I am Simon Jester

No, Er, Looking

Posted by Hazel Stone | Filed under Buttinskis, Idiot Legislation

When did Maine become California?

Those who peer at children in public could find themselves on the wrong side of the law in Maine soon.

A bill that passed the House last month aims to strengthen the crime of visual sexual aggression against children, according to state Rep. Dawn Hill, D-York.

“Visual sexual aggression.”  What do you suppose that is, exactly?

Her involvement started when Ogunquit Police Lt. David Alexander was called to a local beach to deal with a man who appeared to be observing children entering the community bathrooms. Because the state statute prevents arrests for visual sexual aggression of a child in a public place, Alexander said he and his fellow officer could only ask the man to move along.

“There was no violation of law that we could enforce. There was nothing we could charge him with,” Alexander said.

A man observed children entering the community bathrooms.  Was he perhaps a father, waiting for his child?  Was he perhaps a boyfriend, waiting for his girlfriend?  A conscientious son, waiting for his slow-moving aged mother?  These are all possibilities.  And when questioned by a cop in a public place, he is fully within his rights to refuse to answer.  Frankly, it’s none of your business what I’m doing here, officer, this is a public place and I am violating no laws. In fact, what right do they have to tell him to move along from said public place at all?

Now don’t get me wrong…anyone who thinks of children as objects to satisfy their disgusting desires is a candidate for public flaying in Hazeltown…but this stupid legislation is nothing more than a further intrusion into the lives and rights of private citizens.

You want to protect children from predators?  Issue hunting licenses on them then.  Offer cash bounties for their heads.  Then the next time someone is seen to grab a child…and it is always seen by someone…that someone will find their head gracing a pole outside city hall.  Easy.  And normal citizens looking around a public park to see where their children have gotten off to won’t have to worry about being questioned by police officers because they’re “peering” in a predacious manner.

Maine Picadors, Rep. Dawn Hill (D) needs the error of her “logic” elucidated.

Tags: calling all picadors, use your head

Permalink | Comments (2) | April 14, 2008

Help Support Simon-Jester.org!

2 Responses to “No, Er, Looking”

1. Madrocketscientist Says:
   April 16th, 2008

   I gotta wonder, why is a lawmaker putting forth a bill on the recommendation of a single police officer?

   I mean where is the public hew and cry about people looking at bathrooms?

   Reply
2. MadRocketScientist Says:
   April 18th, 2008

   Good News, this law is not as asinine as originally thought.

   From Dr. Helen:

   At least, that’s what Travis Kennedy, Communications Director for Maine Rep. Dawn Hill just told me on the phone. Despite what the news story reported, Kennedy says that the bill never punished mere staring or leering — the defendant has to be touching or exposing himself, or doing something like looking over a bathroom stall wall. And he said that the burden of proof remains on the state for all elements — there’s no crime just because someone is staring or looking at you.

   He says that the bill in question just made a minor change in the pre-existing law to make clear that this could be in a private or a public place. He also said that Rep. Hill has been getting a lot of complaints over this, and is upset that the story is false. So there you are — things aren’t quite as insane out there as we’d feared.

   Reply

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail