Comments on: Guns yup, walking nope

By: Ista

Ista — Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:00:00 +0000

Timbeaux: The problem is outlawing a perfectly legal activity and qualifying that by making it illegal only for a certain group of the population in order to prevent them from committing another, complete separate, illegal act. From the point of view of the law, that’s just discrimanatory nonsense. (And have a kit kat.)

By: john b

john b — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:41:00 +0000

Blaring my car horn up and down the neighborhood streets at 2 am is non-harmful

Disagree. Non-harmful doesn't necessarily mean 'non-physically-harmful'.

And yes, if hookers are shagging their punters and shooting up heroin in your back garden, the police should get involved. But the main reason prostitution can involve such things is because prostitutes aren't *allowed* to work in safe brothels run by non-bastards or advertise in the paper, not because they prefer to work on the streets and get beaten up.

By: Timbeaux

Timbeaux — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:12:00 +0000

Aww, gimme a break. They aren’t rounding up school children walking home from class or even the bum pushing a cart full of aluminum cans. KNOWN prostitutes (i.e. repeat offenders)….what’s the problem? It’s not like it’s the Vieux Caree after midnight and they’d have to arrest half the women they see.

As for the non-harmful acts…..that’s a bit short sighted IMHO. Blaring my car horn up and down the neighborhood streets at 2 am is non-harmful, but I bet it would promote quite a bit of violence from the offended (if given the chance). Prostitution is non-harmful….that’s funny.

By: Ista

Ista — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:59:00 +0000

I hope they put up big signs saying "Walking is illegal around here because this is the only thing our little minds can come up with in the righteous fight against prostitution". Poor tourists, otherwise. (If they get any in Charlotte, North Carolina).

By: john b

john b — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:27:00 +0000

Of course I think prostitution should be legal, along with taking drugs, saying rude things about people, running a profitable business, etc (and possession of guns, as it happens…). We should arrest people for the violence, not for the non-harmful acts that allegedly promote violence.

And I’m well aware that ‘assault weapon’, like ‘weapon of mass destruction’, is a meaningless term designed entirely to scare people.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:08:00 +0000

Did you read Farenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury? A dystopian-future-type-book, in which books were illegal and being a pedestrian was a criminal offence.

A minimum driving speed was also imposed, at around 50mph. Maybe Charlotte, North Carolina could follow this example to put an end to curb-crawling?

By: Timbeaux

Timbeaux — Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:43:00 +0000

Why bother shooting them? Generally a good look at your evil "assault weapon" (a more meaningless term couldn’t exist) is all that’s necessary.

http://bluecollarphilosopher.com/archives/000025.html

I suppose you think that prositution, and its accompanying drugs and violence, are a natural right?