Nudist-Resorts.Org - Naturist Discussion Forum / Bulletin Board


Nudist-Resorts.Org - Naturist Discussion Forum / Bulletin Board
Username:
Password:
Save Password


Register
Forgot Password?

About Us | Active Topics | Active Polls | Site News | Nudist News | Online Users | Members | Destinations | N. A. I. R. | My Page | Search
[ Active Members: 0 | Anonymous Members: 0 | Guests: 530 ]  [ Total: 530 ]  [ Newest Member: dild0 ]
 All Forums
 General Discussion - Everything Else
 General discussion. Post anything off-topic here.
 Reform of the Indecency Statutes is needed

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

 Posting Form
Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List Spell Checker Insert Flash
   
Callouts: Insert Speech Icon: duh! Insert Speech Icon: oops! Insert Speech Icon: sigh! Insert Speech Icon: ugh! Insert Speech Icon: wow! Insert Speech Icon: yeah! Insert Speech Icon: ok! Insert Speech Icon: yes! Insert Speech Icon: no!
Message Icon:              
             


Smilies
Angry [:(!] Approve [^] Big Smile [:D] Black Eye [B)]
Blush [:I] Clown [:o)] Cool [8D] Dead [xx(]
Disapprove [V] Eight Ball [8] Evil [}:)] Kisses [:X]
Question [?] Sad [:(] Shock [:O] Shy [8)]
Sleepy [|)] Smile [:)] Tongue [:P] Wink [;)]

   -  HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON
   Insert a File
 
  Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.
    

T O P I C    R E V I E W
JokerCPoC Posted - 08/27/2008 : 4:10:19 PM
Petition the US Government to Legalize public nudity Nationwide to protect our rights, So far there is 1 signatures there, There could be more, Yes I signed there.


15   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
inudist Posted - 09/17/2008 : 9:49:58 PM
Wasn't JockerCPoC's original intent an activist agenda to try to change(or reform)the current law concerning non-sexual nudity? A lot of great discussion on the merits and pitfalls of trying to do this have been brought out on this post. I would like to hear more!!

But it did seem to change into a debate on what current law is and even who is more lawyerly than who. Yes, a little sarcasm there. I agree with admin on a separate thread for discussion of current law. As a non lawyer myself I would also welcome more clarification of current nudist law. It might help me stay out of trouble down the road!

inudist
balataf Posted - 09/17/2008 : 11:14:02 AM
I strongly disagree that this thread had ever stopped being directly "on-topic!"

This sub-point is to determine what types of property should be legitimately covered by anti-nudity provisions, and what areas and types of establishment should not. For instance, Phi Nu had a group dinner at a restaurant, in which a room was dedicated. In fact, there was another, textiled, group in a room next door on that same floor, and one had to be clothed to use the rest room. By many statutes, that would be regulated, "public" space within a commercial establishment. This event could have run afoul of some ordinance designed to prevent "stripping" while dancing on top the bar, if it merely proscribed nudity within a commercial restaurant or in places where liquor is served.
Admin Posted - 09/17/2008 : 10:18:10 AM
I've started a new thread for this excellent discussion. See What laws allow nudity in a resort / private club?

Now, back to the current topic of Reform of the Indecency Statutes...

VLM34 Posted - 09/17/2008 : 04:46:52 AM
quote:
Originally posted by balataf

A state, federal or local park is very definately a "public place!"

Yes, definitely.

quote:
But what worries me on this point is the great body of rulings and laws on what is/is not "public accomodations". Much of this is left over from the Civil Rights revolution of the '50s and '60s. The basic rule is that any facility tht is open to participation or entry for a fee could be covered as a "public place."


If you meant the words I bolded to say "public accomodation" I agree with you.

As I understand it, a hotel lobby, a restaurant, and (say) Disneyland would be both public places and public accommodations. They aren't incorporated and licensed as private clubs, but instead are open to the general public.

Now, lets look at a resort incorporated as a private club. Assume that the grounds are adequately shielded from view of those outside, and that the club chooses to permit a limited number of selected non-members to enter for a fee.

