Thank God for our police force, saving us from the evil that is strawberries...

Many things have been illegal and the law was enforced but that did not make those laws right.

What we have is the worst kind of law here, one that denies people the right to harmless activity and proposed by others who would rather we had only their view of the world.

Such people would only be too happy to use force to impose their view on the rest of us if we let them get away with it.

All that has happened here is that honest policemen have ended up looking totally foolish and losing respect.
That is not good for the law.

I got caught up in a simulpost so I’ll be back later with more.

casdave,

**should be persecuted in the name of a religious morality set up by a misogynist with a power hungry mindset near to a couple of thousand years ago **
GOD DAMNIT!! I did not bring up the BIBLE. The bible is not part of my argument. I said nothing in the name of religious morality. FUCK, do you people even pay attention??

Just because “its the law” hardly makes something like that wrong.
Again, I agree. This is part of the Victimless Crime Debate (which we should probably start over in GD. Or at least resurrect it since it has already been started, I’m sure)

At one time the police in the UK would hide in toilet cubicles trying to catch gay men from meeting each other.Who are the perverts, the ones doing it or the ones watching, recording and itemising it ?
That was “the law”.

Good point. Around here though, there can be no law passed against a group of people. Gays included. (Please IPU, let’s not start a fucking ‘What did you call Slavery’ Debate. I am just saying that such a law would not happen here, now.
If people want to fuck each other for money that is their business
Again with the victimless crime motif. I personally agree with this. But it is ilegal, and people get arrested for this stuff all the time. What I am saying, is why is this incident any different? Like I said before, “No one ever complains when the cops get the crack whores off the street”. Who are they hurting?
One of the reasons that the sex industry is so sordid and sleazy is that being illegal it is completely uncontrolled so how does enforcement of the law benefit society in that regard ?
Making these things ilegal are an attempt to control them. Should we allow people to fuck each other on the street corner in public? It really isn’t hurting anyone. And those who do not like it do not have to watch.
**… Just so long as I do that in a place that does not interfere with your rights.**I think this has turned into a discussion of whether or not prostitution should be legalized or not. But to answer this question… kiddie porn does not violate my rights either. And about the Age of Consent laws… a 16 year old here can have sex with a person under 22. So why should taking lots of porn pictures of her and selling them be ilegal? This is a moral issue isnt it? Since in some countries, children can have legal sex at 12 or 13. The law here says it is ilegal!! So if people start having 16 year olds dancind nude in their club. The club will be shut down and everyone arrested.
**As for anyone on this board saying anything that might advocate sex with children (now defined in the UK as rape) I do think you ought to apologise for such an intemperate remark. **
No! I believe it is a valid point. But I am not saying that anyone here would do such a thing. What I AM saying, is if you WANTED to have a strip club full of 16year olds… why should that be ilegal? Since it is, then why should it be enforced by the cops? Are they just bastards for closing down clubs that employ young girls.
(I have shut one down before, BTW)
**So tell me, if there is no victim what crime is committed ? **
Again… ::sigh:: this is not what I am debating. My point at the begining was that no one ever complains about other vicitmless crimes being enforced, like crack houses… why are you all so pissed about this?
I have left you with plenty of stuff you can come back at me with, I have not used up my arguments by any degree
Me either! And thank you for keeping it civil. I dont care if this is the PIT, arguments are more productive without people calling each other’s parents FAT or UGLY or what have you…

pepperland and missbunny

Great points… thank you!! That is exactly what I am trying to get across.

Well, you’re right on one thing…

But sorely mistaken on another. Age of consent laws are in place to protect children, who, for the most part, are not mature enough to make such decisions on their own. Same reason why you can’t buy cigarettes unless you’re 18, or beer until you’re 21. Adults are more likely to be equipped to handle the consequences of their actions.

“And Picabo Street comes cartwheeling down to the finish line! Oh, the humanity!”

Then why on earth did you bring it up?

Sure it does. Your tax money helps pay at least some of their medical bills. Stuff like that keeps your insurance premiums up.

Actually, they’re not, although you can be hard-pressed sometimes to find doctors who will perform them.

