the A.A GRUMPY COLUMN police to ignore public sex

[pantoandy]

good morning from grumpy towers the lady grumpy is fast asleep and once i have posted this i will be joining her in the land of nod.
further to my posting of the couple who had sex on a dubai beach which for some strange reason was moved i would like to present this found on sky news.

police have been urged to study specialist sex sites to find out what is going on in local parks and public toilets.

the call came as new guideline recomend that police turn a blind eye to couples having sex in public which is currently a criminal offence under the indecency act.

the police chief in charge of gay lesbian bisexual and transgender issues said the forces attitude to cottaging and dogging alienated the gay community.
deputy chief constable michael cunningham said that police should not arrest those who enjoy sex outdoors and the web would help to get a better understanding.

it is not for the police to take the role of moral arbiter and where individuals are engaged in lawfull sexual activity they should be able to do so safely he said.

A.A. GRUMPY

this story amazed me is this political correctness gone mad ?
they have a police chief in charge of gay lesbian and transgender issues
which in laymens terms means uphill gardeners lesbefreinds and cross dressing men all of which lurk around public toilets after dark.
and the police are to turn a blind eye to this and doggers?
at one time doggers or voyeurs went down country lanes or the local woods
now they want to effectivley decriminalise sex in the park or public toilets
what about decent families with children who wish to visit the park to find used condoms or ladies underwear or even a copy of men only strewn on the floor.
what happened to the police catching criminals?
excuse me sir im not going to do you for public indecency but i am going to do you for your road tax which has expired.

night night
A.A.G

[spot]

Your missing post is in sex on a Dubai beach

I'll try to find out who moved it there. I posted to your thread asking if you'd mind it merging but I didn't merge it. I'll ask.

[pantoandy]

Originally Posted by spot

Your missing post is in sex on a Dubai beach

I'll try to find out who moved it there. I posted to your thread asking if you'd mind it merging but I didn't merge it. I'll ask.

cheers spot
anything to say on this one ? you usually comment on my rants.

[oscar]

Originally Posted by pantoandy

good morning from grumpy towers the lady grumpy is fast asleep and once i have posted this i will be joining her in the land of nod.
further to my posting of the couple who had sex on a dubai beach which for some strange reason was moved i would like to present this found on sky news.

police have been urged to study specialist sex sites to find out what is going on in local parks and public toilets.

the call came as new guideline recomend that police turn a blind eye to couples having sex in public which is currently a criminal offence under the indecency act.

the police chief in charge of gay lesbian bisexual and transgender issues said the forces attitude to cottaging and dogging alienated the gay community.
deputy chief constable michael cunningham said that police should not arrest those who enjoy sex outdoors and the web would help to get a better understanding.

it is not for the police to take the role of moral arbiter and where individuals are engaged in lawfull sexual activity they should be able to do so safely he said.

A.A. GRUMPY

this story amazed me is this political correctness gone mad ?
they have a police chief in charge of gay lesbian and transgender issues
which in laymens terms means uphill gardeners lesbefreinds and cross dressing men all of which lurk around public toilets after dark.
and the police are to turn a blind eye to this and doggers?
at one time doggers or voyeurs went down country lanes or the local woods
now they want to effectivley decriminalise sex in the park or public toilets
what about decent families with children who wish to visit the park to find used condoms or ladies underwear or even a copy of men only strewn on the floor.
what happened to the police catching criminals?
excuse me sir im not going to do you for public indecency but i am going to do you for your road tax which has expired.

night night
A.A.G

The reason the boys in blue are not persuing outdoor sex, cottaging or any of that nonsence, is very simple.
Most of the sex on commons, public toilets etc is carried out by the boys in blue themselves.
They can't go to gay bars to pick up casual sex themselves incase they are recognised.
Public toilts, Wimbledon common etc is far more random and least likely to draw attention and blow their cover.
If anyone does recognise them, it's fine, because they will probably be boys in blue themselves.
Glory holes in public toilets were actually invented by Kent police back in 1912 with the advent of public toilets.
Now don't you go posting anti-police threads on here mate or i'll have to take your particulars and refer you to the CPS.
Now bend over while i spank yopu with my birch twigs.

