Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Officer Who Arrested Larry Craig

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:44 PM
Original message
The Officer Who Arrested Larry Craig
The Officer Who Arrested Larry Craig
You know about Republican Sen. Larry Craig's arrest on disorderly conduct charges in a Minneapolis bathroom. Now you know he has resigned. But do you know about the cop he tried to solicit?
By Keith Naughton
Newsweek

Sept. 01, 2007 - A 49-year-old traveling salesman allegedly seeking sex in a Minneapolis airport bathroom in June noticed a boyish young man with short, sandy hair and an athletic build standing at a urinal. The salesman, peering over the top of his stall, motioned the young man to move to the adjoining commode. Once they were sitting side-by-side, the salesman tapped his left foot. The young man tapped back. The salesman then reached his hand under the stall divider and grabbed the young man's leg. No response. The salesman peeked over the top of the divider. Staring back at him was Sgt. Dave Karsnia and his police badge; Karsnia had just nabbed another man allegedly seeking anonymous action in a restroom known on gay Web sites as Minnesota's "cruisiest." But rather than humiliate the man with a showy arrest next to the stalls, Karsnia wrote in his police report that he quietly led him away. As the man was being released after being booked and fingerprinted, he turned to Karsnia to say: "Thank you for being respectful, sir."

Six days later, that polite police officer caught a much bigger fish: Larry Craig, the conservative Republican senator from Idaho who has been dogged by—and denying—rumors about being gay for 25 years. This time, though, the notoriously anti-gay-rights senator shot the smoking gun right into his foot. He quietly pleaded guilty earlier this summer to engaging in disorderly conduct in that same Minneapolis airport restroom on June 11 after he and Karsnia did the tap dance that's considered a universal signal for a hidden hookup. Before entering the stall, Craig stared so intently at Karsnia through the crack in Karsnia's door that the officer reported he could see the senator's "blue eyes." When Craig got inside, he tapped his foot, brushing it against the officer's, and waved his hand under the stall divider three times, according to the police report. Karsnia waved his badge back, to which the senator responded, "No!" Later, in the airport police station, Craig flashed his business card to Karsnia, saying: "What do you think about that?"

(snip)

Craig's wide-stance defense notwithstanding, his arrest highlights the bathroom subculture of toe taps and anonymous sex in stalls. The Internet is full of Web sites that identify the best places for gay men to engage in lavatory liaisons. Sometimes the action goes on out in the open at the urinals; other times, it's faceless fumbling in the small space beneath the metal divider in the stalls. And according to law-enforcement officials, it happens everywhere there are public restrooms — shopping malls, schools, parks, highway rest stops. The restroom in the main concourse at the Minneapolis airport, though, is an especially hot hookup spot. Located just across from the food court and near a giant statue of Snoopy and Woodstock in aviator gear, the large restroom has nine stalls along the far left wall across from five urinals. (Craig was in the second stall from the back.) In the middle section are two more rows of urinals and to the right, a row of sinks. One Web site ranks it as Minnesota's top cruising restroom. "This is the best spot for anonymous action I've ever seen," wrote one poster to the site. Another said: "Plenty of dark stall action, too!"

Due to that Web chatter — and complaints from travelers — the Minneapolis airport police went undercover inside that restroom in mid-May. Since then, they have arrested 41 men, including business executives and airline and airport employees, according to police reports. Several undercover cops have pulled the shift inside the stalls and at the urinals. They don't initiate contact, says airport police spokesman Patrick Hogan. Instead, they wait for a lingering glance, a head nod or that familiar foot tap. "Sometimes it does involve a considerable amount of time," says Hogan. "It's not glamorous work."

(snip)

Next month, Karsnia is scheduled to marry a fellow St. Mary's alum with whom he has been living for several months. A humble, hard worker, Karsnia has risen in the ranks quickly and earns $75,175 a year. His bosses put him before the TV cameras when "Inside Edition" and "Good Morning America" did reports earlier this year on shuttle carts inadvertently mowing down passengers in the terminal. On his desk is a framed photo of him shaking hands with Vice President Dick Cheney after receiving an officer-of-the-year award in 2003. His former roommate Scott Kronebusch says Karsnia won't say if he's Republican or Democrat, and didn't gloat about capturing Craig. "It doesn't make any difference to Dave whether it was a senator or some guy down the street," says Kronebusch. "It's just his job."

