Woman arrested after flashing prosecutor

July 8, 2004 | AP

[TexasTransplant]

I'm talking about public decency and long-standing, American-traditional values

 

Nanny Cops vs Freedom or "Let the Re-Education begin"

 

Your "childish" attempt to attach personal insult to me and my family was as lame as your life must be, given that you have absolutely nothing else to do.

 

Can I direct you to look in a mirror, say to the mirror "you are a criminal", call the local LE to come pick you up,  you have probably broken 30 or 40 laws already, just today. Just because you didn't know you were breaking the law or maybe the laws that you broke today, yesterday or last week are no longer enforced changes nothing. 

 

If you don't call LE and turn yourself in you are a hypocrite, but hey most Nanny Cops are hypocritical, busybodies, angry, lonely, miserable, depressed losers, (but I still like you).

[pgyanke]

You're comical. So much for intelligent debate. What an idiotic rant!

[pgyanke]

Me: I think you get the crime you accept.

You: What does this mean?

There is less vandalism where it is prosecuted. There is less litter where it is prosecuted. There are fewer speeders and drunk drivers where it is prosecuted.

There is less of nearly every type of crime... when is it prosecuted. Therefore, you get to keep the crime you accept.

[TexasTransplant]

I forgive you. I like you even more now.

[pgyanke]

[BlueMondaySkipper]

Yeah. In that case. I definitely would've called the cops.

Or the Zoo...

[BigAzzHam]

I hate prosecutors.

[TexasTransplant]

LOL
Thanks for the Picture, Do you have any pictures of a Bunny in dumplings?

[Stone Mountain]

There is less of nearly every type of crime... when is it prosecuted. Therefore, you get to keep the crime you accept.

But you agree that it is impossible to prosecute every single crime, right? If that's the case, then the prosecution has to use discretion in choosing which crimes to go after. I think he made a lousy choice here.

[Hat-Trick]

Well she was from West Virginia. Good looking gal down there is one with a full set of teeth.

I was just thinking there is a strong possibility she that has more breasts than teeth.

[Skooz]

10:1 odds that Brian is either a "born again" or gay.

Wow. You're ignorance of "born again" folks is breathtaking.

[Dead Corpse]

So there are no fundie whack jobs on any of the FR threads on this subject calling for the execution of pornographers?

That's good to hear.

Whoops... where's Tailgunner Joe at? Enough said...

[Skooz]

Oh, please. That's all you got?

I could allege that all athiests were mass murderers by using the examples of Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung.

That allegation would be as ludicrous as yours.

[pgyanke]

But you agree that it is impossible to prosecute every single crime, right?

I do. That's why some people are examples to the rest. You have to consider why a crime is prosecuted and why each act is a crime. Jaywalking isn't a crime because the government wants to control where you walk. It's a crime because if you cross the street improperly at the wrong time it could be dangerous for you and for traffic. A cop may look the other way if he sees you jaywalking on an open street. He won't if you cause traffic problems. Word gets around quickly that certain cities are more jaywalking intolerant than others. For example, New York and Chicago have that reputation. More people use the sidewalks and crosswalks in these cities than in a beach city where idiotic tourists are accepted.

You probably won't get a ticket for going 5 mph above the speed limit but you surely will if clocked going 25 above. What's the difference? The fact that traffic can't react to you as quickly nor you to it with a significant speed differential makes an inherently dangerous situation. Roads and communities get reputations for "speed traps" or "strict enforcement" and speeding occurrances go down in these areas.

Back to the current example. Public nudity is a disruption of the peace and an intrusion on public values. Prosecuting her will ensure there will be far fewer prosecutions in the future. Those wanting to "flaunt it" will pick another jurisdiction. Example... the morally degenerate congregate where they are accepted (San Fran, Disney Gay Days). You don't see them on the street corner in Omaha, Nebraska. Why? They aren't tolerated. How would you put a stop to Gay Days? Start prosecuting for public lewdness... word will spread and incidents will go down without having to "prosecute every single crime."

Law enforcement is the same as nuclear deterrance. You get results through a combination of ability and will. If a cop has a law on the books giving him the ability to prosecute but doesn't enforce it, the law may as well not exist. One without the other doesn't deter anyone.

Once again, you get the crime you accept. This prosecuter did the right thing and the Freepers on this thread who called him names for doing his job acted reprehensibly.

[Dead Corpse]

You are making more out of an offhand comment than was intended. Get over it...

Or is this a case of "throw a rock at a pack of dogs and the one that yelps is the one you hit"?

[Skooz]

Apology accepted.

[Stone Mountain]

Sure - so we agree that it comes down to whether or not a prosecutor should use his discretion to use the resources at his command to hold a trial and jail a woman for 3 months for briefly flashing another adult. You believe that the prosecutor should. I, and the majority of posters here don't believe that.

This prosecuter did the right thing and the Freepers on this thread who called him names for doing his job acted reprehensibly.

Those of us who have criticized him (and I don't think I've called him any names) are doing so because we don't believe he acted responsibly, nor do we believe he did the right thing. It is reprehensible to express one's opinion contrary to the prosecutors?