It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


This is what happens due to all the Megan's Law

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 8 2005 @ 02:11 PM
2 Protesters Arrested After Going Topless

There is talk in the article about labeling these people as sex offenders.
To me this is crossing the line, very ridiculous and should be fought against.

Does this mean that breast feeding mothers can be labeled as sex offenders?

Some serious discussion needs to take place determining certain criteria that meets sex offender status.

[edit on 8-11-2005 by ferretman]

posted on Nov, 8 2005 @ 03:59 PM

Originally posted by ferretman
Some serious discussion needs to take place determining certain criteria that meets sex offender status.

I would have to agree. This is a good example of the Government using a good law in a bad way. True sex offenders, child molesters, rapists, etc should be shot or put away forever but a topless woman or a flasher, etc hardly counts as a dangerous person

posted on Nov, 9 2005 @ 12:41 PM
I don't think someone should be put on the list unless they've actually attacked someone or attempted to do so.

Taking a whizz against a telephone pole is not being a sexual predator.

posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 02:24 PM
Sexual offender? Arresting them is bad enough. 'Thank you almighty religous minded legislators for giving us such great laws. We are humble.'

I say some serious determination needs to be made as to what consitutes a crime. Taking your shirt off, owning a plant and preventing yourself from being stolen from are all crimes? Strange.

posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 02:44 PM
There are a number of laws regulating sexual activities and display in this country.

It's extremely offensive to see you blame this on "Meagan's Law."

Meagan's law sys that schools and parents are to be notified when a dangerous sex offender moves into the neighborhood:

Secondly, being topless (or even nude) is allowed in every state in the nation -- on private property and in designated areas. "indecency laws" (not Meagan's law) determines what is indecent in various areas.

Protesters have been doing the streaking/topless protesting in pubic for generations. They know they're going to get arrested if they try it. So if they're doing it, their goal is to get attention and to get arrested (either that, or they're simply incredibly stupid.)

Some serious discussion needs to take place determining certain criteria that meets sex offender status.

Do YOU know the statues?

How can serious discussion take place if you don't know them?

posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 02:55 PM
According to California's site (California allows citizens to search for offenders in thier area online: Breastfeeding mothers hardly qualify as "sex offenders"

Sex Offender Registration
Initial Registration. Penal Code section 290 requires mandatory registration as a sex offender for persons convicted of the sex offenses listed in that section. §290(a)(2)(A)-(E). Even if the offense is not listed in section 290, the person may be ordered by a court to register as a sex offender if the criminal offense committed was sexually motivated. Section 290 applies automatically to the enumerated offenses, and imposes on each person convicted a lifelong obligation to register.

posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 08:01 AM
But here is the problem, if they bare thier Breasts in public, then get arrested as a sex offender, they would ahve to register under the megans law, and the first thing people will think of is that they molested a children, and not Bared thier breasts as a protest, or urinated on a tree. Regardless if any minors saw the act.

The world will becoming to an end when Breast freeing mothers become sexual offenders

posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 07:01 PM
My fine you people you have been mis-led by a reporter from the LA Times. These ladies can not be charged as sex offenders as the reporter said.

despite warnings from the California Highway Patrol last week that doing so would lead to their arrests — and possibly their inclusion on the state's list of sex offenders

I have emailed Reporter Evan Halper to see where this information was derived from. I will let you know what response I get from him or the TIMES.

Here (actually contained in the story) is what they were actually charge with:

Soon after, Glaser, 45, removed her top and was promptly arrested. Renee Love, 40, also of Albion, was arrested after she removed her top. Both were charged with indecent exposure, disorderly conduct and going beyond the scope of their permit to demonstrate on state property.

There are some parts of the law that state things like "xx feet within a school" and 'in presence of children under 16". I am not exactly sure where the protest took place in relation to the proximity of children, but I can't imagine that the "sex offender" charge could stand up in this case.

I think an over zealous reporter has gotten everybody worked up.

I will let you know what I find.

- One Man Short

[edit to fix quote marks]

[edit on 13-11-2005 by One Man Short of Manhood]

posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 09:32 PM


Dear **** *****,

Thank you so much for your interest in and communications with the Los Angeles Times.

Your email has been received and will be forwarded on to the proper department, and if warranted, a response will be sent at our earliest convenience.

Thanks again for contacting!

Automated email responses, not just for porn sites

- One Man Short

posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 09:49 PM
Where does the line become crossed though? When I lived on campus, during college, there were many rapes, flashings, ect;

My roomate, at 2 pm was walking home on a populated road when a man was, well, *guess* while DRIVING his car next to her with the door open. He was unclothed from the waist down. She was the butt of our jokes for awhile after that

During Christmas break, I was getting ready to go home, and most everyone else had left. I had a boston terrier with me(who was no guard dog but better than nothing) and I saw a man kinda skulking around and watching me. It came on my radar, but I was an idiot and believed I was invincible. Nothing could happen to ME. Oh the stupid naivete' of a 19 year old.

