Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a boy’

[Lutherf]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

You do not have a obligation to give the police your ID if you don't want to. And like I said, showing your ID to the police is not required by law.

You don't have to give the cops ID but they have a responsibility to identify you anyway. Your refusal just makes the whole process take a lot more time.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

So, what's your point, that the police should disarm before responding to complaints? Or that they shouldn't respond to complaints?

As I just posted, I doubt 911 would have dispatched the call unless there was a threat of violence or something beyond a dispute of who ****s where. Then again I doubt they would have even been called.

 

[clownboy]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

There is no legal requirement to carry ID. In many states, the police can ask for ID and if the person has none, the police can detain that person until someone can ID the person but ONLY IF they reasonably suspect that person of having committed a crime.

In the video, there are several people who ID her as a woman *and* the police had no reason whatsoever to suspect she had committed any crime. The police were clearly in the wrong here as they had no grounds on which to detain her

Bull****. There was a complaint. The police responded and the chief suspect in the complaint could not identify her/him/itself. The police did not detain but simply escorted the idiot off the premises.

 

[TheGoverness]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

The police obviously responded to a report of a crime being committed (peeping tom, or something similar) and when they asked for simple proof to show she was not breaking that law, she refused and was escorted out. She could have been arrested, but it appears by the little we see in the video that she was not.

If the police truly responded to a report of a crime or suspicious activity, then why did they not just say that instead of asking whether or not she's a female?

If the cops had informed her that she was causing a disturbance, then I would have been on their side in this case.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Yes my google is broken, thanks for your concern. Now that I know of one instance of a man watching a female pee, I can understand the hysteria about a bunch of pervs watching girls pee.

That actually happened?

Call in the national guard!

 

[Lutherf]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

ID is only required if the police have a reasonable suspicion that someone has committed a crime.

What crime did the police have a reasonable suspicion that she committed?

The purpose of the investigation is to determine if a crime has been committed or not. Simply denying that you committed a crime does not satisfy such an investigation.

 

[clownboy]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

As I just posted, I doubt 911 would have dispatched the call unless there was a threat of violence or something beyond a dispute of who ****s where. Then again I doubt they would have even been called.

911 isn't the only one who dispatches police. Dispatch has police respond when called on their regular office line as well. And yes, police are dispatched for nuisance calls, noise calls, and, in this case, complaints from business owners.

 

[Lovebug]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

She may not be a lesbian. She may just like to dress like that. She may actually be a transgender female. We don't know. All we know, is that she was given the opportunity to identify herself as a female and refused to do so by saying she had no ID, which at that point required the police to escort her out.

Some conveniently forget that, unless one draws unwanted attention by acting like an obnoxious filthy mouthed ass, no one cares what is under that skirt or in those pants. It is not that difficult to behave like a polite PERSON, instead of an agenda driven creep. Yeah, she made a point, and those who come rushing to her defense made an even better point. ( I leave it at that)
Cops come to our aid when someone starts a ruckus, not because of sexual persuasion. Claiming that she was thrown out of the BR because she is a lesbian, as it is claimed, is absurd, unless she had it tattooed on her forehead. Had she used the BR and moved on, I highly doubt that anyone would have cares whether she has a boyish appearance or not.
Get real people. Our lives must be pretty boring if we make up **** to be more important than we really are.
Go to the BR, go pee, wash your hands and be on your way, and guess what? No one will bother you, and the very rare occasion that someone does, they have to deal with the rest of us.

 

[Lutherf]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

That's probably true. Here they would be on suspension and being investigated. But then, I doubt 911 would have taken the call here. I would be embarrassed that cops had to be called over who ****s where.

We don't know what kind of complaint necessitated the response. I would suggest, however, that if someone called 911 or store security to complain that they were concerned about another individual in the women's restroom and got no response but was then assaulted the store or the police would absolutely be held accountable for their inaction. That's why the investigation was warranted.

 

[Chomsky]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Actually, I was kind of thinking that asking for ID was a better idea than just going for a crotch check but if you're opposed to that process....

While on the surface I kinda' like the idea of one's State I.D. providing proof of legal gender determination, what will they accept for proof at the DMV? A birth cert, I suppose.

But then this would force trans individuals have a method to change or alter their birth cert or other I.D.

This is funky stuff.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

There are numerous laws that could cover that, let me play out one possibility for you: There are laws in most local jurisdictions that prevent someone from observing another person in a state of undress. Some of those laws are called "Peeping Tom" laws or something similar. There is also a US Supreme Court Case called Terry v Ohio that allows the police to require that you identify yourself when the police have a reasonable suspicion that you may have already, are currently committing, or may soon commit a crime. Being that this young lady was in a restroom, and there are laws preventing people from looking at other people undressed, she was asked for ID to show she was not breaking the law. The police came there and were there because they were obviously called to report that a male was in the female restroom. Terry v Ohio gave the police the power to ask for ID, the power to detain her, and the power to stop/prevent any potential criminal act (removing her from the restroom in this case).

Look, I support transgender people being able to use the restroom they identify with. I also support equal rights for EVERYONE. However, "social justice" activists, as this girl sure seems to be, do not have the right to flaunt the law by not complying with the law and then expect sympathy from us for her having to face the consequences of her own actions.

So, your question is nothing more than just more of the same misplaced and incorrectly targeted outrage. No one is requiring her to show an ID to use the bathroom. The police obviously responded to a report of a crime being committed (peeping tom, or something similar) and when they asked for simple proof to show she was not breaking that law, she refused and was escorted out. She could have been arrested, but it appears by the little we see in the video that she was not.

And you see this as an appropriate use of police resources? Three cops over who pisses where?

The term "Excited States" is very apt in this case. The puritanical hysteria is over the top. FFS, at my local beach men often make the mistake and walk in the wrong change room....it's cause for laughter and observation that seldom do women make the opposite mistake.

I think you all need to calm down, things are way the **** out of hand when three cops have to be called to enforce washroom use.

 

[Lovebug]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

And you see this as an appropriate use of police resources? Three cops over who pisses where?

The term "Excited States" is very apt in this case. The puritanical hysteria is over the top. FFS, at my local beach men often make the mistake and walk in the wrong change room....it's cause for laughter and observation that seldom do women make the opposite mistake.

I think you all need to calm down, things are way the **** out of hand when three cops have to be called to enforce washroom use.

Had the girl remained calm, the cops would have went to the donut shop.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

911 isn't the only one who dispatches police. Dispatch has police respond when called on their regular office line as well. And yes, police are dispatched for nuisance calls, noise calls, and, in this case, complaints from business owners.

Whatever. I could give a **** what asshole idiot dispatched these thugs

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Is your assumption that 3 cops were just randomly patrolling ladies restrooms, spotted a "suspect" and moved in for the kill? Is it possible that, perhaps, someone called in a complaint? If, in fact, a complaint was made and the cops responded to deal with that complaint how do you think they should have addressed the issue?

The rights of everyone else using that restroom should not be superseded by someone who is intent upon causing a disturbance.

That's the problem, guy - today, you sometimes canNOT tell if someone is male or female. I clearly remember one shipmate back on the Lincoln, and I said something like, "please wait over there, sir"...and SHE got all ticked off and said, "why do people keep saying crap like that? Can't they see I'm a woman?"

No, I couldn't tell at a glance that she was a woman...and by her words, some others couldn't, either.

AGAIN, you can't always tell if someone is male or female by just looking at them - so what are you going to do - require body-scans at every freaking restroom to make sure that every single one is going to the proper restroom? Because short of that - or some other way of finding out what is or is not between their legs, YOU CAN'T ALWAYS TELL FOR SURE if someone is male or female by their outward appearance.

So...how you gonna do that, guy?

 

[Fearandloathing]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

We don't know what kind of complaint necessitated the response. I would suggest, however, that if someone called 911 or store security to complain that they were concerned about another individual in the women's restroom and got no response but was then assaulted the store or the police would absolutely be held accountable for their inaction. That's why the investigation was warranted.

None of that is in evidence. if there had been an assault or other real crime the police are derelict in their duty for not investigating that aspect.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

There is no legal requirement to carry ID. In many states, the police can ask for ID and if the person has none, the police can detain that person until someone can ID the person but ONLY IF they reasonably suspect that person of having committed a crime.

Never said otherwise, however what I did say, is that you are required to identify yourself when asked to do so if the police are conducting a Terry Stop as was done in this video. In this instance, the police were obviously called to the scene because someone thought a male was in the female bathroom. That could very well be a breach of numerous laws, which would make the encounter a Terry Stop under Terry v Ohio which is where the reasonable suspicion you mention comes from.

In the video, there are several people who ID her as a woman

That's actually a good argument, and if I were her lawyer, I would argue that point. However, I'm not sure if that relieved her of her legal duty under Terry v Ohio to identify herself.

*and* the police had no reason whatsoever to suspect she had committed any crime.

That's an assumption on your part that is not supported by any evidence. You may very well be correct, however, there are numerous laws that provide for criminal conviction of a person that intentionally observes another person in a state of undress without the permission of the other person, which could have created a breach of law in this instance... we just don't know and to assume either as fact is wrong on both our parts.

The police were clearly in the wrong here as they had no grounds on which to detain her

Clearly? Based on what? It's far from clear. We don't know why the police were there. Did they get a call from another patron of the establishment reporting a male in the female restroom? Did the owner of the establishment call in the report? Did the girl or her friends call it in to create the scenario so they could catch it all on video? Are there laws in whatever jurisdiction this occurred within that provide for criminal penalties for Peeping Toms or the like? Is there a state law or local ordinance that provides for a criminal penalty for people of the opposite sex being in an area where those of the opposite sex are in differing states of undress with the permission of the other party?

I can come up with dozens of questions, so it's far from clear that the police were wrong. And, in fact, based solely on Terry v Ohio, it would appear that the police were well within their powers to act as they did as affirmed by the US Supreme Court.

