I have a problem with the idea of a bathroom sting to begin with. If there was really a problem at this location, why not post a sign asking people to call xxx-xxxx if they see inappropriate behavior. It was an airport. Everyone has a cell phone, and security would be seconds away.

So why do a 'sting?' Stings allow police to rack up arrests and fine revenue, unlike the posted-sign method. It is a kind of mass-production for cops. I have never, ever encountered gays having sex in a public restroom, so I question whether it's a major problem. Once at a highway reststop, a guy asked me if I wanted a BJ. I declined and went on my way. I'm straight, but I did not have an heart attack, didn't call 911, and didn't feel scarred for life.

I believe the 'sting' concept originated from confidence men. It allows police at times to rope in innocents who wouldn't break the law on their own. It usually targets those not suspected of crimes for investigation, which to my mind should be a Fourth Amendment violation.

You're right Icarus. I think part of it is a nexus of sleaze between police & press. A few years ago this filthiness would not have been reported. It would have been swept under the rug, which sometimes is a good thing. If all of us had to have our most wretched moments opened up, it would not be pretty.

I had not seen that photo of the Sgt who arrested Craig, but I did hear the audio of his interview back when it happened, and he obviously was a weasel. He even looks like a weasel.

I don't like the press/PD nexus of sleaze. Why do PD's now hire ex-reporters as PR people? Why do we have shows like COPS that conflate law enforcement and entertainment?

Maybe the officer who recently posted the 'so you hate cops' thread can explain.

SemperFortis is a great guy, a respected member (at least by me), and a good resource for the law enforcement perspective. I'm not sure what experience he has with this kind of thing, but I would be interested to hear his thoughts, as well.

Semper, are you following this discussion? Want to weigh in?

Some of the things that the ACLU defends do leave me cold. Some of the creepy types that they defend, etc...

But...having said that, for the most part I feel they are a neccessary part of the judicial system...I just wish they'd be a bit more careful about which cases they take in order to defend which ever part of the Constitution they're defending. Sometimes I think they go more for shock value than actual usefulness.

Well said, and my point exactly. Its great they are defending the Constitution, but they don't have to be media whores, chasing publicity and sensationalism while they are at it, imo.

I don't understand why it is illegal for someone to ask another person to have sex. And why do Democrats think it is horrible that someone would ask another of the same sex to have sex?

I'm not sure that's the point. The legal aspect of his guilty plea, the cover-up, and the hypocrisy of Craig's professional stance in the Senate are really the issues that stand out to me. In his personal life, Mr. Craig can do as he wishes within the law. It is immatesticle to me.

Also, it is not illegal to solicit sex. It is illegal to solicit sex for money (prostitution). Mr. Craig pled guilty to disorderly conduct. I believe it was a deal he cut as he was facing other charges stemming from the incident, but only pled guilty to the one.