Drag is not always trying to hide your sex. It is often highlighting aspects of masculinity/femininity.
Tough Day To Be In Law Enforcement
- Thread starter JazzGal
- Start date
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
...as people who are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Topless dancers are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Go-Go dancers are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Exotic dancers are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Strippers are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Male impersonators are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Female impersonators are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Yes the law specifically includes male and female impersonators among those who are not allowed to provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult. The law also specifically mentions "a person" but that doesn't mean Tennessee is banning those who believe they are a person. Tennessee is prohibiting persons from providing entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult. They are just being inclusive about prohibiting entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, a.k.a. a strip show, on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
Last edited:
Considering that you view any cartoon that has a penis as appealing to a prurient interest, you'll understand that I take this as a confirmation of my position, as opposed to a rebuttal.
Your read poorly. Not only Is there no reference to strip shows in the law, but the phrase "prurient interest" applies only to male and female impersonators, as the position of "or similar entertainers" makes clear.
Since we live in a world where sexually repressed people refers to nude bicyclers as groomers, or think any cartoon depiction of a penis is pornography, we also live in a world where "prurient" is in the eye of the beholder and cross-dressers/trans people do not have the right of self-defense. You are thinking about how the law will be applied to people like you; I am think about how the law will be applied to people unlike me.
Arizona Trans Woman Arrested and Jailed for Self-Defense
Arizona is a “stand your ground” state. For those who don’t know, that means that if you feel threatened by someone, but you have the ability to safely retreat, you have no legal …
freethoughtblogs.com
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
‘Defund the police’ activist goes viral after begging for help when everything she owned was stolen in San Francisco: ‘The cops didn’t do s—!’
She slammed the police when they did not immediately locate her possessions just hours after she reported them stolen.
nypost.com
Anti-police activist begs for help after thieves stole U-Haul truck
A 'defund the police' advocate was left pleading for help to find a stolen moving truck after her U-Haul was nabbed by thieves on the streets of San Francisco.
On some days, the universe does its thing.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
The police haven't been defunded so she is correct to expect that they will provide full service since she and everyone else is still paying for full service.‘Defund the police’ activist goes viral after begging for help when everything she owned was stolen in San Francisco: ‘The cops didn’t do s—!’
She slammed the police when they did not immediately locate her possessions just hours after she reported them stolen.
Anti-police activist begs for help after thieves stole U-Haul truck
A 'defund the police' advocate was left pleading for help to find a stolen moving truck after her U-Haul was nabbed by thieves on the streets of San Francisco.www.dailymail.co.uk
On some days, the universe does its thing.
It's like if I lived in an HOA that charged for landscaping to include the front yards of all the properties. I might advocate for eliminating the landscaping services to lower the HOA fees. If I'm unsuccessful in doing that and HOA fees continue to pay for landscaping you better ****ing believe I'm expecting my front yard to be mowed regularly.
Note: I didn't read The Daily Mail or NY Post articles because both of those are trash that I don't support. I'm not suggesting the article is a lie, why I'm saying this is that if she was a total Karen about this I don't know, and it really doesn't change the basic facts.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
An allegory with stronger parallels would be that you were successful at reducing the landscaping costs, things started to go wrong causing the landscaping service to be reinstated but not at a level adequate to undo the period of neglect, and one morning a heavy tree branch fell on your car.
The mayor of San Francisco did freeze hiring of police and reallocated $120 million from law enforcement to the African American community. The mayor did finally see the huge mistake she had made and a couple years later set about undoing her earlier actions, but the SFPD has still not been able to hire enough officers, the crime rate in San Francisco is still ridiculous, and the mayor lost her job because of it.
https://sanfranciscodsa.com/mayor-l...-defunding-of-san-franciscos-law-enforcement/
I don't have a problem with the Karen being upset over being a victim of crime after she herself had advocated for changes to the system that boosted the crime rate. I hope she gets her stuff back. I hope they put the thieves in jail for an extended period, but I and many others see the irony in the situation, or at a minimum it being a case of chickens coming home to roost.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
No.
Police are still funded in SF.
The problem here is not about how many police officers are getting overtime pay. The problems in SF are multifaceted and deeper than "more cops = less crime".
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
More cops do equal less crime. San Francisco was a place where the budget for law enforcement was actually slashed. The funding has since been reinstated, but the force has not been staffed back to the levels of when the cuts were made.
“If you give us a billion dollars tomorrow, it doesn’t give us police officers the next day,” Walsh said.
In the face of a staffing deficit, is SFPD trying hard enough to recruit?
This fall, SFPD plans to join forces with a criminal justice program at Sacramento State. Will it help the department fill the staffing gaps?
sfstandard.com
San Francisco is having problems recruiting officers. The problem is the hostile environment created by people like the Karen who had all of her stuff stolen in the U-Haul.
America has too many layers of law enforcement, should be simple, federal police, state police, having policing run my mayors and elected sheriffs is ridiculous. Professional, centralised state run service its how most countries do things in the 21st century.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
It's the way it should be. More uniform (pun intended) enforcement, better training, higher professionalism, more bang (pun intended) for the buck.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
That is the worst thing you could do to law enforcement for two reasons. The first is that it would make law enforcement entirely unaccountable to the people being policed. It would effectively turn all police into the FBI. Being real for a moment, how easy do you think it would be for you to get the FBI to change a policy you disagreed with? What would you do? Make a complaint to the head of the FBI in Washington DC? Write to the President? San Francisco is a perfect example where an errant course of action was changed due to mayor London Breed being local and directly accountable.
The second reason is that the whole law enforcement apparatus becomes more brittle do to the inflexibility of having a single point of control. Distributed systems are more resilient, and law enforcement is no exception. If the law enforcement is uniform, then there is no escaping bad policing because it is the same everywhere, and I guarantee you it will never be the perfect utopia police you have pictured in your mind if only you give total control of it to the Executive Branch in Washington DC.
We have so many layers of law enforcement in order to provide more accountability to those being policed. We have a Federal Police, but States are allowed to set up their own and they'll have jurisdictional control if they do. Counties are allowed to set up their own and they'll have jurisdictional control if they do. Towns are allowed to set up their own and they'll have jurisdictional control if they do. If a town doesn't choose to set up their own police then they can use the county law enforcement agency. If a county doesn't choose to set up a law enforcement agency then they can use the state's law enforcement, and if a state decided they didn't want to do law enforcement then they could use the federal's law enforcement. The whole system is designed to be as locally controlled and locally accountable as those being policed want it to be.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
The local police don't answer to the people and they never have. They answer to the people with money. They protect businesses from the people. They protect the wealthiest most powerful people. The more localized you can get the police the smaller, less wealthy, and less powerful the people in charge have to be, so in some middle sized rural town the guy who runs the chicken nugget factory gets to tell the cops what to do. They essentially become his little band of thugs and carry out his petty tyrant fantasies.
I'm tempted to get into a deeper discussion on what I think the essence of law enforcement should be, but it's enough for me to say that the things I value do not improve because some podunk town decides to have their own police department.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Just a reminder that SF’s murder rate is significantly lower than cities in red states. Or red states in particular. It’s not like Mississippi or Arkansas are actually managed well. Anyone here want to retire to West Virginia? North Dakota, lovely place.
SF gets a disproportionate amount of attention by the right because it has become the symbol for everything the right hates. But it’s not like the majority of red towns or states are managed well. In fact, most with intelligence or talent leave those **** holes and build their lives in coastal cities, like San Francisco.
Might be a good study for someone more interested in this subject. Is one of the reasons why so many in red areas kill themselves off with drugs and guns because they hate where they live? Is it because they live with guilt knowing that those more talented or ambitious left their towns when they could? Seems like there might be a connection between the ****** quality of life in red **** holes and their divorce rates, murder rates, and crime rates.
SF gets a disproportionate amount of attention by the right because it has become the symbol for everything the right hates. But it’s not like the majority of red towns or states are managed well. In fact, most with intelligence or talent leave those **** holes and build their lives in coastal cities, like San Francisco.
Might be a good study for someone more interested in this subject. Is one of the reasons why so many in red areas kill themselves off with drugs and guns because they hate where they live? Is it because they live with guilt knowing that those more talented or ambitious left their towns when they could? Seems like there might be a connection between the ****** quality of life in red **** holes and their divorce rates, murder rates, and crime rates.
Last edited:
I would say there is a pretty good correlation between ease of access to firearms and homicide rates.... Aside from anything else it is much easier to kill with a gun than with other means.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
Cities in red states are blue areas. As for SF being highlighted, it was because the U-Haul was stolen while in SF.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
Police seize $100,000 cash from veteran who did nothing wrong and had receipts for the money. Based on? Oh well when they showed the cash to their drug dog it signaled that it smelled like drugs. The majority of U.S. currency has traces of cocaine on it and will pretty much always cause a drug dog to alert.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
Good point. Hopefully that PD is able to buy an armored personal carrier with the money they seized so they can more effectively serve their community.