Pixiq

I’m beginning to like this guy!

It’s not illegal to be annoying.

Great guy

everyone thinks they have the right to not be filmed. you can only ask that you not be filmed, but you can’t have a physical confrontation about it. No sir – then you’re the one breaking the law.

Keep your hands off of people’s cameras, america!

I live in manhattan and you have to just accept that there are cameras everywhere. I must be in hundreds of pictures that tourists have taken, since I live right by Times Square. You just ignore it. Honestly, I don’t understand why people are so upset with being filmed or photographed.

I am too Happy Tinfoil Cat!

Hey Carlos thanx for the fair write-up……I ask that people friend me on facebook and twitter and subscribe to my youtube channel, to be updated as i post new vids…..on facebook i usually post pics from throughout my day……much love everyone and big gay hugz and big wet gay kisses! xo

http://www.joeyboots.com
Joey Boots recently posted..Life has been exciting!

If someone is acting in a obnoxious way in public other people have a right to point it out, holding a camera or not. This guy in my opinion is just plain obnoxious and his being a Cuddly bear cub doest change the fact he was acting like a Perv when he was a few feet from that young ballerinas behind. Grandma is going to yell at him for simply not having any class. It Goes both ways. Just my Opinion.

This jackass is like the guy who yells fire in a crowded theater. No law is perfect, not even the 1st amendment. So someone can always find a way to push the limit in an irresponsible manner and get people to want a new law passed. By pushing the envelope to the limit, he simply is giving people a reason to put limits on photography. Bothering the girl with the dog wasn’t about photography either. Calling the cops and filming the interaction might have been. But he was just looking to harass her.

Actually it is against the law to yell fire in a crowded theater.

On the other hand if people want to try and do a photoshoot in public then they have to know that the same rights they have to take pictures of their model gives others the same right. If they want to have it be private then find somewhere that is private.

Goobers all around. ha ha

I like this guy. New Yorkers, and the way they talk is a world unto itself.
Rob recently posted..Custom Camera Strap For Sale On eBay

What do you yell at a crowded camel-toe?

@Pinandpuller – Make me a sandwich.

joey boots for president!

I think this is the only thing keeping Boots off the blow and out of rehab. It’s healthier for him than what he was doing previously.

Note that Joey Boots is not that much of a regular on the Stern Show. He is not a regular cast member, to clarify. He is a borderline wack packer, not that this is a bad thing.

“But he was just looking to harass her.”

Harassment is entertainment. Mainstream television shows feature pranks and public displays of annoyance all the time.

I’m not sure whether to like Dr. Boots or not.

In his favor, he is providing a legitimate service by drawing attention to photographer’s rights and to people behaving badly in public.

On the other hand, he’s not exactly behaving well himself: he’s actively seeking out and insulting complete strangers. That kind of behavior doesn’t help a thing, makes him look like a real jerk, and could give photographer’s right activists generally a bad name by association.

Boots, the Vigilante Videographer!

You should have a sidebar just for his stuff. The comic relief is invaluable!!
Peter Greene recently posted..Lake Oswego Chefs Grow and Gather Dinnerjpg by Peter Greene

Ooh, I like him CM. He’s in your face and not afraid to go pound for pound with people. Especially love the video with the lady screaming, “Security!”. It’s like how comical and typical can you get?

Rules are rules…

Actually calling that loser on the bike Goober is an insult to one of the greatest tv characters of all time.

I wouldn’t give that guy any attention. He’s a complete douche bag, regardless of whether or not he is in the right. He isn’t even photographer, he’s a vigilante. He has no interest in photography for honesty and truth, only in harassment and verbal abuse.

While he has the right to film people in public, it doesn’t mean his isn’t a asshole for doing it. Yes, you have the right to film people, like the girl in the park with her dog, and put it on the internet if you want. But as a common courtesy to your fellow citizen, you should respect their privacy and not put them on the internet for something as trivial as having their dog where it shouldn’t be. The one-time violation of a minor rule hardly seems comparable to the punishment of global shaming on the Internet. Wouldn’t that same scenario without the video camera and Internet exposure had a similar effect of informing the girl of the rules? What a dick.

Decency and legality sometimes aren’t in agreement.

This clown is no different than somebody who farts in an elevator … there’s no law against it, but it’s infuriating, and you’d like to just rip their skull out through their nose.

@Eric, if you get that angry because of simple flatulence, you should really look into anger management. it really isn’t healthy.

I agree with Eric

Eric // Aug 30, 2010 at 6:36 PM
… there’s no law against it, but it’s infuriating, and you’d like to just rip their skull out through their nose.
**************
What the hell …! You are so such like an animal. You want to rip their skull because of simple air out-take from human body.

The god damn me me me me me attitude ruins American society.

I work in Times Sqaure and watched this unfold. The girl was getting a professional shoot done and this trash was zooming in and out and making her feel uncomfortable. He was called out on it and asked to stop and didn’t like it. Tried to ruin the shoot. Police escorted him away.

