View Full Version : Change stalking laws? (how much privacy is a celebrity entitled to anyway?)

12-02-2007, 05:30 AM

12-02-2007, 05:59 AM
Hey, if it was me I'd carry a gun with me at all times for self-defense.

No matter how much I hate paparazzis... The fact of the matter is they are doing their "job" as another functioning member of society. Sure, they may stalk celebrities like animals, going through every loop hole in the justice system to invade their privacy and get that shot of them when they thought they were alone. Sure, they may break a hell of a lot of laws on a daily basis to take it upon themselves to destroy another person's life.

But, they are simply the tools of a larger entity. A gun might shoot the person, but somebody has to pull the trigger. We, the people, watch these celebrities on the news, read the newspaper, go into the supermarket and buy the tabloids, complain and support them. If anybody is stalking these people, it is us.

Supply and Demand ladies and gentlemen, Supply and Demand.

The public demands to see the life of the "top" of the human population, so the paparazzi give it to them. We are interested in these celebrities. Whether you love to hate them, or love to love them... You still feed the system that ended up killing Diana, Princess of Wales. The public is responsible for what happens to celebrities through the media, whether they like it or not.

I believe what these celebrities go through is just wrong sometimes. Now, I am speaking for those that become famous, but don't want the attention. Those that do it to bask in their own glory need help of their own. Being stalked on a daily basis through all points in your life, from the day you become famous to your own death is not a welcome thought to me at all, and I doubt most celebrities like being stopped at dinner with their family to talk.

Do I think there should be laws to safeguard them? No.

Why? Because you put laws on the paparazzi, then they will go to further extremes to get the picture. Laws or not, the picture is -going- to get taken, and it is -going- to be on the newsstands tomorrow no matter what happens. Means to an End. The supply goes down, the demand is going to go up. Which means more money per picture. Which means more horror for the celebs out there, and possible people getting hurt or even killed by sheer demand itself. The public will end up doing far, far more harm than help to the people because the public still wants the picture.

Now, you yourself may not care about celebrities. You can shoot down my points, but before you do think carefully on the fact that paparazzi would not stalk these people if the public was not willing to buy the pictures they give us. Some of these pictures can be worth thousands, and thousands of dollars because the masses are willing to pay the media to get themselves more info on the private lives of people they will never become.

12-02-2007, 06:05 AM
I'm with True on this, only way to stop paparazzis is to decrease demand, not likely to happen though

John Galt
12-02-2007, 01:33 PM
As soon as I get a Concealed Carry liscense, I am going to carry a gun everywhere.

Of course, stalking should be illegal(subject to fines and a restraining order), and if they break and enter into your home, you should be allowed to shoot them as burglars.

El Sitherino
12-02-2007, 02:16 PM
It wasn't until dirty tabloids starting doing this, demand became an issue.

People used to be content when they just had average stories, I'm sure it can go back. This stuff came up because journalists were trying to outdo the competition. "Oh you got a shot of Julia at the carpet? I GOT HER IN THE SHOWER!"

They aren't simply doing their job, they're being *******s, plain and simple. Nowhere in their job description are they required to do any of this.

12-02-2007, 02:33 PM
As soon as I get a Concealed Carry license, I am going to carry a gun everywhere. When you get the license you will notice just how many places you can not carry a concealed weapon lawfully. There are places where you can not even leave the gun in your own car legally. Mine pretty much stays in my car, at my business or in my home. The place you might actually need the concealed handgun you are not allowed to carry it; convenient stores, malls, universities, bars or any other business that post that concealed handguns are not allowed. I’m sure the criminals are not obeying the same laws.

I agree with True_Avery it is all about supply and demand. While I agree with El Siherino that the “dirty tabloids” are to blame, the problem is now mainstream with “so called” reputable news outlets and magazines running these stories.

12-02-2007, 02:39 PM
Paparrazzi seem to ruin some people's lives with the rumors they spread...

Web Rider
12-02-2007, 03:05 PM
It wasn't until dirty tabloids starting doing this, demand became an issue.
They aren't simply doing their job, they're being *******s, plain and simple. Nowhere in their job description are they required to do any of this.

Journalists don't have to be asses to get stories, and I'm sure stars would be more than willing to talk to journalists if they simply asked. But they know half these people are just using their photos to spread smear stories, it's disgusting.

If one of these guys happened to get shot by a star, you wouldn't see me care.