Recently, one of your citizens while out and about caught the eyes of passers by as she adorned a rather ostentatious costume inspired by Britney Pears, complete with leotard and tropical fruit hat. The photos circulated on various social media platforms and now the young lady seeks justice. She claims the “excessive” amount of photos taken were burdensome and posed an infringement of her portrait rights. In the absence of specific laws relating to this issue, the public is divided on how to proceed.
1. “She chose to wear such a ridiculous outfit – so she must have wanted photos taken,” exclaims camera shop owner @@RANDOMNAME@@. “Hyper regulation and sensitivity is not the answer. People have a right to take photos of what they like, when they like. Hey, while we’re at it, @@LEADER@@, say cheese!”
Effect: peeping Toms are applauded as they photograph half-dressed young women through bedroom windows
2a [only valid for nations without religion banned]. Concerned churchgoer @@RANDOMNAME@@ interrupts. “If people would stop dressing so aggressively flamboyant then we wouldn’t have this issue in the first place! We should introduce strict rules on what people are and are not allowed to wear out. If not in the name of God then at least for a little modesty! You could even model for us state-ordained outfits, @@LEADER@@; more people would benefit from emulating your style.”
Effect: anyone caught with a Mo-hawk mysteriously disappears
2b [only valid for nations with religion banned]. Concerned senior citizen @@RANDOMNAME@@ interrupts. “If people would stop dressing so aggressively flamboyant then we wouldn’t have this issue in the first place! We should introduce strict rules on what people are and are not allowed to wear out. Why can't we just go back to the good old days when ankles were sexy? Say, @@LEADER@@, you've got a fine pair yourself!"
Effect: anyone caught with a Mo-hawk mysteriously disappears
3. Your power-hungry police chief, @@RANDOMNAME@@, enters the room. “I have a better idea. Let's ban taking someone's photograph without their permission, unless that activity relates to matters such as law enforcement, journalism or reasonable promotion of the public good. OK, we might annoy a few tourists, but you can trust our fine nation's police force to use our honest and fair discretion. Plus a few more arrests every so often always looks good on my record… oops, did I say that out loud?”
Effect: pointing a phone near someone’s face almost always results in being arrested
4. “Banning public photos is not the answer,“ prominent public defence lawyer @@RANDOMNAME@@ asserts. “Photographing people is different from photographing a public landscape which happens to have people in it. Photos in public places are fine so long as the focus is not targeting a specific individual. Each case will be different but we can use our common sense and better judgment to assess the photographer's intent. We should punish those responsible for harassing this lady and many others by establishing formal legal precedent.”
Effect: birdwatcher's photos often include incidental cleavage