Here’s a cite for that, from http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/fgm/fgm.htm :

Again, though, you’re comparing apples and oranges. The circumcisions are performed upon children, who cannot understand the consequences of the “surgery” nor have a choice in whether or not they receive it.

After you.

Nor was the woman naked. As I recall from reading the article, she was wearing underwear at the time. I mean, who hasn’t seen some guy shove his face into the crotch of a woman on a dance floor? I’ve seen this stuff go on at every club I’ve ever been to. Often it’s ENCOURAGED by the staff. What’s next, banning the bump-and-grind dancing that everyone does at those places because it’s simulated intercourse?

This IS, in case you haven’t noticed, the Pit. We’re not in Great Debates anymore, Toto.

Age of consent laws are in place to protect children, who, for the most part, are not mature enough to make such decisions on their own. Same reason why you can’t buy cigarettes unless you’re 18, or beer until you’re 21. Adults are more likely to be equipped to handle the consequences of their actions.
Yes, but our morals tell us that a 14 year old is TOO young. If this was such a universal truth (like murder is wrong) then other countries would not have such young people legally having sex. Same with buying beer. Our morals say children under 21 are not responsible enough to buy beer. They buy it in other countries with (i assume) no dire consequences.

**Then why on earth did you bring it up? **
I didn’t. Weirddave used an argument that only makes since when we are talking about free speech. I simply told him this is not about free speech and therefore, the argument was irelevant.

Sure it does. Your tax money helps pay at least some of their medical bills. Stuff like that keeps your insurance premiums up.
And when people start spreading multiple VDs across the country because of the new legalized “Sex in the streets” Statutes… that will not bring up my premiums?

Actually, they’re not, although you can be hard-pressed sometimes to find doctors who will perform them
Sorry I will be more specific next time. Families are doing this to their children. It is being done at the family’s home. Not by a doctor, and not at a hospital. When this happens, it is definitely ilegal. It is child abuse and aggravated battery. But isn’t this just a moral or cultural law? There are people SOMEWHERE who think it is OK. So should we just LET them do it since they believe it is right? Of course not. I think this is relevant.
After you.
See above. If it was only being done by doctors then that would be different. But it is happening the way I said. I have seen pictures and reports from some of the best Detectives in this country.

. As I recall from reading the article, she was wearing underwear at the time. I mean, who hasn’t seen some guy shove his face into the crotch of a woman on a dance floor?..What’s next, banning the bump-and-grind dancing that everyone does at those places because it’s simulated intercourse?
And then he moved it to the side and licked her pussy…
What is “simulated” about that? That IS oral sex.
This IS, in case you haven’t noticed, the Pit. We’re not in Great Debates anymore, Toto
Yes, I have noticed. But does that mean the insults have to be so childish? Come to think of it… I guess it does.

News flash, sparky. The US does let other countries do this. Women have come to the United States seeking political asylum for themselves and their daughters to AVOID FGM. And in almost every case, asylum was denied. So hon, we DO let them do it. Try getting your facts right next time. Or at least reading the cites people provide for you.

Missbunny

As I read the previous threads it appears to me that there is no possibility of getting a licence to carry out the sort of activity described, why should that be the case I ask ?

Not one person advocates sexual exhibitions in such innapropriate places as you describe.

Bear

You did not need to bring up the bible but since much of our legal code and view of morality is based upon it then it is inevitable that it will be mentioned.

Making the sex-industry illegal has failed to control it but then you have to ask why it needed control in the first place. That again comes down to the code of morality as set out by the great religions. Making commercial sex illegal is easy and you do not have to ask the awkward questions as to why it exists and the social conditions that push people in that direction.

Again I do not advocate street sex and I understand that the sex industry exploits individuals but illegality just makes the stakes higher. Corruption and coersion are never far behind.
My view is that I would rather not have a sex industry at all but the reality is that I cannot think of any important society that does not have one.

As for age related issues that depends on the view of society itself.This must relate to how old a person is deemed to be in a position to make and evaluate decisions.
The law must be pragmatic in this it has to set a line but it is fair to say that some folk are not properly equipped to make these choices until their late twenties and others are plenty sharp at 16.In the western world we think we have it about right and FWIW 12-13 is way too young and amounts to child abuse, it is one of the reasons why I think some nations are uncivilised - I make no apology for that statement either. Stuff the political correctness about respecting cultures on this issue. Culture ends where supression begins.

Whereever the age related line is drawn the victim is not the procurer of sex but is the procured.The police have a duty to protect the victims.This is why sex with minors is a crime because they can never be anything but victims.

The issue is not the ages of the individuals concerned as this was never raised in the link, the issue is wether the people arrested have committed an offence worthy of the name.

A wonderful example of how the police act completely within the law is the “suspicion” laws in the UK.
I will not insult you by explaining them, it is that obvious but the way they were used was disgraceful.
The law was one that was enacted in Napoleonic times and was very repressive indeed.It lay more or less dormant for a couple of centuries with the odd exception here and there.The law was passed to prevent people’s sensibilities from being offended by beggars home from the Napoleonic wars and the police were justified arresting people on the basis that “it was the law”.

It gained popularity with the police force in London but was considered as unworkable throughout much of the UK.
What the London police did was to apply it to any young man who was seen standing around, even those waiting for a bus.The way it was applied was overtly racist and led directly to the complete breakdown of law and order on several estates up and down the country as minority groups took up the cudgels. People died.(look up the Broadwater Farm riots in your search engine)This is why bad laws must be eradicated, they damage the whole law enforcement system.

“It’s the law” is not an end or justification in itself there has to be a clear public interest served and for the life of me I cannot see that in the link provided by the OP.

The reason that the mods operate rules is the twofold, one is previous experience of certain types of behaviour the other is to comply with federal laws that have been discussed and enacted with good reasons behind them.

From what I understand, it’s not a matter of “morals”. It’s a matter of the law. And legally, they were in the wrong. Even if you want to say it was simply because they were not zoned for that kind of show.
There are zoning laws. (Are y’all with me so far). If you break those zoning laws, the cops come and arrest you(still following me?) There are laws against public lewdness. Those laws, in this case, tied in with the zoning laws. So the police came and broke it up.
Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right. And something illegal doesn’t make it wrong. Yet society has come together and agreed on these laws, and then we agreed that there would be a designatet task force (The police) to enforce these laws. End of story.

News flash, sparky. The US does let other countries do this. Women have come to the United States seeking political asylum for themselves and their daughters to AVOID FGM. And in almost every case, asylum was denied. So hon, we DO let them do it. Try getting your facts right next time. Or at least reading the cites people provide for you.
Falcon I was not talking about letting other COUNTRIES do this. I was talking about letting people in THIS country do it. The fact is WE DO NOT!! There are laws AGAINST IT. I alreay told you what they were: Child Abuse and Aggrevated Battery.
Try getting YOUR facts straight. In fact, try reading the things I said and stop making shit up out of nowhere.
People do this sort of thing here!! And when they are caught, they are arrested!!
Geez Falcon, do you even pay attention?

casdave
We’re not arguing anymore?

Anyway, it seems we pretty much agree on things but we started arguing about two seperate issues.

Your argument was:
“Why the hell is that ilegal? It is not hurting anyone. They are just having a good time.”
I agree

My argument was:
“We should not get so pissed at the cops because they are enforcing a law! No one gets pissed when they arrest people growing pot inside their homes. No one gets pissed when they enforce other laws that could/should be considered OK. No one would be pissed if they raided a whore house. So why is everyone pissed about this? Who are we to decide what laws should be enforced and which ones looked over. If we have a problem with a law, we should write our Legislature but we should not get mad at the cops for enforcing them”
Do you agree?

My argument was not:
“These things are ilegal AND SHOULD BE ilegal because…”

Does this clear things up? I think we BOTH got a bit off topic.

Pepperlandgirl

I just know I’m gonnna come off worst debating with you but fortune favours the brave.

There is no mention of zoning laws in the link and if there were then it would make sense.It all come down to lewdness.

Your point is that it is “the law” and the police are carrying out their duty but yet again I point out that “the law” has been wrong and even immoral before.

“I was under orders” has a pretty hollow ring to it.

The law must serve a clear purpose otherwise it loses credibility and looking at this it is hard to see how respect for authority has been enhanced.

casdave, please tell me what makes a regular dance club a more appropriate place than Wal-Mart at which to simulate sex.

It seems to me that some people are here making arguments that since the people were of age, consenting, and not hurting anyone, that the police were doing something unnecessary and ridiculous by arresting anyone.

The fact is, the club was doing something illegal. They got caught. What is ridiculous about that?

And I am not convinced that there do not exist any localities in the U.S. that allow simulated or actual sex acts on stage. There used to be several places in San Francisco that either showed actual sex or a damn good imitation of it. Perhaps those clubs were private. Perhaps this strawberry-eating-contest club should go private if it wishes to show sex acts. Or it could get a lobby together to work to change the laws.

There is no mention of zoning laws in the link and if there were then it would make sense.It all come down to lewdness
Zoning laws would come into play if they actually tried to Officially become a strip club.
These people were arrested, I am sure for:

“SS 800.02
A person who commits any lascivious act with another person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree”

This statute prohibits oral sex. It has been established through case law, that oral sex in public is ilegal. I will no longer argue the WHY part of this. It is just ilegal.

“SS 800.03
It is unlawful to expose one’s sexual organs in public… in a vulgar or indecent manner… violation of this section is a second degree misdemeanor”

These are not felonies. In fact that are not even big misdemeanors. The people are not in much trouble. They are trying to send the message out that people are not allowed to break the law there. No matter what their view of the law is.

I am betting that some of the “simulated sex act” laws they are mentioning are just city ordinances. I do not live in Ft Myers so I could not give specifics on that. But if some guy was on stay and started eating the pussy of some girl. I would arrest him. We are not oppressing anyone. Why dont they just go home and fuck like everyone else??

sorry for the vB error…

Y’know, i stepped away for a few hours, and was debating weather to reply in GD mode or pit mode. I had decided that GD mode was best, but then I come back and see Bear spouting illogic left and right. It’s a good thing this isn’t GD, those logitians would tear you a new asshole, in a nice way. Also SHOUTING random POINTS dosen’t GET YOUR POINT ACROSS any better. It just makes you look like a hyperactive hummingbird on crack. First, I would like to deal with the free speach issue. YOU brought that up, saying my arguements applied to then, not what I was discussing. In point of fact, my statement was quite germain to the issue at hand. A business that caters to adults ( Club- minimum age requirements for entry ) advertises a strawberry eating contest. Presumeably the fact that this activity had potential raunchy overtones was implied or stated. That makes it possible for those who don’t aprove to stay away. Compairing it with a similar activity done in Wal-Nart is a classic straw man arguement. Anyone can go into Wal-Mart, and those stores don’t advertise that they will be having contests with sexual overtones. Think before you post. I realize this is hard, but try.

Second, The ‘it’s the law’ arguement is a classic excuse for not thinking. PLG, I am suprised to se you subscribing to blinder advocating garbage like this. I know you love your boyfriend very much. Presumably, one day y’all might marry. Up until 30-40 years ago, this was against the law in many parts of the country, because he is dark and you are light. The fact that you both love and care for each other was moot <shrug> " It’s the law “. People realized that this was wrong, and the law was changed, often by people breaking it and forcing it to be examined and changed. Bear, you would have fit right in in Nazi Germany in the 30s. " I don’t like the fact that they took the Goldsteins away, but <shrug> ‘It’s the law!’” Many laws NEED to be eliminated. This will only happen if they are challenged. If I was in North carolina, with my wife, and we decided to enjoy anal intercourse, The police would have every right to braek in and arrest us because, <shrug> “It’s the law”. All of these things are nobody’s business but the parties involved. The Govt. should be kept out of them.

Finally, the reason that the Bible came up, is that many of the laws evolved during a time when fanatics used their power to impose their “morals” on society as a whole. They claimed these “morals” were based on the Bible. Frankly, the Bible was nothing more than an excuse for those in power to limit the freedoms of others and maitain their base of power. It worked because most people simply accepted it. “It’s the law” Baaa Baaa Baaa Remember- blind obedience is just that- blind. And unthinking. And ignorant.