[spot]

Originally Posted by pantoandy

cheers spot
anything to say on this one ? you usually comment on my rants.

It's a huge question. The "sex in public which is currently a criminal offence under the indecency act" bit. I've not read the "indecency act" whatever that is. "it is not for the police to take the role of moral arbiter and where individuals are engaged in lawful sexual activity they should be able to do so safely" is a non-contentious truism whoever said it, I can't imagine why the sentence exists since it has nothing to do with the article.

"they have a police chief in charge of gay lesbian and transgender issues" because for at least thirty years the police had a duty to prosecute gay and lesbian behaviour. The ideal police officer enforces every law impartially but for those thirty years Plod got it into his piggy little mind that it was a fun law to enforce, that it was a moral law, that he was doing God's Holy Work and by Christ he enjoyed it. Then the law was removed from the statute book. Of course there's a police chief in charge of gay lesbian and transgender issues, there's a lot of coppers out there with damaged psyches who want nothing better than to persecute gays lesbians and transgendered folk just like their old sarge did when Britain still had an empire.

Dogging has nothing whatever to do with any of that, dogging is invariably an expression of heterosexual exhibitionism.

The moderator who merged your thread with an existing one on the same news item left a redirect in bizarre news stories, whatever that means. It implies, I think, that users are expected to chase down moderator "housekeeping" without any notice or warning and that clues of their actions will be scant. Words are being exchanged, such matters will be handled more noisily in future, nobody will be left uninformed. The skin of the moderator responsible in this instance will end up binding the next edition of "How To Moderate".

The nearest I can guess to an "Indecency Act" is the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which carries the following sections:

66. Exposure
67. Voyeurism
68. Voyeurism: interpretation
69. Intercourse with an animal
70. Sexual penetration of a corpse
71. Sexual activity in a public lavatory

Section 71 relates only to partnered conduct, single-handed exertions are excluded.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) spokesman on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues said officers should avoid a "knee jerk" reaction to outdoor sex? Go on, that has to be a wind-up.

[fuzzy butt]

the article (news report is a load of codswallop.

Police are not moarl arbitors but enforcers of laws . Each group of laws have a particular enforcement agency. Sexual offences , Vice , traffic, crime etc.

Courts are the moral arbitors and police bring those allegedly guilty of "specific conducts" under the law to a court to decide on the moral grounds of each particular case. Courts are a representation of the government who is a representation of the people who elect them and who expect them to carry out the governing of the laws of the land.

I think the chief is going to be hauled over the coals for this .............Because it puts the sexual offences ACt back 100 years. Dogging sexaul acts in public toilets and voyuerism etc. have been psychologically proven to esculate into more perverse behaviours. It doesn't matter if you're gay or straight .


Can somebody tell me who would allow their children at a park where a couple is having sex in front of them .......or allow their child or themselves for that matter into a toilet where a sex act is being carried out?

Personally i'm sick to ********** death of these gay and lesbian units . They take up police money, time and resources ...and for what? It's a travesty and embarrassment. they can effing get over themselves !!! People dont' care if your gay or straight they want their effing crimes solved . Doesn't take a rocket scientist to work that out.

[oscar]

Originally Posted by fuzzy butt

the article (news report is a load of codswallop.

Police are not moarl arbitors but enforcers of laws . Each group of laws have a particular enforcement agency. Sexual offences , Vice , traffic, crime etc.

Courts are the moral arbitors and police bring those allegedly guilty of "specific conducts" under the law to a court to decide on the moral grounds of each particular case. Courts are a representation of the government who is a representation of the people who elect them and who expect them to carry out the governing of the laws of the land.

I think the chief is going to be hauled over the coals for this .............Because it puts the sexual offences ACt back 100 years. Dogging sexaul acts in public toilets and voyuerism etc. have been psychologically proven to esculate into more perverse behaviours. It doesn't matter if you're gay or straight .


Can somebody tell me who would allow their children at a park where a couple is having sex in front of them .......or allow their child or themselves for that matter into a toilet where a sex act is being carried out?

