Meanwhile the rapist in Columbia runs free.
Call it a crime of cheeky behavior. You need to deal with the fact that he was being a public nuisance. If I started fucking the drain hole in the road on your block, am I protected by any legal rights?
I also had a good laugh at fools who think this is protected under 1st amendment. People who don't even know what that means have no right to hold such a privilege.
Looks like his dong's in his pants and nobody's around. What do I care if you dry-hump a drain in the middle of nowhere with your shorts on?
(or skorts? Long boxers...? Unsure what those are called... "skateboard asshole attire")
Because it's Jesus and kids should be locked up for the crime of touching a statue, because apparently "Cheeky behavior" is a new law.
Shame on all of you who said the kid needs to be sentenced to two years in a supposedly free country.
I'll quote the article because those who said this isn't protected under the 1st amendment haven't read the article
"This is a charge that was often used against people who burnt American flags in protest.
In Texas v. Johnson, Johnson was charged with Desecration of a Venerated Object for burning an American Flag during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas.
The case brought to light questions about whether or not expressive acts were protected under the amendment. The supreme court ultimately decided that the burning of the flag in protest was in fact, protected speech, since it was done in an expressive manner with obvious political intentions."
He should be sentenced to some community service and home confinement for fair amount of time at most a relatively short stay in jail if you ask me. This is pretty disturbing to think a judge would even consider allowing such a long jail sentence and that DA should be worried about losing his job for having such horrible judgment on the matter.
I'm ashamed to admit how hard I laughed at the pics because that is a gross act in so many ways. But there is no way a person should go to jail for that long over something like this, that is the real crime..
There was no obscenity, unless you are offended because he's shirtless.
Unless he used the pictures for propaganda purposes, he should be let off with a warning. That said, his behavior was pretty provocative, given the fact that the majority of the Americans are religious Christians. BTW, that guy seriously needs to get laid. The lack of a female companion can sometimes result in illogical behavior, such as this incident.
Actually, if he used the pictures for "propaganda purposes", then he can be let off using the First Amendment. Read the constitution.
If he goes to jail then this basically just shows up the Christians for the morons they are.