Showing her pussy in public is called professional while taking video her ass is called trash!

What the …

Joey Boots is my hero!

Sorry, but I think Joey Boots is an ass. Sometimes his behavior, while technically legal, is clearly intimidating and hostile, and borders on stalking. This man is not a first amendment champion. He is a creepy stalker. If I were to follow someone down the street WITHOUT a video camera, invading their personal space, staring at them, repeatedly challenging them or asking provocative, baiting questions, I would be accused of stalking and harassment. Why does a video camera suddenly make that behavior OK?
Look, I love PINAC and I’m all for holding public officials accountable and I support the first amendment. But the way Boots chooses to exercise his first amendment rights doesn’t do much to advance the cause. While I don’t have much sympathy for the girl posing for photographs in Times Square, I often sympathize with the targets of Boots’ video harassment. In their place, I would feel very uncomfortable and want to be left alone.

@squinty

That’s what I was thinking. At what point does following someone around and getting in their face in a confrontational manner cross the line into stalking and harassment? When does the harassment alone become an actionable (or illegal) offense?

Perhaps Johnny or oscar could shed some light on the legalities of this type of behavior. I’m sure at some point, following and bating someone reaches a point that it can be legally considered harassment.

I love all these ignorant people talking about how the girl is showing off too much and dressed inappropriately. I also love the idiots asking why she couldn’t do this shoot in a studio or another location. It’s obvious they wanted the shot with times sqaure in the background and it was a professional photoshoot. If the pathetic excuse for a man was doing nothing wrong videoing then why did the mother and a complete stranger pick up on the fact that he was filming her inappropriately?

The fact remains that her pictures in all spreadeagle glory are available on the professional photographer’s website. whoever was picking a fight with Boots just didn’t want HIM taking pictures. It’s hypocrisy, and dumb, because by making a big deal out of him filming now EVERYONE can see the girl, both in the professional pictures and in the video that Boots took.

internet white knights… take heed at what happened to the bike white knight.

For those interested, here is one of the photos from the actual “professional” shoot: http://johnpylephotography.com/blog/content/images/upimage_1279155709_12... warning, this may not be safe for work in 25-35 states depending on your place of employment.

For those interested, here is one of the photos from the actual “professional” shoot:

http://johnpylephotography.com/blog/content/images/upimage_1279155709_12...

Come on this photo is nowhere near what Boots was attempting to do. I’m starting to think some of you have some serious issues with young women with athletic ability. This girl has some talent but I guess PINAC readers think she should be at home and wearing a burka, and the fact that she’s not means she’s a piece of meat deserving of zero respect.

Florida,

Which portion of the picture you look at most?

@ongtroi
“Which portion of the picture you look at most?”

Ha, ha! Does anyone remember that movie “Looker,” where the computer tracks where Albert Finney’s character is looking during a series of ads?

okay, here’s a fat gay dude with waaaay to much time on his hands. this is a prime example of why “vigilante videographers” are going to ruin it for those who actually have purpose. I’m just visualizing one day when Joey Bootie gets a tazer in the balls for accosting someone on the street for his version of “Street Justice”….

What was that phrase that one of the problems with protecting people’s rights in democracy is that we often have to protect the rights of those we disagree with?

Everyone who thinks Boots was wrong, a douche, and shouldn’t have taken video of the girl…is just flat out wrong. Constrain/remove his rights and it is then a few short steps to having your rights constrained/removed. Don’t be a bunch of pussies, stand up and fight for your rights even if it means sometime people are going to use those rights in ways you don’t agree with.
Steve Verdon recently posted..Tweet of the Day

Let’s have some cameras tape him in his favorite gay bar and post the results on youtube as people call his junk a “goober”. It is likely the size of a peanut when aroused. The man knows his goobers after all.

As for the Times Square shoot, if you’re going to do something in public you have no expectation of privacy. It doesn’t get much more “public” than Times Square, does it? If you do something in public that’s likely to attract attention, there’s not much you can do or say about the attention you receive. Of course, Boots’ behavior also strains the limits of what’s acceptable public behavior. His filming of the girl’s crotch was the equivalent of a creepy guy staring at a woman’s cleavage on the subway. It’s wrong to expect privacy in a public space, but it’s customary to expect people to mind their own business in shared spaces.

Actually, the slow guy from the Andy Griffith Show was Gomer, not Goober. Just an FYI.

Why do you have to insult gays bu comparing this guy to them, ‘goober’!!

Well looks like the videos were taken down, anyone know what youtube law they broke?

@Scott: The law of youtube being douche bags, youboob is a law unto themselves. It’s a private place that allows public access, their place their rules.

Some idiot complained and they shut him down. He now has another youtube channel, he has reposted heaps of videos:

http://www.youtube.com/user/joeybootsnyc