Anyhow, I got in my car and as I was driving off, the guy was in road with his pants to his knees and was well, happy to see me to put it as tactfully as possible.

Do these things consider sex crimes? I thank God daily I made it out of college with no terrible things happening. I sure wasn't as careful as I should have been

Do you think these flasher types, who watch and pick out those they are going to do this to eventually cross the line?? This isn't breastfeeding or Girls gone wild. It was truly a gross experience.

posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 08:02 AM
The sad thing about this is that if it were in Texas and these ladies did this it would be no questions asked. They would be listed as sex offenders. Public display of nudity is grounds for registering as a sex offender; along with urinating in public, flashing,...etc.

I just hope in the future that this law will be revamped to better explain the difference between REAL sex crimes and not just college kids having fun flashing there friends.

IE: My best friend has to register as a sex offender because at a party he flashed the "full moon" to the rest of the party members and just one person that didn't like the guy reported him to the police. Now he has to register for 10years probated and 10 years after that for location. He will be 46 when he gets his name off the registration, for just mooning.

posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 02:10 PM
See, there is a difference between mooning in jest/flashing boobs because you are at Mardi Gras(or a party whatever) And someone who gets a sexual thrill, like peeping or the two type experiences I discussed

I think the two men/experiences I mentioned ARE worthy of a sex offender label. I know what that man *had* to have been doing while he was watching me, as the state he was in when I went by(I was in my car and he was smack in the middle of the road)

I think that kind will probably cross the line at some point

And no, I don't think mooning/flashing while being silly is a crime worthy of a sex offender label

[edit on 11/14/2005 by llpoolej]

posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 02:37 AM
This is why the US justice system is one of the biggest jokes in the universe. We have the state of New York, whose supremes just released 12 sex offenders that did things like rape 3 year olds. But an 18 year old kid who has sex with his 16 year old girlfriend will be basically crucified with Megan's Law. Same perhaps with these girls showing boobs. It is insane to me the things that go on a thousand times a day across this country. We have a gaping, oozing border with a third world country and wont put another dime into it, but we will spend billions a year on a invading and then hand holding another country for the next perhaps DECADES.

Doesn't anyone have common sense here? Do we have any moderate leaders that can look at things on a case by case, decide as it happens perspective???

And the sad part is, is that this country is one of the top 3 best countries on the planet! It's time for the aliens to invade and wipe us out! HURRY HURRY!!! BEFORE WE SPREAD THIS # ALLOVER THE UNIVERSE. KILL US NOW!!!

Ok sorry.

posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 03:17 AM
No its wrong here when a 30 or 40 year old man, gets drunk rapes his 11 year old niece and gets six to 12 months jail for it.

Its wrong when they let serial admitted sex offender paedophiles out of jail and then moan when the neighbourhood they move him into protests because its a small country community and right across the road is a daycare centre.. and its even more wrong when they do move him to another small country town that less than six months later he is back in court for molesting two more little girls. Lost innocence.

Its wrong when you are a woman and eight months pregnant to be followed as your walking along at night, and the guy following you has his privates being very public, so public he is drooling over you and fondling them

Its wrong when a pack of guys rape women and then kill them
its wrong when a husband rapes his wife continually and violently
Its wrong when your daughter gets molested by a trusted family member

Its also wrong to stop a woman breastfeeding wherever she may do it......and its so wong telling women they have to keep their clothes on otherwise face the consequences of being labelled with the freaks I mentioned above.

For crumbs sake we were born naked, its only society's closed mindedness and shame that decreees we are not naked to this day. Why should I have to wear a top? Why should I be told that I have to dress to conform act to conform o actually conform...

* looks down at self.....but then again.......its wrong at times to flash 40 year old ( • Y • ) around for kicks..

[edit on 19-11-2005 by Mayet]

posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 08:14 AM

Originally posted by Mayet
* looks down at self.....but then again.......its wrong at times to flash 40 year old ( • Y • ) around for kicks..

I knew I voted for you for a reason!

Great addition to a very meaningful post, I just had to pick out the last line because you reached "the funnny" region of my brain.

40 year olds ROCK!

- One Man Short

posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 10:30 AM
Wow, this is pretty ridiculas. It's cool to go to war with 3rd world countries and murder tons of innocent people, but women going topless in a protest!??!? WOAH! That's so inhumane!!!!!

posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 10:53 AM
Seems to me that there needs to be some way to differentiate between the various levels of severity of these crimes. The example above of the individual that has to register as a sex offender because he 'mooned' people at a party is rather extreme. I mean, if he is going to be required to register, there needs to be something that indicates that it was not a violent crime, or a crime against a particular individual or something.

Edit: Spelling

[edit on 11/30/2005 by DCFusion]

top topics


log in