It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why the NC Bathroom Law, Will Never be Applied to a Pervert...

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2016 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Can you quote me where I said that? Any of that?

I know you're relatively new around here, but a word of advice: many of us are disinclined to defend or explain something that somebody else makes up and then claims we said.




posted on May, 27 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You're right, I didn't read the wiki page.

I read the article that listed every single conviction he has. Which were both felonies and misdemeanors.


But all were for sexual misconduct with a minor.. There were no small charges with Sandusky.. Also a lot of the charges they chose to drop were Big charges.

They drop the ones that are harder to prove and focus on the charges that are easier.


I have been on ATS for a decade, roughly..least 6 or 7 years now that I think about it, just recently came back and couldn't remember my old password so I used FB.


I don't know what I quoted you on incorrectly, my post clearly has question marks behind "so what your saying is.."meaning I was asking, not telling. It was in response to your final paragraph were you seemed to be saying no one good or evil would ever be charged with this law..

I thought implying it was all for naught, but ...



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You're right, I didn't read the wiki page.

I read the article that listed every single conviction he has. Which were both felonies and misdemeanors.


But all were for sexual misconduct with a minor.. There were no small charges with Sandusky.. Also a lot of the charges they chose to drop were Big charges.

They drop the ones that are harder to prove and focus on the charges that are easier.


I have been on ATS for a decade, roughly..least 6 or 7 years now that I think about it, just recently came back and couldn't remember my old password so I used FB.


I don't know what I quoted you on incorrectly, my post clearly has question marks behind "so what your saying is.."meaning I was asking, not telling. It was in response to your final paragraph were you seemed to be saying no one good or evil would ever be charged with this law..

I thought implying it was all for naught, but ...



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You do understand that the literal definition of misdemeanor is that it's a lesser crime, right?

Lesser crime is lesser crime. They had Sandusky for misdemeanors and felonies both, prosecuted for both, and got convictions for both.

And yes, I am saying nobody will prosecuted for violating HB2, because HB2 is not criminal code. The only thing HB2 did in this regard is clarify who's allowed to be in what bathroom (not getting in to all the discriminatory stuff about jobs here). HB2 did not make it any more or less illegal for a man to use a women's restroom or vice versa. The charges would still be anything from trespassing to indecent exposure and any of a dozen other similar charges. "Violation of HB2" is not a charge. It is not in the criminal code. Ergo, you can't be charged for violating it. You can be charged, just as you could before HB2 was ever a bill, for being in the wrong place, in addition to being charged for whatever acts you commit while there.
edit on 27-5-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You do understand that the literal definition of misdemeanor is that it's a lesser crime, right?

Lesser crime is lesser crime. They had Sandusky for misdemeanors and felonies both, prosecuted for both, and got convictions for both.

And yes, I am saying nobody will prosecuted for violating HB2, because HB2 is not criminal code. The only thing HB2 did in this regard is clarify who's allowed to be in what bathroom (not getting in to all the discriminatory stuff about jobs here). HB2 did not make it any more or less illegal for a man to use a women's restroom or vice versa. The charges would still be anything from trespassing to indecent exposure and any of a dozen other similar charges. "Violation of HB2" is not a charge. It is not in the criminal code. Ergo, you can't be charged for violating it. You can be charged, just as you could before HB2 was ever a bill, for being in the wrong place, in addition to being charged for whatever acts you commit while there.


It is still a lesser crime AGAINST A CHILD. Making it inherently carry more weight than a speeding or bathroom ticket.



There have been criminal charges placed..I think it is 500$ and 1 year in prison.

I'll try and confirm it..but after the initial outcry of "that's unenforcable, what would the penalty even be?" You did have a penalty get set.



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Ok well when you start putting qualifiers in there that are solely there to support your claim, I'm sure you're right. Never mind that in your OJ example, speeding (it was a low speed chase and he wasn't driving, but we'll ignore that) is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor. But we can pretend it's a misdemeanor, and then toss some qualifiers in on top of that, and yep you're right. You win the Internet buddy.

HB2 has no enforcement or penalty clause as it stands, and has not been amended so far to include either one. Beyond that, short of assigning law enforcement to stand outside every public restroom and check birth certificates (which again, the law does not require people to do), there's no way to enforce it. Oh, and again, it's not criminal code. It's civil.
edit on 27-5-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Ok well when you start putting qualifiers in there that are solely there to support your claim, I'm sure you're right. Never mind that in your OJ example, speeding (it was a low speed chase and he wasn't driving, but we'll ignore that) is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor. But we can pretend it's a misdemeanor, and then toss some qualifiers in on top of that, and yep you're right. You win the Internet buddy.

HB2 has no enforcement or penalty clause as it stands, and has not been amended so far to include either one. Beyond that, short of assigning law enforcement to stand outside every public restroom and check birth certificates (which again, the law does not require people to do), there's no way to enforce it. Oh, and again, it's not criminal code. It's civil.


Exactly, until you get some cop who is an @$$ and/or some "concerned citizen" who decides to report some one.

Then I just went to jail for dipping in the ladies because the men's was occupied/out of order....and the law will back the @$$ cop up...



posted on May, 27 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Trespassing is trespassing. It was before HB2 and it still is. Acting as if HB2 has somehow changed that is, frankly, asinine.



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Trespassing is trespassing. It was before HB2 and it still is. Acting as if HB2 has somehow changed that is, frankly, asinine.



Is using the ladies when the men's is out of order trespassing??

Has anyone in the history of America been charged with a crime for taking leek in a bathroom??

Now they will..



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Ok well when you start putting qualifiers in there that are solely there to support your claim, I'm sure you're right. Never mind that in your OJ example, speeding (it was a low speed chase and he wasn't driving, but we'll ignore that) is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor. But we can pretend it's a misdemeanor, and then toss some qualifiers in on top of that, and yep you're right. You win the Internet buddy.

HB2 has no enforcement or penalty clause as it stands, and has not been amended so far to include either one. Beyond that, short of assigning law enforcement to stand outside every public restroom and check birth certificates (which again, the law does not require people to do), there's no way to enforce it. Oh, and again, it's not criminal code. It's civil.



A 500$ fine and 6 months in jail...


www.cnn.com...



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Last I checked Oxford, Alabama isn't in North Carolina and not subject to North Carolina HB2.



posted on May, 28 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Don't know, why you don't you research 200-odd years of case law and let us know.



posted on May, 31 2016 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Last I checked Oxford, Alabama isn't in North Carolina and not subject to North Carolina HB2.


Omg you completely invalidated my entire point by pointing out the penalty was in Alabama, not NC!!!!


Sarcasm....



Lol



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Actually you took care of that for me. All I did was point it out. All the other stuff I said is how I invalidated your entire premise, point by point.

It's your thread title, not mine. It specifically mentions NC HB2, not Oxford, Alabama.

I didn't draw any state lines. Somebody else did that a while ago.

Not sarcasm.

Lulz.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join