Sex Offenders everywhere!

Status
Not open for further replies.
GuerrillaAngel said:
Clearly! You made a claim and have yet to prove it! :lol:

------------

Debate 101, Lesson 1: The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim, not the one questioning the claim!.

------------



We don't know that. The OP didn't furnish proof. There might have been a station wagon full of girl scouts in the alley.



While you're knocking "socialism", care to explain the absence of "advanced civilization" within capitalists? You know, the Palins, the Perrys, the Bachmanns . . . -- all of whom give Neanderthal man a bad name.
Click to expand...

Since you're the only one in this thread that's interested and has the idea this travesty isn't going on, you should google it, you'll find a lot of information on the topic, a good place to start is the California Penile Code.
And I'm not knocking socialism, I just said it's not the system used in the USA.
 
GuerrillaAngel said:
While you're knocking "socialism", care to explain the absence of "advanced civilization" within capitalists? You know, the Palins, the Perrys, the Bachmanns . . . -- all of whom give Neanderthal man a bad name.
Click to expand...

Let's gently steer this discussion away from the overtly political, please…
 
brianluce said:
California Penile Code.
Click to expand...

emotrimshotwd1.gif
 
brianluce said:
Since you're the only one in this thread that's interested and has the idea this travesty isn't going on, you should google it,
Click to expand...

You mean you're not even interested in your own claim -- whether its factual or not?
The burden is on the person making the claim to back it up. So if you were just guessing, just own up to it and we'll move on.
 
The entire world is literally covered in poop. It's scientifical. Get over it.

By the way, Dready, who says women have to wait to find a public restroom? I've seen many pop a squat, and have occasionally aided and abetted in concealing the heinous crime!
 
The US justice system has a boatload of problems. It's still the fairest and greatest in the world.

I genuinely doubt that someone pissing on a wall constitutes a sexual offender status. The OP has only heard one side of the story. Anyone can lie, and they do.

If there's states where pissing in public is tad amount to a sexual offender status, point me in the direction of the law. Because there's a reason for it.
 
ussinners said:
If there's states where pissing in public is tad amount* to a sexual offender status, point me in the direction of the law. Because there's a reason for it.
Click to expand...

(quoted because it seems to be the question everyone is asking)

It is not cut and dry. An Indecent Exposure charge in the state of CA usually requires you to register as a sex offender.

http://www.shouselaw.com/indecent-exposure.html

California Penal Code 314 PC prohibits "indecent exposure".1 And while violating California's "indecent exposure" law may not seem like a very serious offense, its repercussions can be devastating. In addition to fines and incarceration, a Penal Code 314 PC conviction subjects you to a lifetime duty to register as a California sex offender.
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine.

And it is possible to be charged with Indecent Exposure for taking a wizz in the alley.

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...arges-associated-with-public-urination-in-cal

Very rarely, people are charged with the more serious crime of indecent exposure (California Penal Code section 314), a misdemeanor that requires “lewd” behavior.
Click to expand...

That last phrase is a gray area though. Maybe the cops were just extra salty that night and wanted to slam the guy as hard as possible. Maybe he was 15th person they'd busted for relieving themselves on that there spot.

Or maybe there were just enough people around for it to be considered lewd. Or maybe he was drunk enough to be spinning in circles yelling, "I'm a weenie-go-round" at the top of his lungs. There is legal precedent that this has happened, and also that it has been fought against and won.

Sure there is a "reason," but it may not be a valid one.

* -- I do apologize for the unnecessary pedantry, but the word you are looking for is tantamount in place of the portion of your quote that I bolded. :D "tad amount" in that context is not quite the same thing.
 
" Every American state keeps a register of sex offenders. California has had one since 1947, but most states started theirs in the 1990s. Many people assume that anyone listed on a sex-offender registry must be a rapist or a child molester. But most states spread the net much more widely. A report by Sarah Tofte of Human Rights Watch, a pressure group, found that at least five states required men to register if they were caught visiting prostitutes. At least 13 required it for urinating in public (in two of which, only if a child was present). No fewer than 29 states required registration for teenagers who had consensual sex with another teenager. And 32 states registered flashers and streakers. Because so many offences require registration, the number of registered sex offenders in America has exploded. As of December last year, there were 674,000 of them, according to the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children. If they were all crammed into a single state, it would be more populous than Wyoming, Vermont or North Dakota. As a share of its population, America registers more than four times as many people as Britain, which is unusually harsh on sex offenders. America’s registers keep swelling, not least because in 17 states, registration is for life.

