breach of the implied obligations of confidence.”
Yes, I hereby admit: I have done much worse things than put a cat in a garbage bin. I have hurt people emotionally, I have cheated on ex-girlfriends, I have lead people on the past, I have caused people to lose money, I have caused people pain suffering. Those are worse than putting a cat in a bin. Hell, those are worse than even killing a cat. And I admit to doing all of those. You’re gonna tell me, with a straight face, that you’ve never done anything like that?
Well, shit, I guess I’m the only honest person around here.
Or the only person who doesn’t understand that hurting the defenseless is inherently shittier than fucking with people who have the means to hurt you back.
Honest person… I’ve hurt people emotionally, and most of the time it hasn’t been on purpose. Other than that I’m clean. I’ve caused my parents to lose money I guess, but nothing too drastic.
Just saying…
And if you killed a stranger’s cat, that may trump most of the things you’ve listed.
I watched the video again. She put the cat in a bin, closed the top, and walked away. Several hours later the owner found the cat and removed it unharmed. End of story. That’s shittier than any of the things I said above simply because a human being has the capacity to get me back? Please. If I had to choose between my heart getting broken and being lead on by someone I thought loved me (I’m certainly not proud of what I did. I was 18, I was stupid) and my cat getting put into a garbage can and then rescued several hours later? I’m choosing the cat.
As mentioned, I’ve hurt people’s feelings, I’m sure. I’ve cheated with, but never on. I’ve never screwed anyone out of money, property, etc. I’ve certainly lied. I’m pretty sure I’ve never caused anyone excessive pain or suffering. Maybe I’m just not that cool.
Of course, even the worst of kidneyfailure’s crimes (and mine) were certainly done with an eye toward self interest. Whose interests are served by hurting a random friendly cat? That’s just plain fucked up, and I don’t feel bad that people are now aware that chick is just plain fucked up.
Well, I’m just talking about the video taken on the public street, not the woman’s name and address. I don’t see how images of wrongdoing in public places can be considered privileged personal information.
No, actually you’re wrong. The release of this CCTV footage very probably contravenes the Data Protection Act 1998. And claiming that anything videoed in public is therefore ‘morally’ acceptable to distribute, and cannot possibly breach an individual’s right to privacy from an ethical standpoint, is stupefyingly witless.
We already have a legal system equipped to deal with crimes against animal welfare. God help us if wannabe-vigilante-twats, like you, ever seize control of it.
I don’t know, I’m only going by the facts of this case in which no animal was hurt and a crime (from a legal standpoint) may not have even been comitted. Either way, revealing the video online, rather than just giving it to the police, is a violation of privacy and has caused the woman to experience an even greater level of privacy violation and become the victim of slander, harrassment and character assassination. All of those, as mentioned in the links above, are illegal. Also, just because I may have done something illegal doesn’t give you the right to do something illegal to me. I hope you’re not a lawyer.
Also, led.
Has it already gotten to the point where I’ve shown that this video is an illegal invasion of privacy, that the bin thing was not all that big of a deal, and that it was less disturbing and hurtful than many of the things you yourself have done in the past and, thus, you now have to attack a spelling error? PLEASE. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
He shows a video of someone doing something wrong. Other people are outraged and track down the woman’s info and post it online and begin to harrass her. The original video taker knew exactly what was going to happen, did it anyway, and is therefore an accessory to the harrassment and slander. He should have just taken the footage to the police and let them deal with it legally and confidentially. Instead, he got the Internet involved and what may have just been a minor incident is now international news. I can’t see how his releasing it online can be justified.
Regardless of what you think, Diana, everyone has these things called “human rights” and everyone is under the protection of things called “laws” that protect those human rights. One of those, as shown above, is privacy. Another is the right to not have one’s good name sullied by speculation, slander, libel, etc etc. She probably is a fucked up old mean lady. But she still has the right to due process and the right to not be shittalked for what she did. Sorry if you disagree, but this “human rights” thing is kind of a big deal.
Translation: “I have no other argument, so I’m going to start attacking his spelling. Hyuk!”
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Outside of work I hardly ever pay attention to my spelling, anyway. Mock all you want. I could give a shit.
I do not need to look up “immoral” and “amoral,” thank you. Amorality is not caring about the morality of actions; possibly someone feels that kidneyfailure is amoral because he doesn’t care about the wrong done to the cat and family, or animal abuse generally. I’m not sure that’s the best characterization of fail’s position here, but it’s not a clear misuse of the word.
I doubt he knew “exactly” what would happen. No doubt he hoped that somebody would be able to identify her; that was the point of showing it lots of people, instead of just the police.
No, I don’t hold the cat/camera owner responsible for what other people do with factual information about events in public places. If other people have done something wrong, criticize them.