Indecent Exposure on Your Own Property

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

I'll probably regret typing this, but here we go ...

Are we seriously up in arms about seeing a naked human? I can't walk around naked in my back yard in case Deb-the-Hawks-Fan from across the street might see me and be offended?

I'm offended by the suggestion that I have to curb my nakedness (apparently that's a real word ... huh ...) on the off-chance that someone might see me. We're fine watching intense violence on the TV, but we're freaking about seeing a naked human?

Baffling.

---

the US, in general, for all its claims of freedoms and progressiveness, remains quite prudish when it comes to nudity. While nudity is allowed on television in some other countries, the Janet Jackson debacle where she exposed her nipple shows just how prudish we are here. Personally I didn't have a problem with nudity. If you want to wander around nude where I could see you dogmatique, I've no problem what so ever


the fact remains, in most states there are laws against nudity in public or in the public eye. some states apply a require the to shock, offend, arouse others, or provide some self (sexual) gratification for it to be illegal. Others simply disallow any nudity.


Prudes I tell you, prudes. As a protest I think everybody reading this should strip off their clothes, right now, and run outside nekkid and yell; there is nothing to be ashamed of. This is how Gawd made me and I'm proud of it.



You guys let me know how that works out for you.



As to TM's post. I agree somewhat although I found a few other laws that provide support in the opposite (although not as closely related to the original law cited). I agree some case law is needed to settle it but since I do everything on my phone now it has become more difficult to do that research. It TM would care to do the honors I would have no argument in accepting something that provided some finality.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

I'll probably regret typing this, but here we go ...

Are we seriously up in arms about seeing a naked human? I can't walk around naked in my back yard in case Deb-the-Hawks-Fan from across the street might see me and be offended?

I'm offended by the suggestion that I have to curb my nakedness (apparently that's a real word ... huh ...) on the off-chance that someone might see me. We're fine watching intense violence on the TV, but we're freaking about seeing a naked human?

Baffling.

---

If adults can see him, so can children. That is a problem in my eyes.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

If adults can see him, so can children. That is a problem in my eyes.

---

Why? They see themselves naked, they've probably seen their parents naked and maybe even siblings. What's different about a naked stranger? All the bits and pieces are essentially the same, with some variety is size and distribution.

Other cultures don't have an issue with this so why should we? Children are allowed to live in naturist communities and the government has not seen fit to ban that.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

If adults can see him, so can children. That is a problem in my eyes.

---

Why? Have you taught your children that seeing a naked body is a problem? I suppose you should never take them to Europe or any art museum that has work by "the masters" where statues and paintings of nudes are common.

And by all means avoid Portland Oregon. They have a nude bike ride every year.

its when you teach a child to be ashamed of nudity and you must hide it is where you change the mental attitudes to make them prudes. Yes, modesty was taught in my household but just the same my kids were also not ashamed of themselves and I don't know how many times one of my kids zoomed through the living room going from their bathroom to mine so they didn't have to share mirror space butt ass naked. I didn't give it a second thought and neither did they

I have a bad feeling the topic of Religion is going to be brought up at some point

The issue is really a struggle between public and private morality. When a government tries to impose, by changing what has always been private morality (what goes on in private property or in someone's home), into public morality you run amuck with the law.

Quote:

---

There is a distinction between public and private morality and the private morality of an individual is not synonymous with nor necessarily will have effect on what is known as public morality (see State v Saunders, 75 NJ 200, 218-220). 490*490 .

---

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...20795596160936 closest case I could find.

Besides, why get all bent out of shape about children seeing the private parts of the opposite sex? Or should I say transgender sex? Our current Administration is threatening to withhold Federal school funds to any school that will not allow transgender individuals to use whatever bathroom or locker room they want. And that is a public place.

It's a perfect example of the State trying to make a public morality of what has always been a private morality.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

You should look up the definition of lewd. What you described does not meet the definition.

It it does violate this law though.


the cops do not have to cite the guy though.

---

He was not in a public place. He was on his property.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

If adults can see him, so can children. That is a problem in my eyes.

---

As long as he is not coming up to children and forcing them to look at him, fondling them, rubbing his genitals against them or doing anything lewd or inappropriate with them while naked, who cares? I would not care if my daughter saw a naked man or woman walk down the street.

This Puritan mentality in our country...even though sex and nudity are all over TV, movies and everything else. I guarantee your kids have already seen nude adults somewhere.

Regardless of whether you or I might like it, or not, the fact is that people who intentionally expose themselves to the public (generally for their own lewd interests) are most often subject to criminal penalties - and rightly so.

There is a difference between incidental and accidental exposure, and someone who flashes the public - adults, children, whomever - for their own purposes.

You can choose not to care all you want, but, if we have codes that tell us what color our houses can be, the size of signage on a public street, and that require lit house numbers, we can certainly regulate who can flash their genitalia to me and to my children. And, we currently do.

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

Regardless of whether you or I might like it, or not, the fact is that people who intentionally expose themselves to the public (generally for their own lewd interests) are most often subject to criminal penalties - and rightly so.

There is a difference between incidental and accidental exposure, and someone who flashes the public - adults, children, whomever - for their own purposes.

You can choose not to care all you want, but, if we have codes that tell us what color our houses can be, the size of signage on a public street, and that require lit house numbers, we can certainly regulate who can flash their genitalia to me and to my children. And, we currently do.

---

* § 245.01 Exposure of a person. A person is guilty of exposure if he appears in a public place in such a manner that the private or intimate parts of his body are unclothed or exposed. For purposes of this section, the private or intimate parts of a female person shall include that portion of the breast which is below the top of the areola. This section shall not apply to the breastfeeding of infants or to any person entertaining or performing in a play, exhibition, show or entertainment.

All he has to do is say that he's performing a play or some type of exhibition and he can get away with it. It seems he already has since the police came and did nothing. However if he truly was purposely flashing his genitals they could arrest him based on what I just read about indecent exposure laws.

There are some states (obviously not NY) where there are no laws against public nudity. Kansas is one of them. I saw an article a year or two ago where a guy walked down the street naked in his town. The police could not do anything because there is no law against it. He just took a naked stroll. If I saw a naked guy strolling down the street, I would not even care. If he is being lewd (or a woman too) then that is different.

Quote:

---

Quoting qwaspolk69

---

He was not in a public place. He was on his property.



As long as he is not coming up to children and forcing them to look at him, fondling them, rubbing his genitals against them or doing anything lewd or inappropriate with them while naked, who cares? I would not care if my daughter saw a naked man or woman walk down the street.

This Puritan mentality in our country...even though sex and nudity are all over TV, movies and everything else. I guarantee your kids have already seen nude adults somewhere.

---

the law says "appears in a public place", not it "in a public place". Light travels without limit unless acted upon so he did in fact appear in a public place. Many states rule that if you are visible from a public vantage point your appearance is considered public for then purpose of the law.

But Obviously you missed the discussion in the thread though.