BlognonyBITS - The Cooter Gets A Bye
He's arrested for exposing himself,
Convicted, and labeled a sex criminal.
Britney Spears goes commando and gets
Photographed with her cootchie exposed.
People gossip, leer, and opine but...
...nobody gets arrested. WTF?
Now that's Americana.
Lew... She barfed in the SUV. Does that count?
Fred... Bread and circuses.
Mags... Eeeewwww! People are making money off of that. It's all over the place. I can't imagine how.
God forbid we just look the other way in both events!!
Because the men in charge of things like that didn't think little Billy would be traumatized by seeing it?
Because the Media needed something really sleazy and prurient to attract attention away from the death count in Iraq?
Because the Libby trial was heating up and at all costs there had to be something to take voters minds off of Scootergate?
Nah. Can't be.
"A bum takes a pee against a wall.
He's arrested for exposing himself..."
Yeah. When? This happens daily in New York City. The charge is public urination.
"Convicted, and labeled a sex criminal."
Give me an example of someone who is arrested for public urination who was subsequently convicted of a sex crime and entered into the sex offenders database.
"Britney Spears goes commando and gets Photographed with her cootchie exposed."
There's so many photographers following her and other shameless performers that it's more likely the photographers have invaded the privacy of the people they hound rather than the celebrities breaking laws.
I'm sure the photographers would put surveillance cameras in toilet bowls if they thought they'd get a shot of Britney's crotch.
People gossip, leer, and opine but...
...nobody gets arrested.
Not that I care, but Princess Diana probably died simply because her half-drunk driver was attempting to slip away from the photogs while she was sneaking around with her boyfriend.
And as clueless as ever!
Why? It's a hypothetical situation.
What is not hypothetical is California's Prop 83. It requries registration for any conviction for a sex offense, misdemeanor or felony. The bum who pees against a wall and Britney Spears would both qualify as indecent exposure, but if you're going to assert that they'd both get the same treatment, you're naive. Florida, Alabama, New Hampshire, and Georgia (I think) have the same requirement for indecent exposure with no separate category for 'public urination'. Though NH only makes you register for 10 years.
"Why? It's a hypothetical situation."
Shows what you know. My question is absolutely NOT hypothetical. In fact, based on your use of the term, I don't think you know the meaning of "hypothetical."
People, men mostly, are arrested for public urination in NYC daily. They are NEVER prosecuted as sex offenders.
The list of convicted NY sex offenders who have been released from prison is available. The crimes of the ex-cons are listed. Not one of the offenders was incarcerated for emptying his bladder in view of others.
"What is not hypothetical is California's Prop 83. It requries registration for any conviction for a sex offense, misdemeanor or felony."
No kidding. New York does the same.
"The bum who pees against a wall and Britney Spears would both qualify as indecent exposure..."
Only in your mind. You've concluded -- without actual examples -- that peeing on a wall is a sex offense. If you were right, you would have no trouble providing examples of convictions.
You can be sure no one would plea-bargain UP a public urination charge into a guilty plea to a sex offense.
Meanwhile, Britney won't get nailed for public lewdness either. In her case, the constant presence of photographers actually helps her. They wait for the inevitable moment when a woman exits a car and must spread her legs to complete the process.
She's never naked or behaving in a deliberately "lewd" manner. She's simply caught in those motions that are hard to manage when you're wearing a short skirt.
"...but if you're going to assert that they'd both get the same treatment, you're naive."
Now you're changing the subject -- again. First you attempted to claim legal equivalence between two very different infractions. Second, YOU have finally entered into the land of the HYPOTHETICAL.
With your "if" you set up the hypothetical situation.
Meanwhile, there's no doubt a bum peeing on a wall and Britney face different legal treatment. But neither of them -- within the context of actions described here -- face sex charges of any sort.
Furthermore, if public urination were truly a sex crime, every homeless person in the country would land behind bars forever.
"Florida, Alabama, New Hampshire, and Georgia (I think) have the same requirement for indecent exposure with no separate category for 'public urination'. Though NH only makes you register for 10 years."
Check the laws on public urination. Peeing against a wall doesn't rise to the level of "indecent."