Naked woman shoots gun on California highway.

Packerjohn said:
No wonder there is a general feeling that all the people in California are crazy. I know that it's not true. They are not ALL crazy. Just some!

What I found real interesting is that her image was totally blurred out. Just proves how prudish Canadians and Americans are. They are scared of images of naked people but it's OK in movies and certain magazines. Sort of "forbidden fruit" for North Americans. I think I'm with the French: nothing wrong with bare breasts on the beach. Makes being a beachcomber a rather interesting past time.
Click to expand...
Why show private body parts on news broadcasts where kids can see. Makes no Journalistic sense, and obviously the program editor thought the same.
 
ohioboy said:
Why show private body parts on news broadcasts where kids can see. Makes no Journalistic sense, and obviously the program editor thought the same.
Click to expand...
What's the problem with kids seeing private body parts? :unsure:

I recall when Timberlake created a clothing mishap during a halftime Super Bowl show exposing one of Janet Jackson's nipples. There was this big uproar by some prudish Americans. It seemed absolutely ridiculous since every kid should know what a nipple is.
 
WhatInThe said:
Apparently she started the incident by stopping the car on the highway and got out with clothes and a knife screaming. Lucky just stopping her car on a busy highway adidn't cause a multi car pile up type accident. She then drove to a toll plaza at which point she exited the car with no clothes and a gun.

https://nypost.com/2023/07/27/naked-woman-who-shot-up-california-highway-under-evaluation/

It wasn't noted if she had shoes on but no shoes on asphalt in summer not good.
Click to expand...
Maybe she was hot and she couldn't take it anymore. (joking!)
 
Last edited:
Nosy Bee-54 said:
What's the problem with kids seeing private body parts? :unsure:

I recall when Timberlake created a clothing mishap during a halftime Super Bowl show exposing one of Janet Jackson's nipples. There was this big uproar by some prudish Americans. It seemed absolutely ridiculous since every kid should know what a nipple is.
Click to expand...
Canadians have a strange "dance" with being prudish. They like to watch naked women but they do it in "SECRET."
 
ohioboy said:
Why show private body parts on news broadcasts where kids can see. Makes no Journalistic sense, and obviously the program editor thought the same.
Click to expand...
Those were my same thoughts which I posted about on the first page. It makes far more sense to edit that part out since the fact that she was naked wasn’t the most important part. The fact that she was on a highway shooting off a gun at oncoming cars was.
Nosy Bee-54 said:
What's the problem with kids seeing private body parts? :unsure:
Click to expand...
It’s a news report not a peep show. Not only should kids not see it but neither should anyone. The reporter did a professionally job by editing all that.

This was in California not Canada.
 
PeppermintPatty said:
Don’t worry about it. I thought maybe it was something you could answer off the top of your head type of thing. Please don’t go out if your way. It’s not that big a deal.
Click to expand...
No big issue PP. The general answer is, yes, a reporter can be fined if he or she had prior knowledge of a potential violation but broadcast it anyway.

Here is SC case that helps explain it better. Concerning the non working link, it even mentions the Janet Jackson half time episode. Since it was "live tv", it appeared no one knew about it but Janet and Justin, hard to fine the Network.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supreme...BC-affiliated stations that aired the episode.
 
ohioboy said:
No big issue PP. The general answer is, yes, a reporter can be fined if he or she had prior knowledge of a potential violation but broadcast it anyway.

Here is SC case that helps explain it better. Concerning the non working link, it even mentions the Janet Jackson half time episode. Since it was "live tv", it appeared no one knew about it but Janet and Justin, hard to fine the Network.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/10-1293#:~:text=FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.,the 45 ABC-affiliated stations that aired the episode.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That’s seems fair enough and gives plenty good reason not to expose more in the news than need be.

Janet Jackson’s case is accidental since it was a costume failure so that would be hard to not show especially if it was a live show.
 
Lewkat said:
Each state and county should have psychiatric institutions, and the streets cleaned up by responsible judges remanding the offenders to the proper institutions.
Click to expand...
I think there are psychiatric institutions in every county--every state for sure anyway--but unfortunately, it all too often happens as it did in my state in the 1980s when our g0vernor decided remanding people to mental institutions was infringing on their rights. So a huge amount of people were kicked out of said institutions thus starting this state's homeless problem. And our high housing costs have only made it worse.
 
In our neighborhood was a young woman who was completely naked at a gas station and after filling her tank drove on the motorway in the wrong direction causing a fatal accident. The staff at the gas station didn't call the police although the woman was naked. Strange, isn't it?
 
Back
Top