Georgia has more than 17,000 registered sex offenders. Some are highly dangerous. But many are not. And it is fiendishly hard for anyone browsing the registry to tell the one from the other. The Georgia Sex Offender Registration Review Board, an official body, assessed a sample of offenders on the registry last year and concluded that 65% of them posed little threat. Another 30% were potentially threatening, and 5% were clearly dangerous. The board recommended that the first group be allowed to live and work wherever they liked. The second group could reasonably be barred from living or working in certain places, said the board, and the third group should be subject to tight restrictions and a lifetime of monitoring. A very small number “just over 100” are classified as “predators”, which means they have a compulsion to commit sex offences. When not in jail, predators must wear ankle bracelets that track where they are."-

http://techliberation.com/2009/08/08/rethinking-sex-crimes-and-sex-offender-registries/
 
Last edited:
David.rhsc said:
(quoted because it seems to be the question everyone is asking)

It is not cut and dry. An Indecent Exposure charge in the state of CA usually requires you to register as a sex offender.

http://www.shouselaw.com/indecent-exposure.html



Emphasis mine.

And it is possible to be charged with Indecent Exposure for taking a wizz in the alley.

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...arges-associated-with-public-urination-in-cal



That last phrase is a gray area though. Maybe the cops were just extra salty that night and wanted to slam the guy as hard as possible. Maybe he was 15th person they'd busted for relieving themselves on that there spot.

Or maybe there were just enough people around for it to be considered lewd. Or maybe he was drunk enough to be spinning in circles yelling, "I'm a weenie-go-round" at the top of his lungs. There is legal precedent that this has happened, and also that it has been fought against and won.

Sure there is a "reason," but it may not be a valid one.

* -- I do apologize for the unnecessary pedantry, but the word you are looking for is tantamount in place of the portion of your quote that I bolded. :D "tad amount" in that context is not quite the same thing.
Click to expand...

My takeaway is that if you're caught pissing in public, and are unluckier enough to run into an overzealous prosecutor, you better have real lawyer as an advocate.

The law is clearly unfair and wildly inefficient. Ruins lives and a money sinkhole. Brought to you by your local politician so he can look tough on crime. Throw the bums out.
 
How [expletive] important is it to pee in public?!!
Gooood Lorrrrd!
Just quit it!

I really don't care if the law says "pee in public and get your head cut off and your offspring neutered and spayed".

Why do we care so much about the rights of someone that just HAS TO pee in public?
They can remember to not p!ss in their pants or in their car but they can't remember not to p!ss in public.
It's not that big deal. Quit it.
 
Cracker Funk said:
The entire world is literally covered in poop. It's scientifical. Get over it.

By the way, Dready, who says women have to wait to find a public restroom? I've seen many pop a squat, and have occasionally aided and abetted in concealing the heinous crime!
Click to expand...

You're not wrong. And I've been guilty of that a few times, only once in civilization. But I'm not proud of it :)
 
rayw said:
How [expletive] important is it to pee in public?!!
Gooood Lorrrrd!
Just quit it!

I really don't care if the law says "pee in public and get your head cut off and your offspring neutered and spayed".

Why do we care so much about the rights of someone that just HAS TO pee in public?
They can remember to not p!ss in their pants or in their car but they can't remember not to p!ss in public.
It's not that big deal. Quit it.
Click to expand...

Because it's a perfect reflection of larger issues of political pandering, inefficiency, fairness, justice -- all things that are crucial to society. Disengaging and trivializing these things will give you the government you deserve.
 
I'm pulling this thread down as it is getting quite politicial, which (per forum rules) is not allowed:

"We are a group of filmmakers. Politics only serve to divide us. We do not allow political discussions unless they are related to film. If they turn into political bickering, they will be closed."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top