Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Zon
"Before an impartial jury nine out of ten juries would find the flasher guilty if it was public flashing."

Yes they would. Because in our society it is currently against the law. But that wasn't my question to you.

My question concerned your argument that laws should be based on harm. What harm is caused by flashing? How do you justify a law against flashing?

Can I get monetary restitution in your society if I am merely offended or shocked by someone's behavior, like flashing? Does that constitute harm?

Answer that first, then we can move on.

169 posted on 03/29/2006 9:19:58 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen

My question concerned your argument that laws should be based on harm.

Strawman. You cannot quote me anywhere on this thread where I made that argument because I never did and you know it. Admit your error and then perhaps I'll continue the discussion of what you wrote and what I wrote. I will not engage in your strawman arguments nor let you "put words in my mouth".

172 posted on 03/29/2006 9:34:35 AM PST by Zon (Honesty outlives the lie, spin and deception -- It always has -- It always will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson