Naked Neighbors

[simonsebs]

Naked Neighbors - Oregon Lawmakers Are Trying to Make "Crack" Illegal

Why don't the people who spy on their neighbors and video tape them get in trouble? Just based on this little bit of information it doesn't say what this man was doing. But if he was just minding his own business, in his own house, than the government shouldn't make a law to make that illegal.

[simonsebs]

Naked Neighbors - Oregon Lawmakers Are Trying to Make "Crack" Illegal

Why don't the people who spy on their neighbors and video tape them get in trouble? Just based on this little bit of information it doesn't say what this man was doing. But if he was just minding his own business, in his own house, than the government shouldn't make a law to make that illegal.

[RCH44]

I love to be nude around my house as much as possible. Once my neighbor cought me nude with an erection. I did not realize that I left the blinds open. No harm was done. It's your home do as you please.

Ralph

quote:

Originally posted by simonsebs:
Naked Neighbors - Oregon Lawmakers Are Trying to Make "Crack" Illegal

Why don't the people who spy on their neighbors and video tape them get in trouble? Just based on this little bit of information it doesn't what this man was doing. But if he was just minding his own business, in his own house, than the government shouldn't make law to make that illegal.

[nudeM]

So basically, they are going to try to make Peeping Toms legal? That's what this sounds like to me. Also, they are going to try to infringe on the rights of what you chose not to wear on your own property. How ridiculous.

What bothers me is, the neighbors 'actions' isn't described. Lewd actions with the windows open, yea, could be cause for alarm, but the video taping is a form of invasion of privacy, I would imagine.

I have been seen by my neighbors many times and nothing has been said. They all know I am nude in the back, even the new neighbors.

[nifocinphx]

quote:

Originally posted by simonsebs:
Naked Neighbors - Oregon Lawmakers Are Trying to Make "Crack" Illegal

Why don't the people who spy on their neighbors and video tape them get in trouble? Just based on this little bit of information it doesn't say what this man was doing. But if he was just minding his own business, in his own house, than the government shouldn't make a law to make that illegal.

Apparently Jimmy "Mack" McKenzie wasn't just minding his own business

Click on Link to CFF topic "Naked man in Oregon made news in Va" posted earlier this year. Be sure to check out the link that hairyhomer provided.

nifocinphx

[Rabid_Clam]

The argument arises about open blinds or the ability of someone being able to see into the home. That makes for the defense of a complaint or law suit for invasion of privacy.

I maintain that such spy activity, especially where recording devices are used, are wrong and liable.

[roaddog]

I agree whole heartedly with Rabid Clam. These peeping toms, with their video cameras should be prosecuted under whatever privacy laws are available. When are the local cops going to do anything about this? Never.

[nudeM]

Thanks nifocinphx, apparently there are still people upset that this individual is allowed to 'strut his stuff' in his own property. Going back and looking at the link you provided, this issue is still being considered by the local residences on 'requiring' this individual to remain clothed on his own property.

I still stand by my statements on that topic, in that I have no problems on him being allowed to remain nude, but with his past history of child molestation charges. His constant nudist tendencies when the school bus arrives, is one issue that deserves to be brought into the limelight and questioned.

But for the State to suddenly make it a 'new' law about being able to roam nude on your own property, that is where I don't agree.

[shãybare]

I echo your thoughts, nudeM. It is something to not take lightly.

[Guest]

OK - the short story on this post does make this guy out not be bad but the whole story at the news station post sounds like more is going on. I agree that if all he is doing is being naked on his property the peolple should leave him alone but it really sounds like there is more to this story. Check out this story:http://www.katu.com/news/5817056.html

[stomper69]

I read the story and if this guy has child porn and is exposing himself to schoolchildren,then this is not a case of someone that just wants to be naked.He wants to be seen and is abusing the law by acting this way.

[MJ_KC]

According to the law, it sounds like his nudity on his own property is OK. It is his other activities, as described in the link provided by Art900, that are likely to get him put away.

[Naturist Mark]

OK, lets analyze the news report.

This guy was charged with indecent exposure 3 times between 1989 and 2004. But obviously not convicted of anything substantial, if at all. The police have obviously been schooled about the law and now know they cannot charge him anymore for mere non sexual nudity under Oregon law.

The news report says he admitted to molesting a toddler and while he was serving probation in 2005. Sorry folks, If that were true, no Judge would allow him to remain free, KATU is spinning the story in some manner.

The allegation that he constantly exposes himself to both adults and children while on his property is a little less disturbing when you see what they have to peep through to see him:



Apparently this is a rural property not quite so exposed as the reporters would have us believe. Not unlike the type of property many nudists would like to own precisely so they can be nude on their own property.

He has Child Porn charges against him - 50 counts of Encouraging Child Sexual Abuse, apparently stemming from boxes and computer hard drives stuffed with child pornography . This is a serious charge, yet the authorities have clearly been instructed not to bother him. Why? Hopefully they didn't charge him because of nudist photos.

Yeah, I agree this guy sounds suspicious, but I also smell a witch hunt.

I am encouraged that the authorities in this case sound like they are being careful and nonsensationalistic - unlike the media which is fanning the flames to hype a controversy.

-Mark

[MJ_KC]

Newspapers like to play up controversy any time they get a chance. In this case it sounds like the police are handling this in a proper manner. They have even publicly acknowledged that he is free to be nude on his property.

[Nude in the North]

I not only agree that for simply being nude on his property he should be left alone. But I wish My state had protection for individual rights like that.
If your allowed by law to be nude on your own property, then being seen nude doesn't not constitute anything indecent. It doesn't matter what age someone that sees him is. Because they are not seeing anything illegal. And there is no need to shield anyone from the ability to see him. It's not against the law.
People can choose not to look. Or they can explain to their children that this man is simply enjoying the rights that every citizen of that state can enjoy if they so choose.
If a law says something is legal, then it must be assumed that at some point other people will see you doing that "something". Being seen doing something that is legal doesn't make it a crime.

That having been said. If there were any laws being broken in the molestation or child porn catagories, I'm sure the authorities would not hesitate to do their jobs.