Posted on 09/27/2005 5:07:41 AM PDT by Puppage
NEW YORK -- It's an only in New York story.
A woman was given a ticket for sitting on a park bench because she doesn't have children.
The Rivington Playground on Manhattan's East Side has a small sign at the entrance that says adults are prohibited unless they are accompanied by a child.
Sandra Catena, 47, said she didn't see the sign when she sat down to wait for an arts festival to start.
Two police officers asked her if she was with a child. When she said no, they gave her a ticket that could bring a $1,000 fine and 90 days in jail.
The city parks department said the rule is designed to keep pedophiles out of city parks, but a parks spokesman told the Daily News that the department hoped police would use some common sense when enforcing the rule.
The spokesman told the newspaper that ticketing a woman in the park in the middle of the day is not the way you want to enforce the rule.
It's sad isn't it? There's a park across the street from my house that I walk in and occasionaly I even sit on one of the benches. I have observed when I am around, that parents seem to stay a little closer to their children. It makes me want to tell them, "Hey, your kids are a lot safer around me than around your minister, priest or teacher".
It's sad too that the simple pleasure of watching children play is now "suspect" behaviour, unless of course you are with a member of the femine gender.
Perverts only stalk in parks? If anything, this is a "feeeeeel good" ordinance.
And what if the "pervert" is laying on a blanket just outside the "playground" - this is just plain stupid - it is outrageous to punish innocent behavior (sitting on a bench at a playground) because "someone" might one day sit on that bench and intend to perform an illegal act.
What's next?? A rule stating that you may not be within eyesight of a children's playground unless accompanied by a child? A rule stating that you can't use a path which leads to a children's playground unless accompanied by a child?
She should just tell them she's pregnant.
The ultimate crime.
Always a bad assumption. If everyone had common sense, you wouldn't need rules in the first place.
Hmmmmm, so...to prevent stalkers from doing their thing in a park, we target childless bench sitters. But, to prevent men from the Middle East who are radical islamists from doing their thing, we target everyone except them for "random" airport security checks. Okay. Got it.
Yes, the police should stop generalizing about entire groups of people, wouldn't you agree?
When cops confronted them, arrested them, etc. the ACLU and NAMBLA launched lawsuits against the city because there were no state laws regarding public parks unlike the other venues I mentioned.
So the city was forced to institute this rule for public parks in order to bar pedophiles from them.
If the ACLU can get enough examples of childless adults hanging out in public parks, they can sue the city for civil rights violations regarding selective enforcement.
I knew I should have said 'fascist' instead of 'liberal' right after I hit 'post.' {:^(
"The spokesman told the newspaper that ticketing a woman in the park in the middle of the day is not the way you want to enforce the rule."
Well pedophiles wouldn't hang out on a park bench in the middle of the night when all the kids are at home asleep, would they?
"Sitting on a park bench
eyeing little girls with bad intent.
Snot running down his nose
greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes.
Drying in the cold sun
Watching as the frilly panties run.
Feeling like a dead duck
spitting out pieces of his broken luck."
Perfect theme music for the KKKlinton Liebrary.
Just another way for a municipality to make money. It's all about the money.
Now if it had been a 47 year old guy........
Police see everyone as a criminal, except themselves of course.
That's the entire problem with laws that cannot be written with a precise definition of what constitutes "breaking the law", without the offense being defined far too broadly. Far too many innocents are caught in its web. Police become judges deciding who they will and who they will not arrest, among many individuals who, by definition, are "breaking the law".
Such laws are not needed. Better, targeted, periodic police surveilance is; along with parental surveilance and supervision.
The nanny state is not a replacement for personal, parental responsibitity. The result, as this incident shows, is the loss of liberty for everyone.
LOL! I'm pinging you when I need a quick comeback from now on. Good one.
As for the ticketed person being a woman, how many times a year do you read of a woman stealing a small child to fill an empty place in her life.
Parents do have the primary responsibility but not all parents are responsible 100% of the time. That's the reality. This code helps protect the children who had the misfortune of being born to that sort of individual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.