It's definitely a public accomodation (because it allows selected non-members for a fee) but it's not a public place because it's not open to the general public.

As a private club, it's governed by its Articles of Incorporation and its Bylaws and/or by its conditions of license. If those governing documents require or permit nudity, and if the shielding adequately prevents view of nudity from public places, all is well.

All who enter do so voluntarily and agree to accept and abide by the bylaws, thus waiving the right to invoke public indecency laws - at least as regards mere nudity.

I'm not sure I've got that 100% right, but that's the idea. Both federal and state law are involved, plus a lot of murky case law, so I don't think any synopsis would apply everywhere.

I'd happily defer to anyone who has detailed knowledge in all 50 states, although I doubt that such a person exists.
balataf Posted - 09/16/2008 : 11:58:16 AM
A state, federal or local park is very definately a "public place!"

But what worries me on this point is the great body of rulings and laws on what is/is not "public accomodations". Much of this is left over from the Civil Rights revolution of the '50s and '60s. The basic rule is that any facility tht is open to participation or entry for a fee could be covered as a "public place." This definitely includes the nudist resorts I have attended, as opposed to someone's private land or house that is open by invitation and without any fee.

At the time, while I basically supported Civil Rights, I disagreed on giving the government the power to regulate so much private property on technicalities. I did not patronize segregated facilities, but felt that it was not the government's proper function to forbid it on private property. This is the position known today as libertarian.
Diger Posted - 09/16/2008 : 09:39:43 AM
Cheri,

I'm not an Attorney either, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. LOL



Diger
VLM34 Posted - 09/16/2008 : 06:14:10 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Cheri

quote:
Originally posted by VLM34

[quote]Originally posted by Cheri

VLM, You might enjoy reading this thread: http://www.nudist-resorts.org/talk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=28&whichpage=2&SearchTerms=public%2Claws

Not enjoyable at all. As far as I could tell in one pass through, every post misinforms. Even the attorney guy got some things wrong. There's no way I'd try to straighten out that mess. I just hope that no one depends on anything that was said.



Are you an attorney? What James stated was verified with another attorney. What is it that James posted that is not accurate in your opinion?!
Cheri
Cheri

Dear Cheri Cheri,

I’m not an attorney, although I do have the power of one. However, your question is irrelevant because law schools don’t teach the law, certainly not all of the law, and especially not nudity law, although they do teach how to read law. Knowing how to read law doesn’t mean an attorney has read any particular law or any particular area of law. And, in case you’re unaware, in many cases a reading of a particular law doesn’t tell you what the law is, but I digress. On top of that, as I’m sure you know, nudity law is state and local law. We have 50 states, as I’m also sure you know. Most attorneys are licensed to practice in only one or two states, and don’t know diddly about other states’ laws. For that matter, most attorneys don’t know a whole lot more than diddly about the laws of their own state outside their specialty area. They write wills or defend DUIs or sue physicians or whatever.

You see, we’re talking about knowledge here, not what one took in school.

We’re about to go way off topic – what follows belongs in that other thread - but since it’s YOU demanding answers in THIS thread, I’ll proceed. I do hope you aren’t engaging in entrapment, which is a legal term you might ask your husband about.

James says the following:

8/25/2002: “I believe you are half right (that being that there are no OFFICIAL nude beaches, as none have been officially designated as such by the government).”

James doesn’t say which of the many levels of “the government” he means. We’re thus justified in assuming he means _any_ of them. He’s wrong. Collins Beach on Sauvie Island has been “officially designated” as clothing-optional since September 23, 1993, by the State of Oregon – specifically by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, an agency of the State of Oregon, whose policy-setting Commissioners are appointed by the Governor. Refer to the “Sauvie Island Beach Use Plan” of that date. There are other counterexamples, but one is enough so I’ll stop.

8/25/2002: “However, there are MANY places where one can legally be nude in public. There are LEGAL nude beaches (as opposed to OFFICIAL nude beaches) ...”

James is correct there, until he once again claims there are no OFFICIAL nude beaches. See above.

8/25/2002, the above sentence continues: “... & why can't one legally be nude even at a nudist resort? At least in my jurisdiction that simply isn't the case -if a nudist resort or club is licensed to operate within the jurisdiction, one certainly can legally be nude there.”

James is claiming that nudist resorts are public places. Although I’m not familiar with the definition of “public place” in all 50 states, and I doubt that James is either, most resorts are incorporated as private clubs and, as such, are not public places as that term is used in the public indecency laws of most states.

10/27/2002: “Also, as has been discussed in this forum previously, the fact that it might be legal in a given location doesn't mean that you won't be arrested by a renegade official (only that the case against you won't be successful if you have adequate representation).”

James is correct until his parenthetical, which is woefully incomplete and falsely reassuring. Even the most expert representation won’t overcome perjured testimony as to what you were doing. (You were merely nude, sitting on a beach. An official doesn’t like public nudity, so he arrests you. He doesn’t want his baseless arrest tossed out in court, so he says your person was tumid or some such archaic crap.) And, even if court testimony is accurate, the most expert representation won’t stop a judge (or judge and jury) outraged by the merest of mere nudity in their precious community from finding you guilty. Examples are legion. Think Bend.

(If you think perjury and/or community outrage rarely cause unjust convictions, read about all the old, long-settled murder convictions that have been overturned in the last few years by DNA evidence. If innocent people are convicted in murder cases, where the stakes are high and the scrutiny is supposed to be extremely high, you can be sure it happens more frequently in “minor” cases, especially when a perfectly legal action is strongly despised.)

That’s four, which ought to do it.

Oh, while I’m at it, here’s a quote from you from that same thread:

8/25/2002: “There are legal nude beaches: Haulover in North Miami, FL is recognized as is Rooster Rock and Sauvie Island in OR and in New Jersey there is Sandy Hook.”

Cheri Cheri, I do wish you’d stop referring to Collins Beach as “Sauvie Island” which makes people think it’s OK to be nude on the beaches of Sauvie Island, which most definitely isn’t so. Only Collins Beach on Sauvie Island is officially designated for nude use. The other Sauvie Island beaches are not.

People like you, saying things like you said, foster many of the problems there.
Cheri Posted - 09/15/2008 : 11:49:23 AM
quote:
Originally posted by VLM34

[quote]Originally posted by Cheri

VLM, You might enjoy reading this thread: http://www.nudist-resorts.org/talk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=28&whichpage=2&SearchTerms=public%2Claws

Not enjoyable at all. As far as I could tell in one pass through, every post misinforms. Even the attorney guy got some things wrong. There's no way I'd try to straighten out that mess. I just hope that no one depends on anything that was said.



Are you an attorney? What James stated was verified with another attorney. What is it that James posted that is not accurate in your opinion?!
Cheri
Cheri

Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
http://pages.prodigy/cheridonna
JokerCPoC Posted - 09/14/2008 : 4:26:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by VLM34

quote:
Originally posted by JokerCPoC

quote:
Originally posted by VLM34

quote:
Originally posted by balataf

Unfortunately, a solid dose of reality is needed for this fantasy movement. American government is based on a FEDERAL system, with power over different areas assigned to local, state and national levels. This is a local function, subject to review by whichever state the community is in.

As a practical matter, if it were somehow taken to the national government, then what areas of nude freedom now exist would be wiped out. Better to win in some communities rather than lose it all completely. Think about it!

Balataf is right on.

There’s no federal law against nudity now, and we don’t want one. It would take a constitutional amendment or a SCOTUS decision to override state authority as regards nudity. Such preemption is highly unlikely. Let’s not stir the federal legislative pot.

On some topics, including nudity, some states allow political subdivisions (counties, cities) to pass ordinances more restrictive than state law. This results in a patchwork of radically different laws within a state. Other states (e.g., Oregon) reserve such topics to the state legislature.