Nocturne

You obviously have your head so far up your ministers ass that everytime he burps, you see daylight. for you information, I have read the ENTIRE Bible, Old and New testaments, including the boring stuff like the begats. Unlike you, I THOUGHT about what I read, compaired it to itself, and looked for internal consistance. I also have studied the history surrounding it, how certan book were declaired cannon and others dropped. The attitudes taught by Paul are frequently in direct conflict with those taught by Jesus. I suggest you read and THINK, rather than blindly regurgetating the spew brainwashed into you by the religious power structure.

So you think other countries with different laws concerning underage sex are uncivilized??? Wouldn’t this make you one of the "others who would rather we had only their view of the world?!!?

weirddave
People realized that this was wrong, and the law was changed
But the cops can’t change the laws!! Why are we getting pissed at the cops? Shouldn’t we be pissed at the law makers??

Bear spouting illogic left and right
Show me, please!

A business that caters to adults ( Club- minimum age requirements for entry ) advertises a strawberry eating contest. Presumeably the fact that this activity had potential raunchy overtones was implied or stated. That makes it possible for those who don’t aprove to stay away
You are missing the fact that this is still against the law. If I put a sign on my crack house saying, “Warning: This is a crack house. Do not come in here if crack houses offend you” then it would be ok for me to make crack??

Bear, you would have fit right in in Nazi Germany in the 30s
So now I am a Nazi?? Wonderful! Just because I am against anarchy does not mean I am a Nazi! If the people do not like the laws, then they can protest and try to have the laws changed. The cops cannot change the laws.
And how is arresting someone for having oral sex in public like marching jews into a gas chamber?

Now, I also said: What’s legal is not always right, what’s illegal is not always wrong.

The reason I used the “It’s the law” arguement was because I couldn’t figure out if the people were bitching simply because the police broke up the fun, or if they wanted that particular law to change.

This comment seemed to be directed towards the police involved, the police that were simply doing their job. For the people who were bitching about the police, get a fucking clue. They don’t make the laws.

Another snide comment directed towards the men and women paid to arrest people for breaking the law.
And the thread continued in this vein.
My purpose was to point out it wasn’t the policeman’s fault, and making snide comments in uncalled for. Because they were doing what society has asked them to do.
I have yet to see a legitimate, logical reason why that law should be done away with. Because people want to fuck in public?
So, apparently we are now arguing the reasons behind the law, though I would have to say, none of you are doing a very good job of it. At least Bear has a grasp of what the law is. The rest of you sound like spoiled children. “But I want to fuck in public. You’re so mean!”
It sounds like a six year old yelling at the babysitter “But I want to stay up late! You’re so mean!”
Or a five year old “But I want a cookie! You’re so mean!”
:rolleyes:
If we are going to bitch about laws, bitch about the law makers not the enforcers.

Oh and Weirddave, don’t get on people’s case for logic. The first chance you got, you compared Bear to Hitler. :rolleyes: When you think of a real arguement, please come back. In the meantime, you’d better get to work pulling your head out of your ass. It’s so far up there, you might need assistance from a friend.

If I was in North carolina, with my wife, and we decided to enjoy anal intercourse, The police would have every right to braek in and arrest us because, <shrug> “It’s the law”. All of these things are nobody’s business but the parties involved. The Govt. should be kept out of them.
Really? The police would have every right??? Since you have no idea how this system of justice works in this country, I will be happy to explain it to you.

A police officer must witness a misdemeanor to arrest a person for committing it. I do not have the North Carolina law book near me, but I assure you IF anal sex is ilegal there, it only a mesdemeanor. Which means as long as you are doing it in the privacy of your own home, you cannot be arrested and you do not have to fear the police! You could have all the booty sex, oral sex, and every other page of the Kama Sutra.
That also goes for Marijuana. Possession of pot in Florida is not a felony. Unless you have a lot or you are selling it. This means that if you really want to smoke it, keep it in the privacy of your own home! The cops can’t touch you!
I do not know where you learned about the legal system here, or why you think you are some kind of expert on the oppressive American Police. But why don’t you at least learn a fact or two before you respond with such garbage.

You are presuming that: 1) the contest was in fact advertised in such a way as to display its “raunchy overtones” for everyone to understand completely and unreservedly; and 2) that everyone who went to the club that night knew that they were going to be seeing people having oral sex on stage.

And here’s a thought for you - it wasn’t that hard to come up with this time: fuck off.