20070827

that's some catch, that catch-'disorderly conduct'

[note that out of approximately 10 sites i visited to read about this incident, not one focused on the elephant in the room. this includes 3 "progressive" (ugh) sites, supposedly staunch defenders of "civil liberties". it's all "ha ha ha, isn't it great that somebody got fucked." i'm not an unconditional fan of LRC's william anderson, but against steady opposition, and regardless of popular/specific hatred against the victim, he normally remains true when fighting the perverse "laws" of this anti-liberty country. his is the sound method.]
[...] Karsnia entered the bathroom at noon that day and about 13 minutes after taking a seat in a stall, he stated he could see “an older white male with grey hair standing outside my stall.”

The man, who lingered in front of the stall for two minutes, was later identified as Craig.

“I could see Craig look through the crack in the door from his position. Craig would look down at his hands, ‘fidget’ with his fingers, and then look through the crack into my stall again. Craig would repeat this cycle for about two minutes,” the report states.

Craig then entered the stall next to Karsnia’s and placed his roller bag against the front of the stall door.

“My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall,” Karsnia stated in his report. “From my seated position, I could observe the shoes and ankles of Craig seated to the left of me.”
Craig was wearing dress pants with black dress shoes.

“At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. I moved my foot up and down slowly. While this was occurring, the male in the stall to my right was still present. I could hear several unknown persons in the restroom that appeared to use the restroom for its intended use. The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area,” the report states.

Craig then proceeded to swipe his hand under the stall divider several times, and Karsnia noted in his report that “I could ... see Craig had a gold ring on his ring finger as his hand was on my side of the stall divider.”

Karsnia then held his police identification down by the floor so that Craig could see it.

“With my left hand near the floor, I pointed towards the exit. Craig responded, ‘No!’ I again pointed towards the exit. Craig exited the stall with his roller bags without flushing the toilet. ... Craig said he would not go. I told Craig that he was under arrest, he had to go, and that I didn’t want to make a scene. Craig then left the restroom.” [...]
astonished by the thin layer of subjective drivel the badged criminal alleged so that he could kidnap superior criminal senator larry craig, i looked into the code under which he was charged and screwed:
609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
     Subdivision 1. Crime. Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place, including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:
(1) Engages in brawling or fighting; or
(2) Disturbs an assembly or meeting, not unlawful in its character; or
(3) Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others. A person does not violate this section if the person's disorderly conduct was caused byan epileptic seizure.
     Subd. 2.[Repealed, 1969 c 226 s 1]
     Subd. 3. Caregiver; penalty for disorderly conduct. A caregiver, as defined in section 609.232, who violates the provisions of subdivision 1 against a vulnerable adult, as defined in section 609.232, may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both.
ayn rand:
"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against — then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
anyone wanna dispute that if he'd sat on the can and merely farted loudly while grunting, he'd have been guilty of "disorderly conduct"? better read that fucker again:
Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct
anyone dispute that telling your girlfriend her ass looks fat in that dress is "disorderly conduct", subject to kidnapping and theft against which one may not defend himself with reasonable force? read again:
Engages [...] in offensive [...] language tending reasonably to arouse [...] resentment in others.
any wonder i have no respect for "the law"? fuck "the law". these obsessive patrols of bathrooms for the slightest sign of homos looking to hook up brings only the further emasculation of the general male population (the real goal). in the old days, some queer propositions you in a bathroom, you tell him to fuck off. now, terminally pussified "real men" are supposed to run to the goddamned badged criminals so they can set up regular scans to ensure masculinity isn't threatened by gayboys.

same problem even regarding exposing kids to homos fucking in bathroom stalls. i've been in countless public bathrooms in my 43 years and not once observed anything that sounded or looked like sex. [clarification/correction: i fucked a girlfriend in a locked public bathroom once, which sorta doesn't meet the meaning of "public bathroom" i was talking about, but maybe if she read this she'd quibble.] let's say though that while on the road with my family in the 60s we'd walked in and my dad had heard queers going at it. my dad was a short, pudgy/skinny motherfucker that few would lose a fight to. however, i guarantee he'd have told my brother and me to get out of the bathroom, then confronted the fuckers directly. old school. now, you hop on your cell phone and invoke the state machine, if you even have the "balls" to do that. the result? more homos fucking in bathrooms, as almost every witnessing male becomes more of a pussy, unwilling to speak up and preserve useful social standards. funny how that works.

naturally, the only solution is private property, with private, normally just coercion.

Labels: , ,

posted by saltypig @ 21:34