(snip)

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20547150/site/newsweek/


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Danieljay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. and Craigs attorney and ReThuglican friends will do every thing to discredit him..
smear him, threaten him, and try to ruin his career. Typical Thug behavior...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Yep - I think we can look forward to a real smear campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. Hooray for the officer.He sounds like a great cop! Officer of the year!
So much for all the disparagement he got here on DU. He didn't deserve that! This was never "entrapment" !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. When I heard the audio, it seemed quite evident to me that the officer was
a very decent guy in that he did not try to belittle or shame Craig.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. I can't imagine that would be an assignment that any one would want.
Some of the things we expect of public employees is amazing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. yeah. peee-yuuu!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PetrusMonsFormicarum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. I recall from the audio
that the officer even told Craig that he had voted for him.

The audio really tells the story and backs up Officer Karsnia. After listening to it, the idea of entrapment is ludicrous.

The police had been alerted to a problem in this specific restroom. If the undercover officer had solicited Craig (or some other stupid ass), THAT would have been entrapment. As it was, the officer waited very patiently until Craig showed the signs of his desire (ewww . . . not the gay part, just the public bathroom part).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. How could the cop have voted for craig?
The cop is in MN & craig is from Idaho.

I'm not doubting you, just doubting that the cop is telling the truth. Or did the cop used to live in Idaho?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. No, more like that he was a man for whom people voted
Edited on Wed Sep-05-07 06:16 PM by question everything
The officer, being a resident of Minnesota could not have voted for a senator from Idaho.

Found the transcript:

DK: I just, I just, I guess, I guess I’m gonna say I’m just disappointed in you sir. I’m just really am. I expect this from the guy that we get out of the hood. I mean, people vote for you. LC: Yes, they do. (inaudible)

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1392960-p2.html (and scroll down)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PetrusMonsFormicarum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I stand corrected
I will park my ear (and brain) closer to the speaker next time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
22. He didn't say that
really -

Craig was elected in Idaho -- (over and over and over...)

The officer lives in Minnesota.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
62. Craig represents Idaho, so the Minnesota officer couldn't have voted for him. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Well said!!! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Police departments everywhere look for young-looking officers, male and female
They have more possibilities than their older-looking co-workers. Out here m they even put them into high schools sometimes, to catch the druggies (Remember that TV show Jump Street?)..

before a police department starts up a sting operation, the rules are carefully planned out,.. They don't NEED to entrap the prey they are after..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. How nice that he can get legally married
a right/privilege denied to every Minnesotan gay and lesbian person.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Don't Blame Him Blame Craig
I don't think Sgt Karsnia voted for DOMA or a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Did I blame him?
I'm just pointing out the irony.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. The Irony Is That Craig Got Busted For Trying To Do Something He Professes To Loath
That's the irony...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. That's one them
another one is that a guy who arrests sad closet cases for a living is getting married to his "sweetheart," a privilege afforded the cop by a society that denies the same privilege to the cop's targets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. He Was Responding To Public Complaints
If politicians like Craig didn't create a negative environment for gay folks such actions would be unnecessary...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Please provide the proof that there were public complaints
I'd be interested in hearing about them. Or are you relying on the cops' claims that there were public complaints?

And I don't think Craig invented homophobia. He just took advantage of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. from the article posted in the OP
"Due to that Web chatter — and complaints from travelers — the Minneapolis airport police went undercover inside that restroom in mid-May."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. I HEARD ON eD SHULTZ SHOW there were 41 arrests in that bathroom from may through june
and this bathroom was listed on a gay site on Craigs List.

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #25
77. We better send cops to Jones Beach to arrest heterosexuals wanting to have sex.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #77
82. Wanting to have sex isn't illegal. Being a peeping tom is. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #82
83. What the eff ever. You get my point.
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #83
84. Afraid not. I don't confuse what Craig did with people looking for sex
in perfectly appropriate ways. I can't believe there are still people trying to excuse him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #84
85. There are NO "perfectly appropriate" ways to look for sex.
Unless you are heterosexual, then anything goes, apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #85
91. Really? Then how about "perfectly legal"?
There are plenty ofways that heteros "looking for sex" are neither legal nor appropriate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #91
98. You are totally off on another thing altogether, and I don't even know
what it is, but I'm putting you on ignore. Goodbye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #98
99. If that helps you rationalize your bizarre defense of Craig, go right ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #85
125. Wait, is it legal for a male to walk into a female restroom and seek sex?
This is happening at Jones Beach? Have you reported such activity and been ignored?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #125
136. What a stupid question.
I have no idea - probably not, ergo "female restroom." DUH. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #136
137. Hmmm.........
Kinda tosses a little kink (no pun intended) into your theory re: Craig's activities then, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. Here
"Due to that Web chatter — and complaints from travelers — the Minneapolis airport police went undercover inside that restroom in mid-May."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. That's proof?
That's what the cops are telling us and Newsweek. There is also "chatter" on the internet claiming that the cops went online and solicited hookups at this restroom - lured guys there, telling them how they'd be dressed, and then when the guys showed, they busted them.

What bothers me is that many on DU are not able to see the bigger picture of this story. No one is denying that Larry Craig is a rightwing hypocrite and that public sex in bathrooms is sad and nonrespectful of bathroom patrons.

But there is far more to this sordid tale than that. There wouldn't BE a story to begin with, without our culture's homophobia. Far easier to concentrate on the prurient aspects of this case than engage in a real dialogue about the American societal underpinnings that begat it. How sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. While I agree with you in part I think that
there are also people (not that I'm saying craig is one) that get off on public sex. I remember flying across country & some couple (straight) were in the bathroom joining the mile high club.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #30
36. Did they get arrested?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Not that I'm aware of.
I think that I wasn't clear. I thought you were saying that there would never be public sex if there wasn't homophobia. All I was saying is that I think that there still could be some simply because some people get off on it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Well
straight people have public sex all the time, so obviously it wouldn't stop it. But, what's interesting is that the places straight people have public sex - beaches, lover's lanes, airplane bathrooms, are never places they run sting operations to catch straight people breaking the law. Instead, at worst, they will get a flashlight shone in their face and told to "move along."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. Agreed.
The only exception I can think of is prostitution busts. As I said way down thread, I'm not in favor or those either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #36
78. They Could Have Been
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 10:10 AM by ProfessorGAC
That is considered lewd behavior, and on a flight, violates federal law. No, they probably didn't get prosecuted, but we don't know that. We do know that people have been arrested for it. A simple google search will prove that.

(BTW: I get your point. You seem, however, to be misdirecting your anger at the cop. He was a good cop doing an distasteful job. You want to be mad at the societal underpinnings? Go ahead, you've every right. Don't take it out on this cop.)
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. Do You Have Proof To The Contrary?
Edited on Wed Sep-05-07 08:22 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
It is what it is until proven otherwise...That's the American way...If the police are harassing innocent folks they should be stopped and if folks are accusing the police of harassing innocent folks without proof they should be stopped too...

All the evidence suggest Sgt. Karsnia was doing his job with the the confines of the law...If anybody has proof to the contrary it is incumbent upon him or her to produce it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. I think it's within the confines of the law
for police to go online and bait guys who engage in this behaviour. Police stings are given wide latitude under the law.

Doesn't make it any more sensible, ethical or right.

Like I've said a hundred times, if there were complaints, why didn't they hire a security guard?

Maybe because some in the police dept in Minn. think it's far more satisfying to harrass and bust fags?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. He's not with the Minn police
He joined the Minneapolis Airport Police in 2000 as a community services officer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. So there are higher ups
in the "Minnesota Airport Police" who would rather bust people than station a security guard there. My point remains unchanged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. I don't know why stationing a security guard there is a better choice.
I don't know that it's less resource consuming (I suspect not).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. I'm sorry to squeeze in here, but my point about
a security guard isn't to have one stationed full time, just have one wander through at irregular intervals. If there was hooking up going on that would probably put a stop to it. The word would get out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. Presumably the word gets out either way. I don't know why one way should be
preferable to anyone but the managers who have a budget to live with.

