Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NY governor: Topless women in Times Square breaking the law

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NY governor: Topless women in Times Square breaking the law

    New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo says women posing nearly naked for photos in Times Square are breaking the law and undermining efforts to keep the tourist area family friendly.

    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/N...re-6452950.php

  • #2
    It's bad enough that many police officers don't know the law, it's terrible that the governor doesn't. Being topfree in Times Square is legal, even if the governor doesn't like it.

    Comment


    • #3
      It's reverse marketing. By bringing attention to something that most people had no idea about, he will draw countless more visitors to the location to see the spectacle...if NYC wasn't spectacle enough. Regardless, I have no intention to go to such a metropolis...give me trees in wide open spaces where there are 100 acres per person, not 100 people (Or more) per acre.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's not the topfree. It's the exchange of money for posing with the topfree women that would be the law violation

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by paul1961 View Post
          It's not the topfree. It's the exchange of money for posing with the topfree women that would be the law violation
          What law would that be? The "Modeling Outlaw Act"?

          1) It is legal to be topfree on public property NY State
          2) It is legal to pose for photos on public property in NY State
          3) It is legal to be paid for posing for photos in NY State

          There is no crime to crack down on here. They would have to create a law to make it illegal - and that law would be invalidated by NY's Constitution if it treated women differently from men.

          Of course they could just break the law and illegally harass women who are doing nothing illegal. There is a lot of precedent for that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Mark, I haven't check this site in a few days. Here's a link to the money issue. Does their topless behavior and soliciting for donations cross the line from noncommmercial to commercial?

            http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...free-legal-ish

            "Instead, a majority of the court sidestepped the constitutional issue with a narrow ruling. The court pointed to previous decision in 1973 that said that section 245.01 of the penal code, should not be applied to "the noncommercial, perhaps accidental, and certainly not lewd, exposure alleged."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by paul1961 View Post
              Mark, I haven't check this site in a few days. Here's a link to the money issue. Does their topless behavior and soliciting for donations cross the line from noncommmercial to commercial?

              http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...free-legal-ish

              "Instead, a majority of the court sidestepped the constitutional issue with a narrow ruling. The court pointed to previous decision in 1973 that said that section 245.01 of the penal code, should not be applied to "the noncommercial, perhaps accidental, and certainly not lewd, exposure alleged."
              That would be unlikely. The court in 92 may have decided to not rule on 'commercial' exposure of the breast since the case in question clearly did not include that aspect, but there is no reasonable way to define a breast as 'indecent' under commercial conditions when it is not in non-commercial settings. Furthermore - even full nudity is legal in commercial establishments in the State of NY, so the state would have to somehow find a compelling legal basis to say that breast exposure is legal in public, and legal in commercial establishments, but not legal in public for commercial purposes. That would be no different than saying that ankles or elbows could be freely exposed in public, but not commercially. The Santorelli ruling clearly established that breasts - male or female - are not obscene, lewd or lascivious and there is no reasonable way to carve out an exception.

              Since it is unlikely that NY can legally stop the desnudas, I expect it will do what it has traditionally done - it will illegally harass them. Charge them with loitering, disturbing the peace, unruliness, and of course failure to comply with the orders of a peace office and resisting arrest. In most cases they will then release them without charge after running them through booking and 24 hours holding.
              Last edited by Naturist Mark; 08-28-2015, 06:01 PM.

              Comment

              Working...
              X