When Does He Do an Ad with Brian Baker?
August 1, 2003 2:33 PM Subscribe
Teen abduction foiled by cell phone cam. And here I was saying that those phone cameras were simply gimmicky.
Yeah they're no gimmick... phone sex has a whole new meaning these days.
posted by zekinskia at 3:28 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by zekinskia at 3:28 PM on August 1, 2003
I dont know, a bruise on his arm, photos of the guy and license plate.... wouldnt make sense for him to lie about it. But hey, innocent until proven guilty. Or burned to death by angry mob.
posted by Keyser Soze at 3:57 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by Keyser Soze at 3:57 PM on August 1, 2003
Ew. Clifton, NJ is one town over from where I live.
When I was this kid's age and a little younger, I lived very near a city park that was known for being "cruised" by gay men. I used to have creepy guys pull up next to me as I was walking along, asking if I wanted a ride.
The best I could ever do in the moment was mutter "No," but I used to fantasize about scaring them away from me.
At one point I started carrying a starter pistol around with me when I had to walk around after dark to collect money from my paper route customers. I wanted someone to come up to try to proposition me so I could point it at them and scream at them to fuck off.
I never got to use it though. Probably for the best.
posted by dammitjim at 4:14 PM on August 1, 2003
When I was this kid's age and a little younger, I lived very near a city park that was known for being "cruised" by gay men. I used to have creepy guys pull up next to me as I was walking along, asking if I wanted a ride.
The best I could ever do in the moment was mutter "No," but I used to fantasize about scaring them away from me.
At one point I started carrying a starter pistol around with me when I had to walk around after dark to collect money from my paper route customers. I wanted someone to come up to try to proposition me so I could point it at them and scream at them to fuck off.
I never got to use it though. Probably for the best.
posted by dammitjim at 4:14 PM on August 1, 2003
good for the kid. i'm damn glad he didn't become another statistic.
posted by donkeyschlong at 4:15 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by donkeyschlong at 4:15 PM on August 1, 2003
Glad they got the guy. However, the kid took the pictures first and then he was attacked. I would bet that knowing the kid had his picture caused the guy to attack if for no other reason than to get the evidence. Frankly, he probably would have been better off just running before the guy got a chance to get out of the car. Of course, he now has the satisfaction of putting this guy away.
posted by caddis at 4:22 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by caddis at 4:22 PM on August 1, 2003
Good job. Technology rules. And mobile phone-cams have other uses, too...
posted by davidmsc at 4:27 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by davidmsc at 4:27 PM on August 1, 2003
Excellent thinking. Merely approaching and soliciting is a crime, surely, and the boy was under age. Then to exit the car and attack him - well, he deserves to be prosecuted.
It's possible a serial abuser has been caught, I applaud that.
posted by dash_slot- at 4:45 PM on August 1, 2003
It's possible a serial abuser has been caught, I applaud that.
posted by dash_slot- at 4:45 PM on August 1, 2003
Don't you love technology. On the one hand you've got people secretly taking pictures of other naked people with mobile phones, and on the other hand you've got stories like this. Added creedence to the fact that technology / extra surveillance is neither good or evil, it's the people that use that technology. It raises interesting questions.
posted by seanyboy at 4:53 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by seanyboy at 4:53 PM on August 1, 2003
"After taking the pictures, MacDonald got out of the car and grabbed the boy's arm, police said"
Either CNN needs a copy editor or this story is weirder than it seems.
posted by divrsional at 4:57 PM on August 1, 2003
Either CNN needs a copy editor or this story is weirder than it seems.
posted by divrsional at 4:57 PM on August 1, 2003
It raises interesting questions.
Yes, like will spouses pressure each other to wear their always-on, always-connected shirt-button cameras whenever they are apart?
And, how would you act differently if you knew everything you did outside your house was recorded? I would pick my nose a lot less.
posted by Triplanetary at 5:03 PM on August 1, 2003
Yes, like will spouses pressure each other to wear their always-on, always-connected shirt-button cameras whenever they are apart?
And, how would you act differently if you knew everything you did outside your house was recorded? I would pick my nose a lot less.
posted by Triplanetary at 5:03 PM on August 1, 2003
Would you pick your nose a lot less, or would you care about people seeing it a lot less? Would spouses wear shirt-button cameras, or would there be social pressure for spouses not to ask partners to wear these cameras? Would teenagers run up to camera-wearers and shout at the shirts "Why don't you trust her/him you prick/bitch"? What would it do to street-fashion if all criminals had to hide their faces? Interesting questions indeed.
posted by seanyboy at 5:13 PM on August 1, 2003
posted by seanyboy at 5:13 PM on August 1, 2003
it's the people that use that technology.
Couldn't be more true... as it often applies to just about everything.
posted by Witty at 1:23 AM on August 2, 2003
Couldn't be more true... as it often applies to just about everything.
posted by Witty at 1:23 AM on August 2, 2003
I was recently mugged in London. My gut instinct was to take a flash mugshot. But I'm sure the muggers would have been happy to steal my digicam too - images and all - if I had taken it out of my pocket.
Perhaps I need to get this or this.
posted by mook at 2:46 PM on August 2, 2003
Perhaps I need to get this or this.
posted by mook at 2:46 PM on August 2, 2003
« Older Bling Bling! | LNSGP Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Keyser Soze at 2:55 PM on August 1, 2003