I also don't know the police force is a better choice. But I don't think it's much of anyone's business except those who are responsible, provided they acted within the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #48
105. I take it you are not familiar with restroom--it would be hard to have more security around
The restroom is in main shoping concourse just beyond security. Security check points 3 and 4 are on either side of restroom, each with ATF agents. There are generally uniformed MSP police around the immediate vicinity. Here is a map . . .

http://www.mspairport.com/msp/docs/LT_Terminal_quick_map_0807.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #43
72. It's not the Minnesota Airport, it is the Minneapolis St. Paul Airport
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. We Are Talking About Minneapolis, Minnesota Not Boise, Idaho
Edited on Wed Sep-05-07 08:34 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and sometimes police are just responding to public complaints...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Left Is Write Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #40
47. Er...
downtown Boise itself is one of the progressive pockets in Idaho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #35
45. Pretend Your The Chief Of The Airport Police
You get several citizen complaints from men or women that there are persons peeking at them through cracks in bathroom stalls while they urinate or defecate and they feel violated...

Do you respond to their complaints or do you turn a deaf ear?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #45
112. Apparently turn a deaf ear
...and let perverts make life miserable for people who simply went in there to do what it was designed for.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. Newsweek actually quoted some of the "web chatter"
that I had to cut to comply with DU guidelines of posting copy righted material.

Are you suggesting that these stories were fabricated by the cops?

The Minneapolis Star Tribune, known to have a liberal bent, mentioned the concerns of mothers, whose young sons may be too old to take to the Ladies room but who now have to worry about their sons being preyed upon by perverts, yes, perverts, like Craig. (He is a pervert because he is anti-gay while looking for homosexuals arousal himself in public rest rooms).

Or even regular guys who go to use the rest rooms for their intended use. How would you like to have someone looking into your stall while you are there doing your business?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Great Escape Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. Is Craig Into Children?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #34
42. As a mother of two sons, two guys getting it on in an
enjoining stall while either of my boys were using the john is the least of my concerns. In their pre-teens they probably wouldn't have even understood. At least not until they were 12 or so. By that time they understood GLBT & sex.

I'm far more freaked out by heroin users which my DIL accidentally walked into with the baby. Guy missed the vein & blood sprayed everywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #42
104. Not to cast aspersions, but. . . . .. .
"I'm far more freaked out by heroin users which my DIL accidentally walked into with the baby. Guy missed the vein & blood sprayed everywhere."

If your daughter in law walked in on a "guy" heroin user, did she walk into the wrong restroom or was the "guy" in the women's room? Or was it a unisex bathroom in a public place??

If he "missed the vein" but "blood sprayed everywhere," he must have hit an artery. Is this conceivable??


Tansy Gold, whose senses are always pricked by things that don't seem quite kosher. . . .. .. .


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #104
113. Not kosher indeed
...this whole episode is exposing a dirty underside here that is makeing me want to wretch. Do people even think for a second how people will perceive their defenses of this perverts acts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #113
115. I didn't think that I was defending craig.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #115
116. I was talking generally here...
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 03:52 PM by HughMoran
but your description of what is & isn't acceptable for your son to see might both be nightmare scenarios to other people. Is it OK for some people to have a higher level of private space than others or be more protective of their children than others???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #116
134. Good Catch
The poster is arguing that one has the right to have sex in a public restroom but not to shoot up in a public restroom...It's logically inconsistent to say one person's vice is virtuous and another person's vice isn't...

Also, heroin withdrawl or missing a fix is physically and emotionally painful for the addict... I don't think Mr. Craig would have suffered from withdrawl symptoms if he didn't get to perform or receive fellatio...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #134
135. No, I didn't say that one shouldn't shoot up, but it's
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 08:49 PM by wakemeupwhenitsover
okay to have sex. Please point out where I said that. I said that I was more worried about someone shooting ... than. Big difference.

I've just taken a different position than supporting a sting wholeheartedly.

As I've said, I don't support prostitution stings either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #135
139. You Suggested The Peeker's Rights Should Be Protected But Not The Addict's Rights
How about folks respect one another and not turn public restrooms into peep shows and shooting galleries...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #104
114. Unisex bathroom in a retail business - truck rental.
She had to change the baby & had no where else. The door was shut, but unlatched. You know how a door can shut, but the latch prevents it from closing? She thought the bathroom was unoccupied. She walked in. There's a guy standing there in front of the sink. She must have startled him & he swung around & blood sprayed. She backed out as fast as she could. She didn't stop to write down the details.

