First Amendment Intended to Protect Creepy Photographers?

It's legal to do this in Massachusetts and Texas

Exactly 225 years ago today congress passed the Bill of Rights.  The bill of rights gives us Americans everything from freedom of speech to the right of peaceful assembly and petition.  However, I am sure that 225 years ago they never imagined that the first amendment would be used in the defense of "up-skirt photos".  In Texas the state law banning improper photography in public has been thrown out, meaning anyone can take pictures of anyone in public places. This is because photographs are "inherently expressive" and a camera is "essentially the photographers pen and paint brush".  I find this to be ridiculous considering this ruling originated from a case in 2011 where Ronald Thomas was charged for taking pictures of children's breasts and butts at Sea World in San Antonio.  However, Thomas has walked away with no charges due to the fact that the court believed he can do that due to the first amendment.  I do not think that a camera could be necessarily classified at the same respects as a "pen and paintbrush" considering that a camera is instant.  With that, I do not see how the first amendment would even begin to justify taking indecent photos of children.  Not only Texas but also Massachusetts has ruled that taking photos up the skirts of women is perfectly legal given they are wearing underwear. Who knew that 225 years later the Bill of Rights would defend creepy men who take perverted pictures, I am sure that that is not what the Bill of Rights was intended to do.

Read More about it Here