Personally i'm sick to ********** death of these gay and lesbian units . They take up police money, time and resources ...and for what? It's a travesty and embarrassment. they can effing get over themselves !!! People dont' care if your gay or straight they want their effing crimes solved . Doesn't take a rocket scientist to work that out.

Too right. I may joke but i too am fed up with so called bloody minority groups taking preference over the majority.
There is nothing in the bible that says anyone should have sex in public. In this day and age, even if you don't have a place of your own to do it in private, you can rent a bloody room.
Sitting on councils, i know of the money wasted that's given away to hair brained schemes cooked up by looney nooooo Labour just so we can be oh so bloody politically correct. Never mind the local kids nursery shutting down through lack of funds, no, let's give it to a centre for one armed black lesbian single mothers or the like. And if they don't get it, they go screaming to the lawyers for a discrimination pay out.
Absolutely right, would you take your kids on the common when you knew you were liking to run into some arss bandit looking for some pump action? It's damn well revolting and insulting.
These perverts do it in public because they are exhibitionists who want the thrill of getting caught out heightning their sexual pleasure. Well, what if it's your kid that happens to stumble on them? They don't give a shyte about anyone else but themselves.
I wish the police would round the bloody lot of them up, prosecute them and send them down so if they do want some bum fun, they can get it in prison for free.

[spot]

And your focus on homosexuals is completely accidental, given that by far the greater proportion of public exhibitionist sex in England is heterosexual? I think you've more than one agenda running in tandem there, oscar.

In an ideal society, if an act were mandatory in the Bible it would be legislated against now. Think of an example and I'll say I'm right. I have no desire to put my mother in law to death, nor to hack prostitutes in twelve parts, nor even to take my first-born male to the top of a mountain and plunge a dagger into his chest. These ancient icons of respectability form lousy role-models.

[pantoandy]

Now don't you go posting anti-police threads on here mate or i'll have to take your particulars and refer you to the CPS.
Now bend over while i spank yopu with my birch twigs.




[/quote]

yes please oscar luvvy xxxx

[oscar]

Originally Posted by spot

And your focus on homosexuals is completely accidental, given that by far the greater proportion of public exhibitionist sex in England is heterosexual? I think you've more than one agenda running in tandem there, oscar.

In an ideal society, if an act were mandatory in the Bible it would be legislated against now. Think of an example and I'll say I'm right. I have no desire to put my mother in law to death, nor to hack prostitutes in twelve parts, nor even to take my first-born male to the top of a mountain and plunge a dagger into his chest. These ancient icons of respectability form lousy role-models.

Well yes your right Spot on the lousy role-models. I suppose it is rather hypocritical to say on one hand that all perverts should be locked up but on the other hand, to say the bible is correct in everything it says.

My focus on homosexuals is accidental, i do have gay associates but if they want to meet some-one, they go to a gay bar. If that then leads to a sexual relationship, then i'm quite certain that they do it in private.
While in my rant, i did over-see the old fashioned act of dogging, which yes, is hetrosexual and yes, i find equally revolting. In a practical society, how would life be, if every time we parked the car to walk our dogs on the common, there was group sex taking part in a car? Or we popped down the local supermarket on a late closing night to be greeted with the same sight?

I have no worries at all about any sexual practices. If Tory M.P's want to be tied up with an orange stuffed in their mouth, then who am i to judge any-one? Surely though, we must have a code of decency? Some morals or ethics. Would the world just slip from the minority into the majority?

We are not asking anyone to do something that is going to be impractical to them. We're simply saying that the majority find men hanging aroound public toilets offensive and a horrible thing should you be out with the family in the park.
If they want to meet strangers for sex and i include the doggers in that, in this day and age, there are plenty of ways of doing it. The internet for example is some-where you can hook up on line with. Magazines are constantly advertising for couples for group sex etc. (Not that i know, i hasten to add, i am married to Mr Oscar). I am told, that even the old fashioned orgie's are returning. There are many establishments that cater for every need.

It can only make me come to the conclussion that any-one who does want to have sex in an area where they are likely to be seen, is after a cheap thrill.
If that behaviour infringes on the morals of others and deeply offends, then quite right the police should be doing their job and prosecuting them.