Replies

"My point is simply that these laws are not really used as an excuse to peek into private bedrooms."

Then it's either a law that's useless (due to unenforcability), or it's a law which is selectively abused to add redundant charges in violation of the double jeopardy clause of the US Bill of Rights. Why not make it illegal to have sex on certain days of the week? That way, if someone gets caught doing something bad on one of those days, but we can't get real charges to stick, we can start hunting around for any other laws to get them with. Personally, I think our laws should never be used as 'gotcha's for when real justice isn't presently attainable. Perhaps, if when we find someone doing something bad but can't charge them, we can dig through their lives and hold them in custody until we can find some evidence, some place, that they broke some law at some time. With all the laws on the books these days, it's getting pretty difficult to make it through the day without doing something that's technically against the law.

"They tend to get used when people step way out of bounds."

Then again, let's just charge people with the crimes they've actually commited instead of packing on a dozen other infractions that shouldn't be on the books to begin with?

"I agree that it makes a lot more sense to focus on lewd behavior in public, regardless of the sexes involved, and that's what I'd personally prefer."

So then let's agree that the court was correct in striking down a fundamentally flawed law which was unnecessary to begin with?

"the reson why people aren't more agitated by these laws is exactly beause the police don't abuse them."

I don't really care about the laws either, so long as they aren't being enforced. However, when people pipe up to defend a law that had no place on the books, I do indeed respond. :-)

I don't really like the courts overturning laws for the same reason why you don't like silly laws being used as a gotcha. It puts the law in the hand of the opinion of a few people concerning what they think is right or wrong. Courts shouldn't be overturning legislature on "We don't like this!" grounds any more than police should be arresting gays on "We don't like you!" grounds. I'd rather someone show some guts and try to change the law legislatively.

I will, however, admit having some sympathy with law enforcement officials with an important caveat. There are often times when a law enforcement officer knows that someone has done something wrong but can't prove it, either because the hard evidence is lacking or because of police procedures. Yes, this sometimes lets really awful people get off the hook (e.g., everyone pretty much knows that OJ was guilty). On the other hand, giving police the tools to make random arrests almost any time they want can lead to Dan Rather-like situations where the police "know" a person is guilty and act on it without real hard evidence but are wrong and wind up hurting an innocent person.