Some state statutes are ridiculously prudish and punitive. Others (e.g., Oregon’s) are eminently reasonable.

There’s been a very successful effort over the last 50 years by groups of lawyers to propose “model” state statutes, and then get state legislatures to pass them. One example is the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. Another is the move towards (more-or-less) uniform traffic laws.

If petition authors want to do something useful, I’d suggest two practical actions:

1. Forget about petitions and instead propose a “Uniform Public Indecency Statute” which would a) reserve laws on that topic to the state legislature, and b) copy Oregon’s Public Indecency statute. Then, working with existing lawyer and legislative groups, get one state after another to adopt the uniform statute. That approach has the potential to actually do some good, with little if any potential to make matters worse for naturists.

2. Figure out which candidates for local, state, and national office are most likely to oppose a Public Indecency statute like Oregon’s. Then, vote against them. Those candidates are quite easy to identify. You don’t need to ask them about nudity. Anyone who wants to impose a single point of view or a single standard of conduct on everyone, by law, is someone to vote against. I could list maybe a couple dozen easy ways to identify those to vote against, ways that are doubly easy in an election year, but I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader. By voting against such people now and in the future, you make passage in your state of a future Uniform Public Indecency statute much more likely.


Would that be this?

Yes.

quote:
As this sounds like reform, maybe, It does sound good. Although I do have some problems with 1(c). As in could an Officer interpret this to mean just plain exposure? And try and get a confession out of a suspect to prove intent?

You may, perhaps, misunderstand the American legal sytem. Anyone can be arrested for anything. No evidence or other reason is necessary. If you resist, you've broken the law and will be convicted and sentenced - no matter what happens to the other charge.

Unjustified arrests are common as punishment for doing whatever an officer (or his superiors) doesn't like. Sometimes charges are dropped a few days later, sometimes not. If they're not dropped and you plead guilty so you can go home, you're guilty. If you have the guts and the money to fight the charge, and if the charge has to do with nudity, you'll still be found guilty at trial, but you'll win in the first or second appeal court - if you have the guts and the money to keep fighting. When that happens, the officer, the prosecutor, and the judge that found you guilty pay no penalty. You're cleared, but you're out the time, the money, and the adverse publicity. They won, you lost. That's the way it is. Accept it.

To answer your question, of course that can happen. However, if you hang in there, the prosecution has to prove intent in court and that proof has to withstand scrutiny on appeal. That's a bit difficult when you were swimming, sunning, playing volleyball, or just walking along.

quote:
NAC
http://www.nac.oshkosh.net/StatesFrames/State_Laws_Frames/Oregon_Laws/body_oregon_laws.html
163.465 Public indecency.

(1) A person commits the crime of public indecency if while in, or in view of, a public place the person performs:

(a) An act of sexual intercourse; or

(b) An act of deviate sexual intercourse; or

(c) An act of exposing the genitals of the person with the intent of arousing the sexual desire of the person or another person.

(2)
(a) Public indecency is a Class A misdemeanor.

(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, public indecency is a Class C felony if the person has a prior conviction for public indecency or a crime described in ORS 163.355 to 163.445. [1971 c.743 s.120; 1999 c.962 s.1]

Note: Section 3, chapter 962, Oregon Laws 1999, provides:

Sec. 3. The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission shall classify felony public indecency as a person felony and crime category 6 of the sentencing guidelines grid of the commission. [1999 c.962 s.3]




I thought that in this country, One was innocent until proven guilty, Not Guilty until proven Innocent as that's not right. That's legalized government harassment to Me, Just what We need Police and Prosecutors as Bullys, Which means We are being Discriminated against for more than just the wrong reasons, But possibly religious, My sister-in-law who's a Nurse doesn't like Nudity and I quote Her here "I see nudity everyday and I don't want to see anymore of It", To Her son My nephew I'm indecent when not dressed and that's hurtful, Thankfully when I announced I'd eventually be joining a Nudist resort nearby and doing It outside, She didn't disown Me. We do need the protection of the law from the law in My mind, Some want to do nothing but rely on No federal laws against nudity which almost says paint a sign on My back saying please Kick Me, Hard!! And others well I don't know.

