I was reading today how Prince William's girlfriend is being hounded by aggressive paparazzi, and the royal family fears the tragic repeat of what happened to Princess Di when paparazzi were chasing her vehicle. Do you folks believe that deadly force, even firing at the paparazzi should be allowed to ensure the safety of such people. I understand that paparazzi are doing their jobs, but they are putting the lives of their subjects at a great risk.
2007-01-08 05:09:02 · 7 answers · asked by shlangemann 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The problem with punching the guy and smashing his camera has resulted in many lawsuits, in which the photographer wins a huge settelement, yet he is the one who was harrasing the celebrity. This is a big problem here in the USA among Hollywood actors and other celebrities, who are constantly hauled into court for getting physical with aggresive papparazzi
2007-01-09 04:58:22 · update #1
No...not a good idea.
And what happened to Diana is horrible....but her driver who was very drunk certainly contributed to her demise.
2007-01-08 05:15:59 · answer #1 · answered by kissmybum 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Paparazzi should be subject to the same rules and restrictions that govern us, and the same consequences. Most people go to jail for stalking, it is not a capital offense.
Of course, paparazzi try to justify their position by stating that celebrities sacrafice their right to privacy simply by being celebrities.
But this wrongheaded excuse for stalking is just that: an excuse, and they should be prosecuted for stalking, tresspassing etc every bit as aggressively as anyone else, but no more. The lives of celebrities are worth no more or less than yours or mine.
2007-01-08 05:24:37 · answer #2 · answered by Rob 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How exactly does taking ones picture endanger their lives? Princess Diana died because her driver was going 100 mph in a tunnel. Maybe if people don't like paparazzi they should stop buying tabloids.
2007-01-08 05:21:51 · answer #3 · answered by Fire_God_69 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think deadly force is a bit too much. I think something a little less drastic, like punching them or damaging their cameras would be more acceptable. If someone is in fear of being in the hospital or losing a $2000.00 camera, they'd think twice about snapping a picture.
2007-01-08 05:30:33 · answer #4 · answered by c.s. 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you have not any way of telling if someone is chance free or no longer. you may see a cop attempting to wrestle off a guy it really is extreme on meth and imagine that they are beating up a defenseless homeless guy. Police brutality is extremely puffed up by way of the media. human beings like to hate police officials and the media receives very extreme ratings even as they warfare to reveal it.
2016-12-28 09:51:37 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lethal force no...but i think they should tell those idiots to back off only once and then be able to have the arrested or arrest them....
2007-01-08 05:18:10 · answer #6 · answered by eonetiller 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The other stalkers would just shoot pictures of that to sell.
2007-01-08 05:15:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