http://www.cleveland.com/lake/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/lake/1185438652128710.xml&coll=2
2007-07-27 08:15:13 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
I think sentencing someone by making them wear a chicken suit for soliciting prostitutes serves no good.
In the city I live in, we've had drunk drivers sentenced to having something put on their car that says they have been convicted of drunk driving, and to be careful around them. Again, they might as well put them in the gallows of Town Square.
I prefer sentencing people to some form of community service that teaches them the consequences of their crime(s), i.e., having someone who burned a building have to help rebuild the building.
2007-07-27 11:29:13 · answer #1 · answered by Rainbow 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That judge missed a career in show business. His sentences do not sound justified; funny, bizarre, kind of crazy, but not justified.
I have no idea if 30 days in jail is the usual sentence for soliciting or for an "average" misdemeanor, nor does it mention what prostitutes are charged with when they are arrested. I don't even want to think what the judege would suggest a prostitute could wear or do for their "crimes".
And I thought I lived in a wacky town. Thanks, I feel so much better now!
2007-07-27 17:44:01 · answer #2 · answered by edith clarke 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The constitution says the cruel and unusual punishment is prohibited, and that is certainly unusual. I personal support this kind of activity, like making law-breaking kids mow the grass at school and such, but a chicken suit is a little outrageous to me. There is a possibility a sexual weirdo might actually enjoy dressing up like a chicken. Good question!!!
2007-07-27 15:56:32 · answer #3 · answered by Steve C 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
In order to answer your question, I'd have to look at follow up studies to determine whether the creative sentences were effective in deterring additional crime.
I hope the judge is not some David Letterman wanna-be...our judicial system deserves more respect than that.
2007-07-27 15:21:55 · answer #4 · answered by not yet 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wow, I didn't even think judges had the authority to do that sort of thing. Makes me think of Seinfeld where they write the pilot with the guy who is ordered to be a butler because he gets in an accident without insurance.
Anyway, although creative and mildly amusing, I don't know that it really sends a message to society. It would be terribly embarassing for the guys to do, but as Carrie said, I think it is even more embarassing that the guys have their names in the paper. A more fitting penalty would have been to have them stand naked with signs above their heads saying "Is it surprising that we have to pay for sex?" But then again, that would be indecent exposure and another crime....
2007-07-27 15:58:34 · answer #5 · answered by Jim Baw 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, that's idiotic, and embarassing for those men.
Kind of off topic, but soliciting prostitution or being a prostitute shouldn't be illegal. I don't think it should be legal either, but it should be decriminalized.
I feel bad for those men, not only for the chicken suit thing, but also because their names were printed in the paper.
2007-07-27 15:23:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes it does. Very much so.
2007-07-28 23:42:43 · answer #7 · answered by :) 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What this got to do with me ....????
2007-07-27 20:10:54 · answer #8 · answered by I can help . 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