Fucking idiots. I don't like Kanye West, but he didn't do anything wrong.
English
-
Kanye didn't do anything wrong? Seriously?
-
No, he didn't. The paparasshole was baiting him. I understand the concept of public space and all, but technically all of these people are stalking celebrities. It's not cool. How would you like to never be able to go anywhere without 20 cameras following you or waiting for you to get there?
-
That's the price of being famous. That doesn't give you the right to touch anyone. He definitely WAS wrong. And you just proved you have no idea what stalking is. If he feels that way he should stay in his house all day every day.
-
Bearbeitet von A Painful Crap: 7/20/2013 2:04:35 AMKanye approached the photographer. The photographer says, "I don't want to fight with you". Kanye throws him to the ground in an attempt to take the camera. How is that baiting him? As much as you may dislike photographers, taking pictures does not give him a reason to attack him and try to steal his camera.
-
Throws him to the ground? Jesus christ, had I not watched the video myself I would think he actually harmed the guy. Oh wait, you're just blowing things out of proportion. I have no problem with photographers, I have a problem with the paparassholes.
-
In one thread you're against "verbal abuse" on the Internet. In this thread you're like, "it's ok to grab someone and attempt to take their camera".
-
It's totally different. Verbal abuse on the internet is only there to put people down. Kanye may have acted out of frustration, but in my opinion, he was justified because this is crap celebrities have to put up with 24/7 purely because people have nothing better to do than pry into their lives. He can't mute paparassholes and say out of sight out of mind. For whatever idiotic reason, the law protects them over his own right to pursue happiness, which for most people doesn't include having every pit stop they make photographed by people trying to make a quick buck. The outrage over the NSA shows that nobody wants to be tracked to this extent. What he did may have been lawfully wrong, but it doesn't mean the law is morally right.
-
It is different. But I just find it interesting that you're ok with it. These paparazzi take photos of famous people because most people have nothing better to do but watch tmz or read gossip. In this video, the guy was trying to talk to Kanye and was backing away from Kanye and then Kanye rushed him. Kanye could have just got in his car and left. I'm not saying one is better than the other, I just think it's interesting how you justify one over the other.
-
If you think about it, I'm still defending the same thing. No one has the right to exploit anyone else, whether it be by insult and harassment online, or by harassment by paparazzi. Now, exploit might be the wrong word for the people online, but I can't think of a better term for it. I get that there is a certain level of exposure expected when you are a celebrity, but the paparazzi are way too invasive most of the time. Again, Kanye may have been a little too hot, but if any lawsuit develops from this, there is a problem because no harm came to the guy or his equipment, and that means the law is protecting the wrong people. Jesus....I sound like Camnator almost....what the hell has the world come to...
-
Common sense.
-
That's not the point, the point is that he had no right putting his hands on the guy.
-
And why is that? Because the laws set by people not affected by such things say so? He didn't hurt the guy. He wasn't trying to kill him, and he wasn't trying to do physical harm. He was just going to take the camera and prove a point. Legal? No, but what the paps do shouldn't be legal either. Believe it or not, not all celebrities want to be covered by a crew of stalkers 24/7, so it should be their right to deny them access. People scream constitutional rights way too -blam!-ing much because the press's rights encroach on individual rights way too -blam!-ing often. Again, Kanye, in my opinion, is in the right. The legal system won't think so, but it doesn't mean that part of the system is correct.