ACLU and Craig Defense - PLEASE read the brief / press release (provided)

[Political Heretic]

The thread titled something like ACLU says sex in public bathrooms is private, or something like that is from an article title that is horribly, horribly misleading. It has spawned a huge thread with a massive number of people missing the point (after reading the article, which is understandable.)

Acknowledgment of bias: I am a former ACLU employee who returned to school to finish my master's degree. Thus I am a strong supporter of their work. Nevertheless, read the brief and press release for yourself to see how their points have been a bit distorted by the sensationalized article.

Brief:
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/31842lgl20070917.html

And press release here:
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/33697prs20080116.html


This is the important statement:

The Minnesota Supreme Court and other courts have found that a closed bathroom stall is a private location. The police have no business spying on people in places where there is an expectation of privacy.

The article puts its own spin on it basically saying, "oh so you're arguing that everyone should just be having sex in bathroom stalls everywhere!" In reality, the ACLU's CORRECT point is that the police have no authority to initiate spying in places that have been determined to be "private" by the State Supreme Court without a warrant. In other words, what is at issue here is the entrapment, not some advocacy for mass sex in bathrooms.

EDIT - Links fixed!

[gateley]

1. I've always wondered about whether or not a cop sitting in a noted pick-up

restroom is entrapment. But to be honest, I didn't care when it came to Craig. :blush:

I feel your frustration and anger -- that WAS misleading. As usual, the ACLU gets it right.

[Political Heretic]

2. I am so totally cool with not caring when it comes to Craig! But, for the ACLU as an organization-

- I'm glad they understand that larger issues at stake. The issue of privacy is probably one of the most critical battlefront issues facing us in the 21st century, and the questions about what sort of authority and control police forces should be legally allowed to exert over the people in the name of security or safety is very much an issue that affects us all!

Cheers!

[Berry Cool]

3. I still have an issue

which is, personally I wouldn't care if the police spied on women using public bathroom stalls as phone booths and arrested the whole lot of 'em.

And I'm really not that tortured about them arresting guys who appear to be trolling for sex in the bathroom either.

I'm afraid I may have to turn in some kind of badge now.

[Political Heretic]

4. Yeah, the bage would be your civil rights badge...

...which protects the innocent, (i.e. you, not "some guy" trolling for sex in the bathroom) from inappropriate or legally out of bounds search or entrapment.

Holders of the badge believe that its better to let some guys get away with trolling for sex than to allow law enforcement continue to intrude on privacy and allow further and further spying or searches without showing cause (i.e. getting warrant.) :)

[dsc]

5. what if some cop decides that 'appears to be trolling for sex in the bathroom'

is equivalent to gay? Would it still be OK to arrest them?