You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #42: this is why i find discussing law with laymen who don't understand it - tiring [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #37
42. this is why i find discussing law with laymen who don't understand it - tiring
Edited on Fri Aug-21-09 02:59 AM by paulsby
what you are saying is simply false. you do realize that the law VARIES based on jurisdiction. in NY state, for example, it's perfectly legal for women to walk around in public topless. doesn't matter who is offended.

in oregon, it's legal to walk around buck naked (top and bottom) (or so i am told. i am not an expert on oregon law. i may be wrong on this, but see below)

*********the law in WA state is EXACTLY how i stated it (since you were giving me hypotheticals and i work in this jurisdiction).

here is the RCW that would apply to skinny dipping example. RCW is the LAW.

you are astoundingly wrong. not surprising for a layman discussing thelaw. what remains to be seen is if you will have the intellectual honesty to admit your error.

RCW9a.88.010
1) A person is guilty of indecent exposure if he or she intentionally makes any open and obscene exposure of his or her person or the person of another knowing that such conduct is likely to cause reasonable affront or alarm. The act of breastfeeding or expressing breast milk is not indecent exposure.

so two people at night on a deserted beach skinny dipping are NOT **intentionally making an open and obscene exposure of their person KNOWING the such conduct is LIKELY to casue reasonable affront or alarm.

period.

if i skinny dip at a deserted beach at night (YOUR SCENARIO) i most definitely did NOT meet each element of this crime.

and any cop that arrested me 1) is a moron 2) would see his case nolle pros'd by the prosecutor 3) and if he was my trainee, would get a tongue lashing

i am not going to get into all the nuances, so i'll give you one reason why it's not a crime.

assuming the beach is deserted, and it's night, such conduct is NOT ******likely**** to cause reasonable affront or alarm

if you did it in broad daylight on a crowded kirkland beach, it WOULD

there's your lesson in the law.

i will await your response to see if you have the intelletual honesty to admit you are wrong

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC