Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Streaker Punishment a bit Harsh?

24

Comments

  • #32
    El Horseboxo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,341 ✭✭✭El Horseboxo


    I think the psychology behind someone exposing themselves for some sort of sexual gratification and streaking naked across a soccer field as a bet should be distinguished from each other. Even if kids are present in each scenario. And as such both be treated as different crimes. The reason for such lists is to make families aware of sex offenders in a given area which is to act as a deterrent for the offender re-offending. A sex offender that likes to expose himself does it to a very specific set of people in most cases. Streaking to a large random crowd at a sporting event wouldn't fit the profile.

    I think most parents wouldn't feel threatened living in a neighborhood with a streaker that ended up on the list. If I was a parent I'd feel the integrity of the list is questioned when they have people like that on it. Also very often stories get around without people knowing the specifics of a case. He could be branded a pedophile in certain circles.


  • #33
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    Joey the lips wrote: »
    No difference between him and a sex offender who plays with himself with public.

    There is a difference between being naked in public and engaging in a sexual act in public.

    It's pretty immature to assume the two are inexplicably linked.


  • #34
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    He is 22yrs ffs, he did it for a bet not because he is a pervert. I'm sure if he knew he was going to be labelled as a sex offender he would not have done it.
    The judge is unfair here unless he had no choice or there is something else we don't know.


  • #35
    NiallFH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 239 ✭✭NiallFH


    Fair enough children may have been at the match and seen it but he didnt purposefully run up to a group of kids and flash, just seems like the law on it was taken far too literally


  • #36
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    It's a fairly strong precedent to set, I presume the design is to discourage this kind of moronic behaviour in the future.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Deus Ex Machina
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,556 ✭✭✭Deus Ex Machina


    He should also get a lengthy prison sentence on top of everything else.


  • #38
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    Deus Ex Machina wrote: »
    He should also get a lengthy prison sentence on top of everything else.

    7 inches?


  • #39
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,196 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Potential-Monke wrote: »
    While i agree, most people probably won't. The sight of anyone nude in public is enough to get peoples blood boiling.

    Should keep them away from any sort of changing room at a gym or swimming pool then. Or better still, stay at home altogether so other people don't have to deal with them.


  • #40
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,495 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    Potential-Monke wrote: »
    It is

    Section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (UK):

    [F1(1)A person commits an offence if— .
    (a)he intentionally exposes his genitals, and .
    (b)he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress. .
    (2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable— .
    (a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both; .
    (b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.]

    Pretty sexist law, that.


  • #41
    stupidusername
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭stupidusername


    Potential-Monke wrote: »
    It is

    Section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (UK):

    [F1(1)A person commits an offence if— .
    (a)he intentionally exposes his genitals, and .
    (b)he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress. .
    (2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable— .
    (a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both; .
    (b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.]

    What about if I flash my boobs to a crowd?

    The distinction needs to be made in intent.plus who else is present with any child(ren) exposed to


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    stupidusername wrote: »
    What about if I flash my boobs to a crowd?

    *faps*

    :pac:


  • #43
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    stupidusername wrote: »
    What about if I flash my boobs to a crowd?

    The distinction needs to be made in intent.plus who else is present with any child(ren) exposed to

    You wouldn't even be arrested I'd imagine. Total bs, nudity shouldn't be shameful. The only danger is when exposing oneself is done for sexual arousal. Then that's not cool.

    I seen this vid on the net once were some lad is **** on a beach and just cums on some girl sunbathing. Now that's an offence :D Scary though :eek:


  • #44
    stupidusername
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭stupidusername


    howsyourtusk wrote: »
    You wouldn't even be arrested I'd imagine. Total bs, nudity shouldn't be shameful. The only danger is when exposing oneself is done for sexual arousal. Then that's not cool.

    I seen this vid on the net once were some lad is **** on a beach and just cums on some girl sunbathing. Now that's an offence :D Scary though :eek:

    Sorry but that's bollix.a young child can't distinguish intent.like it or not,a child being exposed to that could be harmful when it's not considered normal in society.


  • #45
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,196 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    They never seem to mind when you breast feed them. Children don't give a ****. It's adults who get worked up.


  • #46
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    stupidusername wrote: »
    Sorry but that's bollix.a young child can't distinguish intent.like it or not,a child being exposed to that could be harmful when it's not considered normal in society.

    Do you think it would be harmful for a child to be exposed to a boob or more harmful for a child to be exposed to a penis?


  • #47
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,232 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Did he collect the £100 from the bet ?


  • #48
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    stupidusername wrote: »
    Sorry but that's bollix.a young child can't distinguish intent.like it or not,a child being exposed to that could be harmful when it's not considered normal in society.

    So you think flashing your boobs in public where a child could see is dangerous?


  • #49
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    hondasam wrote: »
    Do you think it would be harmful for a child to be exposed to a boob or more harmful for a child to be exposed to a penis?

    Surely for comparison you should be arguing Vagina/Penis?

    A young child wouldn't really make much of a difference between a topless man/woman.


  • #50
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Surely for comparison you should be arguing Vagina/Penis

    It always comes down to the male/female, sexist issue.


  • #51
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    stupidusername wrote: »
    Sorry but that's bollix.a young child can't distinguish intent.like it or not,a child being exposed to that could be harmful when it's not considered normal in society.

    How is it harmful?


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    stupidusername
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭stupidusername


    What i'm saying (if you read my first post) is depending on the circumstance it could be harmful. A childs mind can be warped by things like that.it's dependent on how safe the environment is to the child etc


  • #53
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    A child's mind can be warped by seeing some folds of skin? From a distance? u mad? :P


  • #54
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,196 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    By someone flashing their boobs? Explain exactly how the child's mind is warped. Does the child take out an etiquette book, finds boob flashing under the "faux pas" section and ends up with mind blown as a result?

    I've been in the men's room in swimming pools and fathers have their young sons and daughters wandering around with naked men showering without a care. None of them seem traumatized to my mind. Maybe you can cite an example of someone who was left scarred after seeing a woman's breast as a child?


  • #55
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    stupidusername wrote: »
    Sorry but that's bollix.a young child can't distinguish intent.like it or not,a child being exposed to that could be harmful when it's not considered normal in society.

    As nudist colonies (and the history of our species) show this is the main problem.

    Nudity around kids is only a problem because we have a stupidly immature view of nudity that we pass onto kids.


    A 5 year old seeing a penis is no different than a 5 year old seeing a finger, unless we contrive a reason as to why the child should be scarred for life.


  • #56
    stupidusername
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭stupidusername


    I didn't say this was comparable to flashing boobs.

    Of course if nudity is normal for a child then being exposed to it isn't an issue. I'm saying nudity / sexual practice around a child can warp their mind. I'm on my phone now,when i'm on my laptop i'll find studies to show what i'm talking about.


  • #57
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    stupidusername wrote: »
    I'm saying nudity / sexual practice around a child can warp their mind.

    Nudity and sexual practices aren't the same thing though.


  • #58
    howsyourtusk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭howsyourtusk


    Nudity is a state of undress. Sexual practise is when one becomes aroused by something. They're related but not even close to being the same thing.


  • #59
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    stupidusername wrote: »
    I didn't say this was comparable to flashing boobs.

    Of course if nudity is normal for a child then being exposed to it isn't an issue. I'm saying nudity / sexual practice around a child can warp their mind. I'm on my phone now,when i'm on my laptop i'll find studies to show what i'm talking about.

    Your point was exposing a child to a boob could be harmful.
    Nudity around your own children is normal up to a certain age, sexual practice around any children is never ok.


  • #60
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    stupidusername wrote: »
    Of course if nudity is normal for a child then being exposed to it isn't an issue. I'm saying nudity around a child can warp their mind.

    Nudity around a child who has learned nudity around children is wrong may warp their mind.

    But I'd guess the minds of remote tribes, nudist colonies, and billions of our ancestors aren't/weren't warped because mommy and daddy didn't wear underwear.

    It's not inherently wrong, it's only wrong because we convey to children that it's wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭RichieC


    An english poster on an other forum posted this:
    Blame Parliament, not the magistrates. The requirement to sign the Sex Offenders' Register is mandatory after conviction for particular offences, including indecent exposure. It's an automatic administrative measure, and the courts have no discretion in the matter.


Advertisement