And no, I'm not making this up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #34
88. ...
Are you suggesting that these stories were fabricated by the cops?

right, cause cops NEVER fabricate ANYTHING
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #28
87. thanks for this
i couldn't agree more, i'm just not as good with the turn of phrase.

i tried expressing it earlier and one poster actually responded "So you have the right to watch me take a dump? Where does that right come from"

:wow:

Few here get that overarching point that you succinctly outline. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-07-07 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #87
138. That's A Reductio Ad Absurdum But You Already Know That
The poster has made it abundantly clear that he or she thinks that while there is a historical explanation for Mr. Craig's behavior there is absolutely no excuse for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #21
58. MSP police and spokesperson have repeatedly said there were numerous complaints
This was well reported and exhaustively hashed out on DU last Thursday. Why do you deny?

http://www.twincities.com/national/ci_6756682

Foot-tapping ritual common in sex sting
By STEVE KARNOWSKI Associated Press Writer
Article Last Updated: 08/30/2007 03:03:14 AM CDT

* * *

In several of the police reports, officers wrote that they knew from their training and work experience that the foot-tapping was a signal used by people looking for sex. The reports said the department had received complaints from the public and made numerous arrests.

* * *

The 40 others caught up in the sting, according to the police reports, included airport and airline employees, an account executive with Revlon, an IT consultant for Ernst & Young, a 3M executive and a Lands End employee.

In an incident June 25, Karsnia arrested three men at once.

He wrote in his report that he was waiting for two suspects to come out of their stalls to be arrested. Then a third suspect near urinals exposed himself to the officer with a smile. One of the suspects, according to the report, was "known" around the airport for lewd acts in the restro

* * *

http://www.twincities.com/national/ci_6756682
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #17
66. Bullseye. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Great Escape Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. I Hope He Didn't Nod His Head...
when he first met his girlfriend. Horror of horrors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
20. The Bathroom Pubs gonna swift the Officer no end....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
24. So there had been passenger complaints about that kind of behavior before!
I was wondering why that cop had been placed in that particular bathroom. I mean, police cannot possibly be placed in every public men's bathroom of the U.S., so why that one. Well, now I have my answer:


"Due to that Web chatter—and complaints from travelers—the Minneapolis airport police went undercover inside that restroom in mid-May. Since then, they have arrested 41 men, including business executives and airline and airport employees, according to police reports."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
27. This is the problem that I have:
Due to that Web chatter — and complaints from travelers — the Minneapolis airport police went undercover inside that restroom in mid-May.

How do I know that that's true? That there were complaints? And if there were, wouldn't having a security guard stroll through the johns at irregular intervals put an end to it?

I don't know. I'm not a fan of prostitution stings that nail johns either. :shrug:

(not defending craig & glad he's gone. I'll also put money that he was trolling. Wide stance, my ass.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Great Escape Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. I Wonder...
if Craig had possibly "pre-arranged" a meeting with officer Karsnia online. It is not unusual for the cops to use the "cruising" web sites, to entrap their victims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Which is exactly what they were doing
if you listen to the stories of some of the guys who got busted. One guy who got busted wrote online that he had been propositioned by someone, who set up a "sex date" with him and described what he looked like and what he would be wearing. When guy #1 arrived to find guy #2 who fit the description, waiting for him, it turned out that guy #2 was a cop.

Of course, imho, guy #1 was an idiot to be engaging in this in the first place, but I think running stings like this in America in 2007 is absurd. A waste of scarce police resources. If there is indeed a problem, get a security guard to patrol the restroom. Problem solved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #27
56. they wouldn't bother to expend the resources for sting but for the complaints
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #27
71. Next time when you call 911 compalining that someone is trying
to break into your home, perhaps the response should be: How do I know that's true?

Thankfully, most of us are grateful when the police is responsive to complaints.

And since public restrooms are segregated, you will not find a bust of heterosexual solicitation.

And most of us consider restrooms a place to remove waste - in private - and we are disturbed when they are used for sex. We are prudish, what can I say?

This is why we always talk about "consenting adults in the privacy of their own home."

You may enjoy sitting on a stall in a public restroom and having a perfect stranger peering into you, most of us would run straight to the police to complain and would cheer when that pervert, yes, a pervert who peers into occupied stalls - is caught.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #71
107. great response from "question everything"!
Only someone with that screenname could pull it off!
:thumbsup:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #71
124. To me, this is a strawman arguement.
First, don't you see a difference between someone breaking into a home & the distinct possibility of danger, theft of personal property, etc. & sex going on in the stall next to you?

Second, if someone was peeking into my stall I would say something like "occupied". If they continued peeking (which of course craig wouldn't have; he could have figured that the peekee wasn't looking for a hook up) then I could probably yell at them. Then I could walk out & complain to whomever I could find. All the cop had to do was say that the stall was in use & craig would have left.

And no, before you bring up another tactic, I am not saying that it's entrapment.

Next, how many times have you witnessed/heard sex going on in the adjoining stall? Once? Twice? A thousand times? Never? Even though I am in the category that I would practically rather pee my panties than use a public restroom I've still had to use them. Never once have I heard anything other than some one snorting coke.

I am now going to run around & ask every guy I know if he's ever seen/heard sex going on in a public john.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #124
126. It's not the responsibility of people in stalls to defend their privacy from peeping toms.
Neither Craig nor anyone else has ANY BUSINESS peering into the stalls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #126
128. You're just saying that 'cause you're a homphobic ninny who is so uptight about sex
that you can make diamonds in your crotchetal area...

:sarcasm: of course. I can't believe some people refuse to see your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #128
131. Oh you are so on to me.
;-)

I don't know why I can't just accept that pervs have a right to cruise for sex by looking into stalls, and the onus is on me to explain that I'm not interested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #124
127. What
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 07:38 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
"Second, if someone was peeking into my stall I would say something like "occupied". If they continued peeking (which of course craig wouldn't have; he could have figured that the peekee wasn't looking for a hook up) then I could probably yell at them. Then I could walk out & complain to whomever I could find. All the cop had to do was say that the stall was in use & craig would have left. "


A peeper has no more right to look at me on the toilet, even for a nanosecond, after I go into the bathroom stall and lock the door, than the government has the right to peek at my e-mails or tap my telephone without a writ from a neutral magistrate, upon probable cause a crime has been committed...


If you disagree with that proposition please state where the right a person has to view another person in their most intimate moments without his or her permission emanates from....





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #127
129. You've never, ever accidentally peeked in a stall that
was occupied? I have. Rarely, but it has happened. I didn't see any feet & went to open the door (I can't speak for men's johns, but in some women's johns the doors stay closed) & when I got up close I could see that someone was in there. I said something like "oops, sorry!" & went to another stall.

Again, craig peeked & the cop didn't say anything. From all I've learned since this started - way more than I wanted to - by not saying anything the cop could have been signifying interest. Especially since craig continued to peek & the cop stayed silent.

How many times have you heard/seen sex going on in a restroom?

Now, I'm going to bow out of this whole thread. As long as you don't PA me, that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #129
130. You mean: "Did you ever putyour face right up against the crack and peer in
for a while to scope out the occupant?"

No.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #129
132. I'll Play
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 07:59 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
I have never peeked into an occupied stall nor have I ever peeked into my neighbor's bedroom... Have I ever "barged" into an occupied restroom by accident? Yes and I was embarrassed and apologized , but that's not the case here, and it was because the person forgot to lock the door ...Mr. Craig deliberately peered into a closed bathroom stall with the intention of finding a sexual partner...


Yes, I have seen two men having sex in a department store restroom, and when I was thirteen years old I was propositioned by a sixtiesh year old man in a DeLand, Florida department store restroom who leaned over me as I was urinating in a urinal and said "would you like to feel the juices"

The bottom line is Mr. Craig had no right to turn a airport restroom into an ersatz singles bar...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
31. He's A Good Cop. I Feel For Him For Some Of The Abuse From Morons He'll Undoubtedly Receive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #31
50. The day before I turned 21 I was picked up by the police in a raid of a gay bar.
They didn't just take in the people who might be underage - they took in anyone without an ID, regardless of graying beards or other obvious signs of aging.

They were assholes. This guy is in a whole different league, any my impression is that he's a very decent man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. But why did they raid a gay bar? What was the justification?
I can only think it's because they wanted to bust gays. And that's wrong, wrong, wrong. And strikes me as illegal.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. I Was In A Regular Bar And It Was Raided
Edited on Wed Sep-05-07 09:21 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
I forget now why...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. Who was busted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. This Was About Twenty Fives Years Ago In A Bar In DeBary, Florida
I forgot what the raid was about...I think it was because

- there were drugs being sold there

- there was no valid beer and wine license

- underage people were being served...

I think it was because the license was invalid because it never reopened...

That place rocked...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. Sounds exactly like the kind of place I would have liked to
hang out in my younger days, but was too chicken.

It also sounds like they had a legitimate reason to bust the place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. It Was Great...
Beer , wine, a pool table, music, lots of women ...

There was a little motel next door...I never got to use the motel because I was rather shy...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. See there. You at least had a motel that you could have used.
Wonder if the motel would have accommodate a gay couple? Depending on how long ago this was, I bet not. The john or their cars might have been their only option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. I Would Have Preferred A Car Back Then With The Emphasis On Back Then
Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. I'm certain it was to intimidate gays - it was just harrassment.
But I don't think that's what this was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #50
63. So where's a 20 yr. old supposed to go to hang out with other gay men?
Church?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. There are certainly many better options today than there were then. My real issue
with that raid wasn't that they picked up people under 21 - it was that it happened only at a gay bar, and that they picked up men who were CLEARLY well above the legal drinking age but just didn't have IDs with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. How long ago was that? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #67
73. Hm, I'm about to turn 43, so 22 years ago.
Though admittedly even then it seemed anachronistic.

Though their intent may have been to intimidate, most of the men in the "paddy wagon" with me were just annoyed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #73
75. Well, I certainly would have been intimidated.
I think you're right that that was the intent.

It's awfully easy for people to forgot how different things were 20 years ago, even in the blue states. And 30 years ago? A different world completely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #75
76. I think they misgauged the impact they'd have.
By that point most of the over-21 set was pretty well out, and despite its political significance, the practical impact on their lives was negligible. It was like "Yeah, I'm gay. BFD!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #76
79. Maybe in that group you were with they were "pretty well out."
But many adult gays and lesbians back then had already entered into straight marriages -- getting caught in a police round-up could have been disastrous.

And unfortunately, there are still people in the closet, as Craig has reminded us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #79
81. I can only estimate based on the guys I hung out with in the "paddy wagon"
that night. The most distressed people were the younger guys whose parents were going to find out where they were.

None of this means I think the action didn't have the capacity to really hurt people - just that I think they were somewhat off in their expectation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. There is no such thing
there are no gay children, no gay teens in this country.... haven't you been listening?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. Sorry, I forgot. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #65
80. Exactly.
Absurd that there are so many people here who appear to be WILLFULLY ignorant of reality. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelly Rupert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-05-07 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
69. Would it be wrong to say that's an attractive guy? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #69
70. I am pretty sure being attractive helps in sting bathroom operations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Balbus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
74. I think Giovanni Ribisi should play him in the movie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
86. my "finish the sentence" reaction to the title of the OP was
"must be one sad, miserable fuck to have a job where you lure and bust sad closet-cases instead of rounding up the real criminals lurking in society."

his political affiliation is unclear, he has a picture of Dick Cheney on his desk, officer of the year, married his sweetheart, blah blah blah, and OH YEAH, he busted a mean-spirited, homophobic Senator for soliciting sex in a public restroom! WOOOOHOOOO!

there's something so perverse about this logic, i'm not even sure i can put my finger on it. all i know is, i would never want to know a guy who had this as his job, and i certainly would not, and will not, be congratulating him any time soon on his most recent bust.

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #86
89. "lure" ? Just how did he "lure" Craig" By walking into a stall and closing the door?
Yeah- that's a real come-on! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #89
90. i dunno
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 11:58 AM by hiphopnation23
i wasn't there. i'm not taking the bait on the "entrapment" argument as there's no sound resolution and it's been hashed out enough here.

i'm saying that i think the guy's got a lousy job and i don't know how he sleeps at night, the same way that i don't know how larry craig sleeps at night, railing against a lifestyle that he himself engages in such clandestine, seedy ways. my point remains the same and that is that this whole situation reflects a much larger, systemic problem which is the culture of homophobia and bigotry that are promulgated here and conveniently ignored in favor of hashing out details about the sting (which we'll never fully know as we weren't there) and of somehow making the cop's political affiliation a "story". what bullshit.

edit: content
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #90
92. The cop is busting people who are engagedin an illegal activity that
includes violating the privacy of others.

