okay I shall cope with your sympathy for molesters
in another question, but I give you that point, maybe
Larry should have asked George Michael about traps.
2007-09-27 08:16:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
11⤊
1⤋
Law enforcement are not as a rule a bunch of liberals, it was also not his home state so that would make it less interesting for anyone to set him up. That would mean that they would have to station a police officer in the bathroom all the time in the hopes that Craig would tap dance into another stall.
The bathroom was a meeting place for some gay men to have sexual encounters,they had sex in the stalls, grossing out the rest of the patrons. Police got complaints about it and set up a sting, there is a long standing methodology of letting another man know if there is a sexual overture, in this case the last stall, the look to check through the door, the movement of the feet into the next stall with a touch, the hand beneath the door. All this was what Craig did. By his own admission. He was arrested for public lewdness. Since he didn't actually wave his weenie in public or sexually touch the officer I suppose you could say hes innocent.
But you'd be lying to yourself.
He chose to take a disorderly conduct, now he says some stack of garbage about not knowing what guilty meant, or how he should have had a lawyer, even though he was offered one. He didn't forget to tell them he was a Senator though.
2007-09-27 15:23:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by justa 7
·
6⤊
0⤋
There had been complaints of people soliciting sex in that particular restroom. The cop was there to arrest the perps of such behavior. To think it was set up by liberals is totally stupid. How would anyone know that Larry Craig was going to be in that particular restroom at that particular time in order to set something like that up to catch him and only him? That makes no sense at all. The lewd gesture is a lesser crime than the soliciting charge and he plead guilty to the lewd gesture crime. It is a misdemeanor usually one is put on probation or fined for such a low level crime and especially when a first offence.
2007-09-27 15:12:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
Sting operation. Basically, a police wears civilian clothes, and hopes the criminals are as negligent and unaware as usual when doing what they do. Plenty of people were caught, Sen. Craig stands out because he's a Senator, which to many is supposed to mean law abiding. Even if it wasn't, why should police officers have to be in uniform or set their badge on the table just to use the bathroom? Makes no sense to me.
2007-09-27 15:18:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by Huey Freeman 5
·
6⤊
0⤋
Sexual activity in the airport bathrooms was happening a lot. This was a sting operation. Senator Craig knew exactly what he was doing because he followed their "code" exactly. To claim that he did all of those actions without knowing would be like accidently opening a combination lock.
2007-09-27 15:10:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
You answered your own question.
Yes, you have the right to take a dump in private.
Which means you have the right to not be solicited while you are in there.
If the police get enough complaints, they set up a sting. I'll bet they made several arrests, but a senator is better news.
2007-09-27 15:12:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by trooper3316 7
·
6⤊
0⤋
Police were responding to several reports that they was homosexual activity in these restrooms
I don;t know about you, but I don't want to have to put up with people having sex in the bathrooms.
As many gays have said since the incident, it is common to
play footsies with the person next to you if tyou want a gay encounter. If there is no objection to the footsies, the next signal would be to run your hand under the stall divider from backto front of stall. this is what Larry craig did, and what led to his arrest, and HE PLEAD GUILTY.
2007-09-27 15:19:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
We have a right not to be bothered by others whilst taking a dump. That is why the officer was there. Huh?
Well it seems that people wanting to use the washroom as a washroom were being bothered by guys coming in and trying to pick them up. Mostly offering BJs for money or free.
This would make their time trying to have a BM uncomfortable. So they complained and the short straw cop has to go in and try to stop the actions. Thus that cop was trying to enforce the right of privacy for those who want to use a washroom as a washroom, not a casual BJ pickup spot.
2007-09-27 15:14:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
9⤊
1⤋
lunds has the correct answer.
The police were responding to numerous complaints about sexual activities in the restrooms at the airport.
An operation was set up to address this, numerous arrests were made in various restrooms throughout the airport.
Besides if Craig really had an issue with his arrest, Why would he please guilty and have no other thought about it until it came up in the media.
2007-09-27 15:12:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by labken1817 6
·
7⤊
0⤋
No.
Though I am no fan of dems,
The cop was in that terminal because there were complaints made about sexual goings on in the restroom, so they set up a sting. Craig was probably not the only one they nailed that day.
2007-09-27 15:10:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by lundstroms2004 6
·
13⤊
0⤋
liberals didn't establish a police state but thanks for playing. the police are an extremely conservative bunch -- you should hang out with them sometime.
being a liberal i disagree with sting operations.
i have broken up champagne room parties to save the police the hassle. i worked in a building that was listed on the internet much like the airport bathroom nasty bad naughty boy craig was busted in. we sadly lost our listing because of me.
i am pro gay rights but anti-public sex. crazy liberal me huh?
if you are using public facilites you should have the right to do so without feet and hands coming under the partition -- shouldn't you? i don't know how anyone could take craig's side.
2007-09-27 15:23:16
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
8⤊
1⤋