>>Le Sigh, I know you get it freedumb but others obviously do not.<<
Bunch of straw men, but I will help you.
I wonder if there might be laws that restrict the sale of alcohol to those over a certain age? How could one prove they were old enough to take part in this transaction? Is there some sort of paper or badge or card issued by some authority that can be offered upon request to prove one is legally entitled to that brewski? Let me think.<<
Straw Man #1: Irrelevant. Purchasing alcohol is an act that REQUIRES identification. Kissing in public does not.
>>Is there a law that forbids one from being in a vehicle not in motion and kissing in that vehicle in such a matter that does not violate any statute or ordinance? Can’t find one. <<
Strawman #2: Any person operating a motor vehicle must be in full control of that vehicle at all times (you can check your local ordinance to determine I am 100% correct)
>>Would one have to prove they were legally entitled to engage in such an activity? Both people are obviously past the age of consent, so again no. Would one have to produce an officially issued document that verified one was not breaking the law? Well no, cause no law was being broken. See the difference.<<
Strawman #3: Yes, you must possess a valid operator’s licence to be in a moving motor vehicle (motorized or not). Yes, you are breaking the law.
>>Sheesh.<<
Yes, your gross ignorance is: sheesh.
Kissing (passionately or not) is not purchasing alcohol nor operating a motor vehicle. Except in your “free republic” where since the former 2 require an ID, the latter must also (unless your arguments can be led to any other possible conclusion).
Next time you kiss in public, be ready to show your papers.
Freedumb,
I totally am in agreement with you. I was trying to show how absurd it was to compare buying alcohol with just going about one’s business while not engaging in suspicious behavior or a criminal act.
PS.
Did you notice I specified the vehicle was not in motion? I think you missed that.
Again I am total agreement with you and I think you misunderstood my post.
I think I just hit you with friendly fire (and you, me).
I think we are on the same side of this and we are both tired.
I reread this and saw I read some things into your response that weren’t there.
This lady had no need to show her ID to the cop — if you agree then we agree.
In California you don't have a constitutional right to commit lewd acts in public...with your wife or otherwise.
Is it unreasonable to assume that what these two persons were engaged in was more than just 'kissing', which drew the attention of law enforcement?