 

[sangha]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

There are numerous laws that could cover that, let me play out one possibility for you: There are laws in most local jurisdictions that prevent someone from observing another person in a state of undress. Some of those laws are called "Peeping Tom" laws or something similar. There is also a US Supreme Court Case called Terry v Ohio that allows the police to require that you identify yourself when the police have a reasonable suspicion that you may have already, are currently committing, or may soon commit a crime. Being that this young lady was in a restroom, and there are laws preventing people from looking at other people undressed, she was asked for ID to show she was not breaking the law.

Umm, no she was not asked for ID to show she was not breaking the law. There were three witnesses there who ID'd her as a female so the cops already knew that no law was being broken. Since no law was broken, the police had no right to detain her for not having ID.

The police came there and were there because they were obviously called to report that a male was in the female restroom. Terry v Ohio gave the police the power to ask for ID, the power to detain her, and the power to stop/prevent any potential criminal act (removing her from the restroom in this case).

If you're going to cite law, you should actually understand it first. Terry v Ohio does NOT give the police the power to detain people who don't have ID. TvO was about police "frisking" people for weapons.

The case you should be referring to is Hiibell vs. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada which held that the police can detain someone who will not ID themselve but only if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person committed a crime - a condition that did not exist here. In addition, in Hiibell the court said an ID could be satisfied by the detained person stating their name.

 

[Chomsky]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Yes my google is broken, thanks for your concern. Now that I know of one instance of a man watching a female pee, I can understand the hysteria about a bunch of pervs watching girls pee.

:lamo

 

[Fearandloathing]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Had the girl remained calm, the cops would have went to the donut shop.

And why didn't the girl remain calm?

First, if you know police work beyond televison shows you will know that the FIRST consideration on arriving is to ensure the safety of all in the immediate vicinity. The SECOND goal is to restore calm to the situation and PREVENT escalation. Modern policing takes into account the arrival of a squad car, the presence of one or more police with weapons, uniforms and body armor can seriously escalate by merely arriving so the additional goal is to de-escalate.

So if your claim is true that the cops reacted because the "girl" did not remain calm, then the police ****ed up. They are peace officers not instigators, and from the exchange seen on the video it would appear they failed in that regard. The fact there were three of them tells me it was a **** up from the get go.

 

[sangha]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Bull****. There was a complaint. The police responded and the chief suspect in the complaint could not identify her/him/itself. The police did not detain but simply escorted the idiot off the premises.

there was no suspect because there was no crime.

 

[sangha]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

The purpose of the investigation is to determine if a crime has been committed or not. Simply denying that you committed a crime does not satisfy such an investigation.

Three witnesses offered information proving that no crime had been committed

 

[Chomsky]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Some conveniently forget that, unless one draws unwanted attention by acting like an obnoxious filthy mouthed ass, no one cares what is under that skirt or in those pants. It is not that difficult to behave like a polite PERSON, instead of an agenda driven creep. Yeah, she made a point, and those who come rushing to her defense made an even better point. ( I leave it at that)
Cops come to our aid when someone starts a ruckus, not because of sexual persuasion. Claiming that she was thrown out of the BR because she is a lesbian, as it is claimed, is absurd, unless she had it tattooed on her forehead. Had she used the BR and moved on, I highly doubt that anyone would have cares whether she has a boyish appearance or not.
Get real people. Our lives must be pretty boring if we make up **** to be more important than we really are.
Go to the BR, go pee, wash your hands and be on your way, and guess what? No one will bother you, and the very rare occasion that someone does, they have to deal with the rest of us.

That's what Mom told me!

And we know Mom's are always right! :thumbs:

 

[Lutherf]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

While on the surface I kinda' like the idea of one's State I.D. providing proof of legal gender determination, what will they accept for proof at the DMV? A birth cert, I suppose.

But then this would force trans individuals have a method to change or alter their birth cert or other I.D.

This is funky stuff.

As part of the process to determine the validity of the complaint the cops need to interview both the complainant and the respondent (suspect, for lack of a better term). In the course of that interview it is common practice for the cops to ask for identification. There are myriad reasons that the cops will do that but among those is the legal aspect. If the cops failed to identify the respondent and it came out later that he or she was a known or registered sexual predator they would have been negligent in their duties and possibly set the municipality which employs them up for a law suit.

 

[Grant]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

This is what the brave new right wing world looks like.
Bigot Cops Refuse To Let Lesbian Use Women’s Restroom Because She ‘Looks Like A Boy’ (VIDEO) ‹ Winning Democrats[/url]

You may be surprised how many lesbians there are who actually try to look male.

 

[Lutherf]

Re: Bigot cops refuse to let lesbian use women’s restroom because she ‘looks like a b

Three witnesses offered information proving that no crime had been committed

And, apparently, whoever called the cops had a different view of the situation. Again, resolving that disagreement is the whole purpose of the investigation.