Bill toughens law on visual sexual aggression against children in Maine
Those who peer at children in public could find themselves on the wrong side of the law in Maine soon. A bill that passed the House last month aims to strengthen the crime of visual sexual aggression against children, according to state Rep. Dawn Hill, D-York. Her involvement started when Ogunquit Police Lt. David Alexander was called to a local beach to deal with a man who appeared to be observing children entering the community bathrooms. Because the state statute prevents arrests for visual sexual aggression of a child in a public place, Alexander said he and his fellow officer could only ask the man to move along. “There was no violation of law that we could enforce. There was nothing we could charge him with,” Alexander said.
He attended a talk with Hill a week later and brought the case to her attention. Hill pledged to do what she could, Alexander said, and the result was a change through the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee in the House, which made the law applicable in both private and public places. Alexander said he’s grateful Hill was willing to take up the cause, and is hopeful the measure will clear the Senate. “I’ll be pleased that we were able to identify this flaw and take steps to rectify it,” he said. Under the bill, if someone is arrested for viewing children in a public place, it would be a Class D felony if the child is between 12 to 14 years old and a Class C felony if the child is under 12, according to Alexander.
In arguing for the bill, Alexander said she cited public rest rooms as places where the people using them should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. She said the committee determined that there would not be any major side effects from expanding the statute to include public places. York Police Chief Doug Bracy said the statute would represent a fairly minor change that would help keep the public safer, especially children. He noted that York police respond fairly regularly to reports of public peepers on the town’s beaches.
This should be relatively easy to enforce……or not.
Um, is this real? It’s thirteen days late!
If real, isn’t this an excuse to press felony charges on anyone the officer wants in a public place? “I’m sorry sir, you’re gonna loose your freedom, your voting rights, and your gun rights; you were looking at a child.”
To quote the ringleader here, “Cripes!”
Yea–I recall being on the beach in Waikiki and some babe on the beach got upset that I was staring at her. She yelled at her boyfriend about it. My wife also said I was being a jerk and was all upset about me looking at other women.
In fact, I was looking at a private aircraft tht was circling Diamond Head thinking about the time I got violated for flying too low over Great Sand Dunes National Park.
No one to this day believes me.
One of my neighbors came by, several months ago, asking me to stop watching her daughter when she passed by my windows. I was completely shocked by this, as I didn’t think I was looking at her any more than I would look at anybody else that passed by.
The woman that stopped by was a completely fucked up, pathetic, neurotic mess. I suppose losers like this watch too much paranoid crap on TV and just plain lose it after a while.
It also reiterated for me, just how fucking insane and pathetic Americans have become.
visual sexual aggression
WTF! – has everyone in this country gone completely bonkers.
This is all part of a greater plan to make absolutely everything illegal, thus making it easy for the police to arrest you whenever they feel like it.
Here is her webpage if you feel the need to email her and tell her what a moron she is.
http://janus.state.me.us/house/hsebios/hilld_.htm
Guilty for your thoughts, and now guilty for what someone thinks you’re looking at.
Even the blind can see the wrong of it.
Shades of guilt through my mean sunglasses.
From the Header: “She said the committee determined that there would not be any major side effects from expanding the statute to include public places”
If I get this right, the original statute was to make it illegal to stare at children in restrooms. Hard to believe that is a real problem, but the intellect is displayed by the statement above. Yep, no difference at all between everywhere except your own house, and a public crapper.
Neither version of that law “should” be able to pass constitutional review. But people get wacko about protecting the kiddies. Notice the nice touch above how the Felony Class gets raised if the kiddie is younger?
Insanely funny, if it weren’t true? I’m gonna check with snopes. This is that silly.
Fuck’em.. wear sunglasses.
This is asinine.
In Milwaukee many years ago, an aggressive nutjob Chief o’ Police had officers request people remove their shiny reflective sunglasses as to insure your eyes weren’t shifting in the shifty way criminals shift their eyes in.
Should make Saturdays around the local Little Leagues interesting.
I have seen old people watching kids play at the beach and at parks. Just imagine an elderly person being asked what he/she did to end up in prison and replying that he/she was watching kids play in the park.
More laws of this type and society will break down.
Here is actual bill’s text …
“An Act To Strengthen the Crime of Visual Sexual Aggression against a Child
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, ¶A, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:
A. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire or for the purpose of causing affront or alarm, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age , in a public or private place, exposes the actor’s genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person’s genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor’s spouse, has not in fact attained 14 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime;
Sec. 2. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, ¶B, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:
B. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age , in a public or private place, exposes the actor’s genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person’s genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor’s spouse, has not in fact attained 12 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime;
summary
This bill amends the crime of visual sexual aggression against a child to clarify that the crime applies when the exposure occurs in either a public or private place.”
As I read it, the bill has to do with exposing oneself to minors, not merely looking at them.
Get off my lawn you little brats!
Another nanny state law to put up with, sponsored by a typical dumbocrat.
#14 – I did not see anything in the article about exposing oneself to minors. That is already a criminal offense.
According to the article:
“Under the bill, if someone is arrested for viewing children in a public place, it would be a Class D felony if the child is between 12 to 14 years old and a Class C felony if the child is under 12, according to Alexander.”
We could use more laws like this. The more oppressive the state the better.
As a Serial People Watcher, I am seriously concerned about this bill’s implications.
HEY—-WAKE UP——
See post #14.
The article posted is seriously misleading.
The proposed basically prohibits flashing kiddies or asking kiddies to do the same.
TOTALLY REASONABLE.
I think I will stick with Mr. Bill’s version, as quoted by “adventurean” whereas the person accused or arrested is involved with exposing their genitals to children, not merely exposing their eyes.
I was being facetious.
#20 Yeah, this is the internet where sensationalism is considered news.
#14 is right? Does anyone do any research any more?
http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027586&LD=2079&Type=1&SessionID=7
#14 & 23,
Thank you for posting the ACTUAL amendment.
Next headline….
“Blind Maine man arrested for staring… without knowing it”
Next Headline…
“Blind Maine man arrested for ‘appearing to lear’. Police did not grant special conditions for the man being unable to lear.”
Following Florida’s stupidity of having to register as a sex offender for public urination.
In many muslim countries (much more area and population than just Maine, mind you) staring at grown-up female person may get you (or her, or both) killed.
So what’s new?
SUMMARY
This amendment replaces the bill. The amendment removes the requirement that visual surveillance, aided or unaided by mechanical or electronic equipment, of the uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person occur in a private place to be a crime. Instead, the amendment specifies that a person who, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, intentionally engages in visual surveillance, aided or unaided by mechanical or electronic equipment, of the uncovered breasts, buttocks, genitals, anus or pubic area of another person is guilty of visual sexual aggression regardless of where the surveillance occurs. Surveillance may occur either in a public or private place.
The amendment also clarifies the definition of “private place” in the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 17-A, section 511.
So…. Basically you’re screwed for having unclean thoughts, in Maine. Like there’s so many other more entertaining and holsum things to do up there. What about someone Tivo-ing the televised “women’s” gymnatics, and getting off on a loop of that (not that I do)? Wouldn’t that basically fit the same description of this law? And does anything that might show up on YouTube, get one into deep doodoo for having watched it?
Maine, right? That’s not to far north of Salem Mass., where those witch hunt trails once took place? Seems like we’re sliding down that slippery slope once again. Some kids scream, and they’re ready to throw stones at anyone for that.
BTW, what their code doesn’t say is this. If you really want to stare at some half naked kids and get away with it. Go to the town’s
slums district. Just don’t dare look at the kids of the burbs. I think you can quess why.