pullnshoot25
Regular Member
I think Sam made the news again! Watch it and, if you can record and post it, please do!
Last edited:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
KGTV 10 News at 11. Watch it!
- Thread starter pullnshoot25
- Start date
Gundude
Regular Member
Sam and the TSA
Here ya go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_y5VWTg8No&feature=player_embedded#at=36
Here ya go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_y5VWTg8No&feature=player_embedded#at=36
Iopencarry
Regular Member
Good Job Sam
cato
Newbie
And for the return trip? Is someone monitoring the Detroit news stations? Can Jason practice in Michigan? Is Sam OCing in Detroit? Inquiring minds want to know!
Last edited:
Thanks Sam!!
The supremes have ruled (I can't find the case; sorry for not giving a citation) that clothing must cover certain parts of the body. Namely, the anal cleft and pubic area. Women must cover the airola and nipples of their breasts (unless a women is in New York City; a judge ruled that under the equal protection clause, women don't need to cover their breasts if men do not have to).
Police are not supposed to be judges of pop-fashion. Police are to ensure that a person's private parts are covered, AND THAT IS ALL!
Therefore, wearing tighty-whiteys, boxers, or panties is legal.
Sam's actions are bigger than a TSA tussle. This is constitutional stuff--more than the illegal search and seizure stuff (4A). This is also a 1A issue.
markm
The supremes have ruled (I can't find the case; sorry for not giving a citation) that clothing must cover certain parts of the body. Namely, the anal cleft and pubic area. Women must cover the airola and nipples of their breasts (unless a women is in New York City; a judge ruled that under the equal protection clause, women don't need to cover their breasts if men do not have to).
Police are not supposed to be judges of pop-fashion. Police are to ensure that a person's private parts are covered, AND THAT IS ALL!
Therefore, wearing tighty-whiteys, boxers, or panties is legal.
Sam's actions are bigger than a TSA tussle. This is constitutional stuff--more than the illegal search and seizure stuff (4A). This is also a 1A issue.
markm
cato
Newbie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indecent_exposure_in_the_United_States
What they said is that a state law regulating public nudity doesn't violate the 1A. CA has no state law against nudity that I know of. 314 PC is for lewd conduct that doesn't apply to general nudity.