What's next? A Kangaroo court?

VLM34 Posted - 09/14/2008 : 4:14:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Cheri

VLM, You might enjoy reading this thread: http://www.nudist-resorts.org/talk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=28


Not enjoyable at all. As far as I could tell in one pass through, every post misinforms. Even the attorney guy got some things wrong. There's no way I'd try to straighten out that mess. I just hope that no one depends on anything that was said.
Cheri Posted - 09/14/2008 : 2:59:11 PM
VLM, You might enjoy reading this thread: http://www.nudist-resorts.org/talk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=28

Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
http://pages.prodigy/cheridonna
VLM34 Posted - 09/14/2008 : 2:05:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by JokerCPoC

quote:
Originally posted by VLM34

quote:
Originally posted by balataf

Unfortunately, a solid dose of reality is needed for this fantasy movement. American government is based on a FEDERAL system, with power over different areas assigned to local, state and national levels. This is a local function, subject to review by whichever state the community is in.

As a practical matter, if it were somehow taken to the national government, then what areas of nude freedom now exist would be wiped out. Better to win in some communities rather than lose it all completely. Think about it!

Balataf is right on.

There’s no federal law against nudity now, and we don’t want one. It would take a constitutional amendment or a SCOTUS decision to override state authority as regards nudity. Such preemption is highly unlikely. Let’s not stir the federal legislative pot.

On some topics, including nudity, some states allow political subdivisions (counties, cities) to pass ordinances more restrictive than state law. This results in a patchwork of radically different laws within a state. Other states (e.g., Oregon) reserve such topics to the state legislature.

Some state statutes are ridiculously prudish and punitive. Others (e.g., Oregon’s) are eminently reasonable.

There’s been a very successful effort over the last 50 years by groups of lawyers to propose “model” state statutes, and then get state legislatures to pass them. One example is the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. Another is the move towards (more-or-less) uniform traffic laws.

If petition authors want to do something useful, I’d suggest two practical actions:

1. Forget about petitions and instead propose a “Uniform Public Indecency Statute” which would a) reserve laws on that topic to the state legislature, and b) copy Oregon’s Public Indecency statute. Then, working with existing lawyer and legislative groups, get one state after another to adopt the uniform statute. That approach has the potential to actually do some good, with little if any potential to make matters worse for naturists.

2. Figure out which candidates for local, state, and national office are most likely to oppose a Public Indecency statute like Oregon’s. Then, vote against them. Those candidates are quite easy to identify. You don’t need to ask them about nudity. Anyone who wants to impose a single point of view or a single standard of conduct on everyone, by law, is someone to vote against. I could list maybe a couple dozen easy ways to identify those to vote against, ways that are doubly easy in an election year, but I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader. By voting against such people now and in the future, you make passage in your state of a future Uniform Public Indecency statute much more likely.


Would that be this?

Yes.

quote:
As this sounds like reform, maybe, It does sound good. Although I do have some problems with 1(c). As in could an Officer interpret this to mean just plain exposure? And try and get a confession out of a suspect to prove intent?

You may, perhaps, misunderstand the American legal sytem. Anyone can be arrested for anything. No evidence or other reason is necessary. If you resist, you've broken the law and will be convicted and sentenced - no matter what happens to the other charge.

Unjustified arrests are common as punishment for doing whatever an officer (or his superiors) doesn't like. Sometimes charges are dropped a few days later, sometimes not. If they're not dropped and you plead guilty so you can go home, you're guilty. If you have the guts and the money to fight the charge, and if the charge has to do with nudity, you'll still be found guilty at trial, but you'll win in the first or second appeal court - if you have the guts and the money to keep fighting. When that happens, the officer, the prosecutor, and the judge that found you guilty pay no penalty. You're cleared, but you're out the time, the money, and the adverse publicity. They won, you lost. That's the way it is. Accept it.

To answer your question, of course that can happen. However, if you hang in there, the prosecution has to prove intent in court and that proof has to withstand scrutiny on appeal. That's a bit difficult when you were swimming, sunning, playing volleyball, or just walking along.

quote:
NAC
http://www.nac.oshkosh.net/StatesFrames/State_Laws_Frames/Oregon_Laws/body_oregon_laws.html
163.465 Public indecency.

(1) A person commits the crime of public indecency if while in, or in view of, a public place the person performs:

(a) An act of sexual intercourse; or

(b) An act of deviate sexual intercourse; or

(c) An act of exposing the genitals of the person with the intent of arousing the sexual desire of the person or another person.

(2)
(a) Public indecency is a Class A misdemeanor.

(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, public indecency is a Class C felony if the person has a prior conviction for public indecency or a crime described in ORS 163.355 to 163.445. [1971 c.743 s.120; 1999 c.962 s.1]

Note: Section 3, chapter 962, Oregon Laws 1999, provides:

Sec. 3. The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission shall classify felony public indecency as a person felony and crime category 6 of the sentencing guidelines grid of the commission. [1999 c.962 s.3]

JokerCPoC Posted - 09/14/2008 : 1:12:15 PM
Ok I've withdrawn any support for the idea in favor of a Uniform Indecency Statue instead, As It may be better, But how to get It made into a bill is another question.

JokerCPoC Posted - 09/14/2008 : 1:02:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by VLM34

quote:
Originally posted by balataf

Unfortunately, a solid dose of reality is needed for this fantasy movement. American government is based on a FEDERAL system, with power over different areas assigned to local, state and national levels. This is a local function, subject to review by whichever state the community is in.

As a practical matter, if it were somehow taken to the national government, then what areas of nude freedom now exist would be wiped out. Better to win in some communities rather than lose it all completely. Think about it!

Balataf is right on.

There’s no federal law against nudity now, and we don’t want one. It would take a constitutional amendment or a SCOTUS decision to override state authority as regards nudity. Such preemption is highly unlikely. Let’s not stir the federal legislative pot.

On some topics, including nudity, some states allow political subdivisions (counties, cities) to pass ordinances more restrictive than state law. This results in a patchwork of radically different laws within a state. Other states (e.g., Oregon) reserve such topics to the state legislature.

Some state statutes are ridiculously prudish and punitive. Others (e.g., Oregon’s) are eminently reasonable.

There’s been a very successful effort over the last 50 years by groups of lawyers to propose “model” state statutes, and then get state legislatures to pass them. One example is the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. Another is the move towards (more-or-less) uniform traffic laws.

If petition authors want to do something useful, I’d suggest two practical actions:

1. Forget about petitions and instead propose a “Uniform Public Indecency Statute” which would a) reserve laws on that topic to the state legislature, and b) copy Oregon’s Public Indecency statute. Then, working with existing lawyer and legislative groups, get one state after another to adopt the uniform statute. That approach has the potential to actually do some good, with little if any potential to make matters worse for naturists.

2. Figure out which candidates for local, state, and national office are most likely to oppose a Public Indecency statute like Oregon’s. Then, vote against them. Those candidates are quite easy to identify. You don’t need to ask them about nudity. Anyone who wants to impose a single point of view or a single standard of conduct on everyone, by law, is someone to vote against. I could list maybe a couple dozen easy ways to identify those to vote against, ways that are doubly easy in an election year, but I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader. By voting against such people now and in the future, you make passage in your state of a future Uniform Public Indecency statute much more likely.




Would that be this?

As this sounds like reform, maybe, It does sound good. Although I do have some problems with 1(c). As in could an Officer interpret this to mean just plain exposure? And try and get a confession out of a suspect to prove intent?
quote:
NAC
http://www.nac.oshkosh.net/StatesFrames/State_Laws_Frames/Oregon_Laws/body_oregon_laws.html
163.465 Public indecency.

(1) A person commits the crime of public indecency if while in, or in view of, a public place the person performs:

(a) An act of sexual intercourse; or

(b) An act of deviate sexual intercourse; or

(c) An act of exposing the genitals of the person with the intent of arousing the sexual desire of the person or another person.

(2)
(a) Public indecency is a Class A misdemeanor.

(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, public indecency is a Class C felony if the person has a prior conviction for public indecency or a crime described in ORS 163.355 to 163.445. [1971 c.743 s.120; 1999 c.962 s.1]

Note: Section 3, chapter 962, Oregon Laws 1999, provides:

Sec. 3. The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission shall classify felony public indecency as a person felony and crime category 6 of the sentencing guidelines grid of the commission. [1999 c.962 s.3]


VLM34 Posted - 09/14/2008 : 12:42:26 PM
quote:
Originally posted by balataf

Unfortunately, a solid dose of reality is needed for this fantasy movement. American government is based on a FEDERAL system, with power over different areas assigned to local, state and national levels. This is a local function, subject to review by whichever state the community is in.

As a practical matter, if it were somehow taken to the national government, then what areas of nude freedom now exist would be wiped out. Better to win in some communities rather than lose it all completely. Think about it!

Balataf is right on.

There’s no federal law against nudity now, and we don’t want one. It would take a constitutional amendment or a SCOTUS decision to override state authority as regards nudity. Such preemption is highly unlikely. Let’s not stir the federal legislative pot.

On some topics, including nudity, some states allow political subdivisions (counties, cities) to pass ordinances more restrictive than state law. This results in a patchwork of radically different laws within a state. Other states (e.g., Oregon) reserve such topics to the state legislature.

Some state statutes are ridiculously prudish and punitive. Others (e.g., Oregon’s) are eminently reasonable.

There’s been a very successful effort over the last 50 years by groups of lawyers to propose “model” state statutes, and then get state legislatures to pass them. One example is the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. Another is the move towards (more-or-less) uniform traffic laws.

If petition authors want to do something useful, I’d suggest two practical actions:

1. Forget about petitions and instead propose a “Uniform Public Indecency Statute” which would a) reserve laws on that topic to the state legislature, and b) copy Oregon’s Public Indecency statute. Then, working with existing lawyer and legislative groups, get one state after another to adopt the uniform statute. That approach has the potential to actually do some good, with little if any potential to make matters worse for naturists.

2. Figure out which candidates for local, state, and national office are most likely to oppose a Public Indecency statute like Oregon’s. Then, vote against them. Those candidates are quite easy to identify. You don’t need to ask them about nudity. Anyone who wants to impose a single point of view or a single standard of conduct on everyone, by law, is someone to vote against. I could list maybe a couple dozen easy ways to identify those to vote against, ways that are doubly easy in an election year, but I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader. By voting against such people now and in the future, you make passage in your state of a future Uniform Public Indecency statute much more likely.

Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches © 2002-2020 SUN Go To Top Of Page
This page was down to skin in 0.42 seconds.

 

General Rules and Terms of Service

Membership in the Nudist-Resorts.Org discussion forum is free, can be anonymous, and requires only a working email address. All email links to members are cloaked. You can disable your email link. Nude photos can be posted, if within our posting rules. No erotica, spam or solicitation is allowed here. References to sex or genitals in your username or profile will result in removal from the forum. Information and opinions regarding anything related to nudism are encouraged, including discussions concerning the confusion between nudism and eroticism if discussed maturely. All posts in this forum are moderated. Read our POSTING RULES here and here. All information appearing on this website is copyright and intellectual property of the Society for Understanding Nudism unless otherwise noted. The views expressed on these forums by participants are not necessarily representative of the Society for Understanding Nudism. Administrators reserve the right to delete anything outside the posting rules, or anything in their opinion not appropriate. To post, you must have cookies enabled and be at least 18 years of age.

Email the Webmaster | Legal Information

Copyright © 2002-2015 SUN - Society for Understanding Nudism
All Rights Reserved

Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000