| Author |
 Topic  |
|
DougK
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/23/2004 : 10:27:33 AM
|
Randy,
Didn't say they were-but the point I tried to make is these others places wouldn't tolerate nudity-and SF wouldn't either.
Stu posted from the SF Police Dept-yet-you seem to put more stock or want to believe, against logic, an article written 3rd-4th hand is correct and one can walk around the streets of SF nude-and nothing could be done. I would tend to believe the Police.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 24 |
 |
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/23/2004 : 11:55:58 AM
|
Doug, Often the police don't know the actual laws. For instance, they often will ask to search vehicles and don't have warrants. People just offer their privacy too easily.
The police/authorities often at certain venues including the Carolinas, do NOT know what the laws read.
Regards, Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
|
|
|
Stu_Fox
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 10/23/2004 : 12:14:47 PM
|
Cheri
I have spent many years teaching law both to cops and to lawyers - it's what I do. In my experience here in the UK, the lawyers have a far better grasp of court procedures, sentencing etc than the police. But when it comes to having a precise understanding of what behaviour does and does not constitute a criminal offence and what police powers exist, a clued-up cop wins every time.
Even if there is no specific offence that expressly forbids a particular type of behaviour, the police wil normally make some other piece of legislation 'fit'. If they are unable to achieve this, and the behaviour is of a kind generally considered to be unacceptable, the police are usually able to get a local law created or amended by the legislative authorities.
Legislators can not always predict how people are going to behave in the future, so they don't always succeed in formulating laws to cover every eventuality. But make no mistake - if some kind of behaviour becomes identified as a nuisance or is otherwise unacceptable - then at some stage the authorities will address it by rectifying any legislative insufficiency.
Stu
|
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 18 |
|
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/23/2004 : 5:43:02 PM
|
Stu,
My husband is an attorney, I used to be an LEO. You may have found it to be so in the countries in which you live, but not in southeastern USA.
Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
|
|
|
DougK
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/23/2004 : 6:34:25 PM
|
Cheri,
I tend to think the SF Police would respond if someone was laying out naked in a park-and if not-I think the public might respond-as well. If public nudity was a continued problem-and the Police couldn't act-legistlation would be introduced to address it. Lawmakers just aren't going to allow something like that.
I sent an email to the SF Attorney General for clarification as well. If I hear back, I will post what is said-and with an email address for any verification.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 24 |
|
|
|
sailordave
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/24/2004 : 06:35:28 AM
|
I have a suspicion about StuFox and DougK. Seems odd that after so long of either people curious about nudism or actual nudist, whether at home or at clubs, we've had at least two who seem almost militantly against nudism. I suspect DougK is also from the UK or somewhere outside the USA. Many who live within this country know of the events, parades, and protest within San Francisco conducted either topless or nude without arrest. Enjoying a good debate is one thing, but I'm beginning to wonder if either they or he is here with some agenda or is being intentionally the counter point simply because he enjoys debating or being the counter point.
We the willing who are led by the unknown must do the impossible for the ungrateful.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 388 |
|
|
|
sailordave
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/24/2004 : 06:41:20 AM
|
It's odd that the member profile of StuFox, Stu Fox, and DougK do not have any information other than member since date. It's also odd that Stu Fox and DougK were both members since October 22, 2004 and StuFox is listed as a member since only a few days before the previous two names.
We the willing who are led by the unknown must do the impossible for the ungrateful.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 388 |
|
|
|
DougK
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/24/2004 : 10:21:18 AM
|
SailorDave,
How would you get the idea I am against nudism? I support people WITH consent doing things like this. I've been a nude beach-even a couple swims. I just take exception to imposing it on others.
Stu and I are NOT the same people. I am here in N America-Stu's in England.
I previously listed as "Datona" but for some odd reason-I think there is a glich in my pc-the cookies didn't carry over. So, I went back in-but I really didn't like the handle-so I just changed it to my name.
I've been to SF several times-a few years ago-I spent about 10 days around the SF, Petuluma, San Rafael, SanJose areas. Never encountered one instance of nudity-I don't think it's accepted there.
Anyway, I sent an email to that spokesperson for the Attorney General-and hopefully I will hear by tommorow or Tues.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 24 |
|
|
|
Stu_Fox
Forum Member
|
Posted - 10/24/2004 : 10:44:17 AM
|
Dave
Your posting is rather off-topic, but I will respond.
OK, so you're suspicious. That's partly my own fault because I haven't put anything about myself on my profile. I will remedy that when I get a minute. Just for now, though, I can tell you that I live in Yorkshire and, although I am reasonably well-travelled, I have never visited the US or Canada. Shortly after I registered here, I had problems logging on, so I re-registered (from StuFox to Stu_Fox). Whilst we agree on most things, if you think that Doug and myself are one and the same, I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree. I note that Doug has participated in nudist recreation in the past - that is something I would never do. I have viewed this site now for a long time before I decided to register and post. I didn't realise that Doug and I had registered on the same day. I just assumed he'd been coming here for ages. Maybe, and this is just speculation, Doug has done the same and, on seeing my input, he's decided to do the same and voice his agreement Or maybe it's just a co-incidence. I dunno.
As for seeming to be "almost militantly against nudism" - I am nothing ofthe sort. I have not said a single word against responsible nudism, but rather expressed support for it. What I am opposed to is inflicting nudity upon those who do not consent to seeing it.
Stu
|
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 18 |
|
|
|
Bob S.
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/02/2004 : 4:54:28 PM
|
I'm wondering if the prosecutors decided not to go ahead with the trial with the thought that if they were to fail, caselaw would be created.
Bob S.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 39 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 11/02/2004 : 8:54:13 PM
|
Bob,
You are probably right. Too bad they didn't. 
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
Naked yoga OK in San Francisco