Good for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #92
93. whatever gets you through the night
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #93
94. Isn't Protecting Our Privacy A Legitimate Governmental Function?
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #94
95. once again, dsb, you completely ignore my position in this
your expert sidestep, bob & weave tactics are truly dizzying. you don't respond to my position, i don't respond to yours.

seems fair...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #95
97. Au Contraire, Dear Sir
I worship at the altar of intellectual consistency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #97
100. you worship something...
you also draw simplistic and fallacious conclusions from a person's stated position, e.g., "I support a woman's right to choose what she does with her body" ergo "I am a baby-killer". Another, more apropos, example, "The fact that men like craig are forced to satiate thier sexual urges in such clandestine ways and that there are entire sting operations in police forces to bust men like him (instead of focusing thier energies on much more serious problems) speaks to a larger societal problem." ergo "Why do you think you have the right to watch me take a dump?". It's a recognizable tactic you employ, if tired, and there's no beating it as I will always be compelled to make my point as clear as possible and you are satisfied poking holes instead of engaging in real debate. good luck with all that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #100
102. That Has Absolutely Nothing To Do With My Position In This Instance
Mr. or Ms. X has no right to violate my privacy. If you want to argue the opposite position you can start by telling me where that right emanates from...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. no
you tell me where i am arguing that anyone has the right to violate your privacy

it is you who are supplanting a fallacious argument in the stead of my stated position via the tactic i outline above. because i am not putting forth the argument that people have the right to violate your privacy, i owe you no such explanation, indeed your requirement that i tell you anything is rendered moot. please try again, unless you're going to continue with logical fallacies and straw men, i'm not really interested in those.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #103
106. Then What Are We Arguing About
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 01:29 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
Folks who pierce the privacy of others should not be beyond the reach of the law...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #106
108. we are not arguing
we are not even communicating

i proclaim: this situation speaks to a systemic problem with homophobia and bigotry in our society

you proclaim: 1. government should be charged with the task of protecting privacy, 2. if you have the right to invade my privacy, where does that right come from, 3. people who pierce the privacy of others should not be beyond the reach of the law, et cetera et cetera.

this, my friend, is not communication. it is two people making two completely different proclamations which have very little to do with one another.

(it should also be noted that the exchange was not so civil, that you took my proclamation and drew your own conclusions which made up the content of your proclamations. sad. :-()
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #108
109. I Would Appreciate You Pointing Out Where I Was Uncivil
Perhaps we are debating on parallel tracks...You are providing a "historical" or "evolutionary" explanation for Mr. Craig's behavior, one that I sympathize with... However that is not a justification for his misbehavior in the current instance...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #109
110. well forgive me if i characterize logical fallacies as uncivil
Edited on Thu Sep-06-07 02:45 PM by hiphopnation23
Mr. Craig's behavior, one that I sympathize with

I wouldn't have guessed this judging from your overt presence on the matter over the last several days and i felt it time to set the record straight.

those of us that argue that this whole situation is indicative of larger societal problems relating to homophobia, taboo, puritanical notions of sex, and bigotry are not, by default, supporting the actions of mr. craig, as you and others (namely mondo joe in this thread) are so comfortable in consistently arguing. you have once again suggested as much in your most recent post.

i grant to you that those of us that do adopt this position are in the minority (here and in society writ large), but i implore you to not draw conclusions as to our reasons for holding said position and then affix what to you must logically be our stance on completely separate issues. it's intellectually lazy and annoying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #110
111. Hmmmm
I have been careful not to draw any global conclusions from Mr. Craig's behavior and have said, ad infitum and ad naseum, I sympathize with his predicament but I can not in good conscience countenance his gross misbehavior and disrespect for the rights of others through his votes, and through his actions on that fateful afternoon...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #93
96. I get through the night just fine knowing a peeping tom was caught.
Being a closet case doesn't give anyone the right to invade my or your privacy in a bathroom stall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #96
101. see post #93
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #101
117. see post #96
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #117
118. thanks for substantive input to the debate
we all know exactly what you are saying...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #118
119. yes, and we ALL know what you are saying as well.
Getting small minded with me is not a good idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #119
120. ....
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #120
121. I am a moran after all
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #121
122. How Do You Do Emoticons?
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #122
123. This?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-06-07 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
133. Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha' gonna do
Whatcha' gonna do when Larry sits in the stall next to you.
Bad boys, bad boys, throw paper on the floor,
Maybe then Larry will peep at you through the door.
Bad boys, bad boys, look the other way,
Larry's toes are tapping all of the day.
Bad boys, bad boys, stare at your knees,
Lest Larry wave to you from underneath.

LoL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC