In the Age of Terror, Isn't Busting Toe-Tappers an Insane Use of Our Law Enforcement Resources?

[TomClash]

Arianna is right - don't the police have better things to do? I dislike Larry Craig but the antigay and antisex undertones of this incident are nauseating.

In the consensus judgment of America's 16 intelligence agencies, the terrorist threat to our homeland is "persistent and evolving," placing our country in "a heightened threat environment."

Given that chilling assessment, isn't it the height of madness to use America's finite law enforcement resources to seek out and arrest people for tapping the foot of a cute undercover officer in a restroom?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not wild about walking into a public restroom and seeing a couple using the a stall for something other than, as Sgt. Dave Karsnia, the arresting officer in the Craig case put it, "its intended use."

But that is not what Larry Craig did. If he had, someone in the restroom could have done what most people do when they see a law being broken: go get a cop.

And as it happens, since Craig was arrested in an airport, presumably there were plenty of law enforcement officers nearby looking for, you know, real threats -- like explosives or folks on a Watch List. Assuming, that is, they weren't all hunkered down in other bathrooms across the airport, protecting the public against people who might be thinking about having sex.

Let me be clear: I'm no fan of Larry Craig. Indeed, I disagree with almost everything he stands for. And I'd much rather he not be in the United States Senate. But I'd also rather have had his exit be the result of his constituents voting on his ideas and policies, instead of a ridiculous sting operation in an airport bathroom.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/in-the-age-of-terror-isn_b_62928.html

[xchrom]

1. i don't know about terror -- but i do know murder rates have been rising

over the last five years.

whenever that happens i become annoyed that cops don't focus more attention on that.

of course with iraq sucking up so much of our resources -- the feds can't help with more money for additional cops.

[dkf]

2. Thing is you are an adult. What if a child walked in?

Is that really the kind of stuff you want your kids exposed to?

Now I can see if this was happening in areas where you wouldn't expect kids to be, but an airport will have kids as long as there are flights.

[Zensea]

3. Yes, terror is our only concern

Any other quality of life issues will just have to be put on hold until we win the war on terror.

:sarcasm:

[kanrok]

4. Part of the job is to address concerns the public has

The argument that the police should be doing something more "important" is a non-starter. I'd be willing to bet that the police got numerous calls that men were performing sex acts upon one another in the bathroom at the airport. I don't know about you, but when I fly and I have to use the bathroom at an airport, I don't want to see two men having sex. Nor do I want my children "exposed" to that kind of behavior. I'd also be willing to bet that if you were exposed to two men engaging in sex acts in the stall next to you, you would be wondering why the police weren't doing something about it.

Are there crimes that need investigating that are more serious? Of course. But contrary to popular belief, police departments can walk and chew gum at the same time. Some officers are assigned the task of investigating murders. Some are assigned to do patrol duties. Some are assigned to traffic detail. Other times the officers assigned to these other duties are required to become involved in special investigations, like...investigating and arresting perverts in a bathroom.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

5. I don't think that's a sensible line to go down.

The idea that the police should not do anything about a crime unless there are no other more serious crimes out there is not a sensible one, I think.

[Dark]

6. Not if it means catching republican hypocrites.

:evilgrin: