Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Great Moments in Law and Order
Woman faces fine, 90 days in jail for swearing at her own toilet.
Meanwhile, 6-year-old Natalie Shea faces a $300 fine for drawing a flower on her home's front stoop in water-soluble sidewalk chalk. A neighbor called 311 to complain, and the drawing apparently ran afoul of anti-graffiti ordinances, even on one's own property.
The Sanitation Department bureau-bot said the fine is standard operating procedure: "If people call and complain, we have to follow it up; we have to respond."
|10.17.07 @ 1:05PM|#
I'd have to say, I'm not totally surprised that she clogged up
that toilet.
*ducks*
|10.17.07 @ 1:07PM|#
"Upon further review, many types of these incidents are not
as cut and dry as they originally appear," he said. "Freedom of
speech is not an unfettered right."
Sigh...
|10.17.07 @ 1:08PM|#
of course if you call 311 to find out what fucking lot they towed your car to, you're SOL. But giving little girls fines? They're all over that.
|10.17.07 @ 1:11PM|#
Efforts to reach the patrolmen were unsuccessful Monday and
Tuesday. Scranton Director of Public Safety Ray Hayes said he
stands by the officer's decision.
"Upon further review, many types of these incidents are not as cut
and dry as they originally appear," he said. "Freedom of speech is
not an unfettered right."
Right, the 1st Amendment says un-abridged, not un-fettered.
Fettering is not abridging, obviously.
Also, why is Public Safety always the one all up on everybody's
shit, so to speak?
anon.|10.17.07 @ 1:11PM|#
"I'm a good New Yorker. I like to obey the rules," she said. "If
it's really illegal for Natalie to use chalk on her own stoop, if
that's really upsetting to Mayor [Bloomberg], I will comply."
I, too, love doing whatever petty bureaucrats tell me to do.
|10.17.07 @ 1:11PM|#
I await the nanny-police state with open arms. How will I ever
be able to live without someone to look over my shoulder and
protect me?
Please tell me what to eat; tell me what I can say; tell me where I
can work; tell me who I can associate with; I am incapable of
figuring this kind of stuff out.
|10.17.07 @ 1:12PM|#
Jesus H Kryste an a happy little tree. If it's your property, then it's not graffiti! What. The. Fuck? Society is going to hell in a handbasket. Yeah, I am soooo geezerfied. Somebody buy me a drink.
Episiarch|10.17.07 @ 1:24PM|#
"I'm a good New Yorker. I like to obey the rules," she said.
"If it's really illegal for Natalie to use chalk on her own stoop,
if that's really upsetting to Mayor [Bloomberg], I will
comply."
As a former Manahattanite, I must say that New Yorkers are
absolutely not the famed individualists and unique characters who
move to NYC to escape the conformity of their small towns that they
think they are. NYC has a major groupthink vibe and is one of the
reasons I left. They submitted to all of Mayor Mike's nanny statism
and will submit to any more that comes. They submitted to
Guiliani's crackdown on idiotic crimes like jaywalking and his
other actions.
New Yorkers like to think of themselves as these crazy awesome
super-sophisticated rebels, but it's bullshit.
This is of course an over-generalization, but this applies to a lot
of people there.
|10.17.07 @ 1:25PM|#
A mother of four, she was cited for disorderly conduct after
a neighbor, who is a Scranton police officer, overheard her
swearing at her backed-up toilet near the open window.
"Freedom of speech is not an unfettered right."
Especially not in the vicinity of your masters!
|10.17.07 @ 1:29PM|#
Isn't the whole point of graffiti law (as it was intended) to
prevent one's property from being vandalized?
Are we not allowed to damage our own stuff anymore? Do I have to
call Bloomberg every time I want to pop Bubble
Wrap?!?
Fucking statists!
Robert|10.17.07 @ 1:30PM|#
Why has no commenter yet remarked about whoever complained? The
Sanitation Dept. just sent a form letter, they weren't even going
to fine her pending the matter's being cleared up, but some jerk
actually put in a complaint. (One of the stories made clear that if
you send them a letter saying that what appears to be graffiti on
your property is there with your permission, that's the end of the
matter.) You'd think someone involved in the story would've gone
into that, because clearly this person has an enemy, and
that is the real story of which this is obviously
just the tip of the iceberg. Someone was just waiting to get
something on that neighbor, possibly in revenge for something else,
and saw "graffiti" as an opp'ty. I'd like to know what started
it.
I also have a feeling the Daily News deleted an expletive in the
place of "[Bloomberg]". Obviously the guy was being sarcastic.
VM|10.17.07 @ 1:30PM|#
Second hand cursing?
I guess the neighbor was upwind, otherwise, she'd have double the
fine, and double the prison time?
Taxtix: naughty!!!!! And to think that the feared, dreaded,
beloved, admired URKOBOLD had your band as a feature. :)
|10.17.07 @ 1:31PM|#
"Freedom of speech is not an unfettered right."
Well no, it's not, but the government does need a compelling
interest to infringe on it. What would that be here? The toilet's
feelings?
|10.17.07 @ 1:33PM|#
Isn't there a small and cramped island that we can send all
these busy-body ninnies to? That way, they can just rat each other
out until their heart's content.
And no, not Manhattan.
|10.17.07 @ 1:34PM|#
"A property owner typically has 45 days to clean the
markings or send a letter to the Sanitation Department saying they
have no problem with the markings on their property"
While the burden shouldn't be on the property owner, it seems like
many people are under the misconception that it is illegal to have
chalk drawings on your own property. It is legal, but
you'll have to write a letter to the city telling them that it's
OK. It's a crazy bureaucracy, but chalk drawings on your own
property aren't illegal.
thoreau|10.17.07 @ 1:37PM|#
Great Moments in Law and Order
I thought this was going to be about Fred Thompson.
|10.17.07 @ 1:38PM|#
"I'm a good New Yorker. I like to obey the rules," she said. "If it's really illegal for Natalie to use chalk on her own stoop, if that's really upsetting to Mayor [Bloomberg], I will comply."
I would really like to think tha Ms Pepperman is being sarcastic
here. Really I would.
Alas, I fear that I would likely be wrong. (siiiigh!)
|10.17.07 @ 1:39PM|#
Pepperman acknowledges that the flower drawing "wasn't
Nattie's best work" and promised to wipe down any future scrawlings
more promptly.
That's like something from The Onion. It had to be
sarcasm.
Anyway, it can't be art if it isn't Jesus Christ done in chocolate
or submerged in urine, so it must be graffiti.
Danny|10.17.07 @ 1:42PM|#
What ever happened to knocking on a neighbor's door and
informing them of the law? I wouldn't guess that she'd be
threatened by the 6 year old who chose to draw a flower instead of
some gang-related term in response to her information. She has to
call somebody else to come all the way down to issue a $300 ticket
to a 6 year old? How about a polite warning?
Protect and serve... Apparently knowledge is not something that
people like to serve. They'd rather serve a ticket.
|10.17.07 @ 1:50PM|#
VM,
Holy crap! Thank you, great URKOBOLD, I shall never cross thee
again.
I only pray that you spare my taint with your forgiveness.
P.S. Tour Dates, new videos, etc. are updated on our
MySpace page.
P.S.S. Sorry Reason staffers and all about the shameless plugging,
but hey, at least I'm not Trollin'
Russ 2000|10.17.07 @ 1:55PM|#
The Scranton story is much scarier, getting hassled by police needs to be publicized. The New York one is just one asshole reacting to another asshole reacting to another asshole. You got a silly letter from the sanitation department? Ignore it and the problem goes away, no need to make a big deal out of it.
|10.17.07 @ 1:58PM|#
NYC has a major groupthink vibe and is one of the reasons I
left.
Ironic, given the conformity of thought found on this blog.
|10.17.07 @ 1:58PM|#
OK regarding the backed-up toilet lady - it's obvious that the
cop next door is a boor, and filed the complaint maliciously to get
back at her after she argued with him. He should be reprimanded and
the case dropped.
Second, the chalk-drawing girl. If the family lives in a brownstone
that is divided into apartments, then the steps are not exactly her
property. So, there is the issue of consideration to the neighbors.
However. the joyless soul who ratted the girl out needs to take a
good long look at the emptiness of his or her life, that a child's
chalk drawings are such an offence to the sensibilities.
Take a look at the quote about "Mayor [Bloomberg]." I wonder what
name the parent called him?
|10.17.07 @ 2:00PM|#
A friend of mine used to have a running debate with another friend about whether cursing in public (I know this lady did this in her home but she obviously did it loud enough for her neighbor to hear) should be illegal. On the one had, it is just words, but on the other you may not want your kid to hear such things...We really have no idea if this lady was screaming and how regular (no pun intended) she was at this.
VM|10.17.07 @ 2:00PM|#
Hay Taktix!
just keep us at URKOBOLD informed of dates, etc. For the others -
check out their music. It's cool stuff! Between Fyodor and Taktix,
we have some great libertarian talent!
Denver area - littlefyodor
Ft.Lauderdale area - Tripping June
re: sidewalk chalk:
in the old hood it was always fun, when walking home from the
train/EL, doing one of the hopscotch games :) And there were
announcements who had lemonade - so the sidewalk chalk contributed
greatly!
Plus all of the kids playing, the families hanging out, etc. really
gave a great feel to that neighborhood! And the toilets work
there!
Doctor Duck|10.17.07 @ 2:04PM|#
"Freedom of speech is not an unfettered right."
You can't yell 'Fire' in a crowded toilet.
|10.17.07 @ 2:06PM|#
"Great Moments in Law and Order
I thought this was going to be about Fred Thompson."
thoreau -- Have you seen the show? There would be no
mistaking...
|10.17.07 @ 2:09PM|#
"If the family lives in a brownstone that is divided into
apartments, then the steps are not exactly her
property."
She has a greater interest in that property than the neighbor who
lives in a different building, but probably not a sufficient
interest to write the letter to the city permitting the chalk
drawings.
|10.17.07 @ 2:09PM|#
"Take a look at the quote about "Mayor [Bloomberg]." I wonder
what name the parent called him?"
Giuliani?
|10.17.07 @ 2:13PM|#
If little Natalie is a grafitti artist, then this guy is the
Osama of grafittiterror.
http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/pave.htm
Amilda Chocha|10.17.07 @ 2:19PM|#
I feel that ruls are rules. No matter how small, if you do
something wrong, you should go to jail.
Today, this little girl will be graffiting flowers, tomorrow it
will be swastikas
Lincoln|10.17.07 @ 2:26PM|#
The toilet's feelings?
Did you see that hideous blue and yellow butterfly cover said
toilet was forced to wear? Between the cover, the swearing and all
the shit poor towlie is subjected to each week I feel some penalty
is in order. Me, I treat my toilets like princesses and make sure
to dump in all three at least once a month. I don't want anyone to
get their feelings hurt.
VM|10.17.07 @ 2:27PM|#
Now, had she been busted making love to her toilet, then we
might be on to something.
However, with sex with furniture cases, it's difficult to establish
whether the furniture actually consented....
Oh hay, juanita. love the moo moo.
|10.17.07 @ 2:28PM|#
Ironic, given the conformity of thought found on this
blog.
Hmm... the classic criticism of libertarians is that they can't
agree on anything, and yet apparently everybody on this site agrees
with everything. I guess if a dissenting comment doesn't involve
Dan T., he just skips over it.
|10.17.07 @ 2:33PM|#
I guess if a dissenting comment doesn't involve Dan T., he
just skips over it.
Ditto regarding comments containing things like "facts" and
"evidence."
|10.17.07 @ 2:40PM|#
Hmm... the classic criticism of libertarians is that they
can't agree on anything, and yet apparently everybody on this site
agrees with everything. I guess if a dissenting comment doesn't
involve Dan T., he just skips over it.
Come on - this thread is a classic example. Nick or Radley or
somebody finds an amazingly trival example of a government hiccup
(person sent form letter about graffiti that turns out to be her
kids' chalk doodle) and we end up with 30 hysterical pronoucements
about the "nanny state" and how we'll all soon be living in an
Orwellian nightmare.
Tomorrow, more of the same. Maybe somebody will get an unjustified
parking ticket or something?
|10.17.07 @ 2:40PM|#
I'm adding Scranton Pennsylvania Patrolman Patrick Gilman of the 900 block of Luzerne St to my black list for when the revolution comes. Nosiness has severe penalties under the new rule of law. We go ex post facto as well. He won't get a job in a homeless shelter after we are done.
|10.17.07 @ 2:50PM|#
The toilet-cursing woman ran afoul of the "I'm a cop, so if you
piss me off I'll have you charged with something" rule.
Whoever complained about a little girl drawing doodles on the
sidewalk in WATER SOLUBLE CHALK is an obnoxious busybody.
Sal Paradise|10.17.07 @ 3:24PM|#
Tomorrow, more of the same. Maybe somebody will get an
unjustified parking ticket or something?
Do they give tickets to people who don't know what "ironic" means
yet?
|10.17.07 @ 3:30PM|#
What the grafitti law really indicates is the high cost of
enforcing trivial laws. The city doesn't send out people to check
on these things unless somebody, presumably a neighbor, complains.
Thus, there's no way the city can consistently and fairly enforce
the rule. Plus, they always have to consider the person who
complained, if they really wanted to be unbiased. Selective
enforcement of a law because they can't afford to consistently
enforce it is an indication that they're overreaching--the law
either shouldn't exist, should be modified so that it is
enforceable, or devolved to a lower, localized authority to
enforce.
The points about the "nanny state" are correct, but for the wrong
reasons in this case.
|10.17.07 @ 3:57PM|#
The Scranton story is much scarier, getting hassled by
police needs to be publicized.
Russ 2000, It isn't just the police. This
crap can come from any of our government officials
masters. Happy ending here though.
|10.17.07 @ 4:03PM|#
Dan T. Was my 3:53 PM post a "trival example of a government hiccup"? Nanny laws lead to this crap, and I suspect you know it.
Mike Laursen|10.17.07 @ 4:04PM|#
Meanwhile, 6-year-old Natalie Shea faces a $300 fine for
drawing a flower on her home's front stoop in water-soluble
sidewalk chalk.
Technically, they fined her mom. But maybe that was only because
the girl doesn't yet have an allowance they could garnish.
|10.17.07 @ 4:10PM|#
Technically, they fined her mom. But maybe that was only
because the girl doesn't yet have an allowance they could
garnish.
Even more technically, they warned her mom that she could be fined
if she didn't clean up the "graffiti" within 45 days.
|10.17.07 @ 4:11PM|#
Did anyone else watch the outatkes for Super Troopers where
Farva was slagging on the toilet after he barfed into it?
Along the lines of:
"You're good enough for my piss but not my puke?"
It was an impressive bit of improv.
Tym|10.17.07 @ 4:20PM|#
What ever happened to knocking on a neighbor's door and
informing them of the law? I wouldn't guess that she'd be
threatened by the 6 year old who chose to draw a flower instead of
some gang-related term in response to her information. She has to
call somebody else to come all the way down to issue a $300 ticket
to a 6 year old? How about a polite warning?
Agreed, and how about just ignoring the art, which is obviously
harmless fun for the child.
|10.17.07 @ 4:38PM|#
slag·ging [ slágging ] (plural slag·gings)
noun
Definition:
U.K. criticism: a series of insulting, mocking, or critical
comments ( slang )
- I took a right slagging over that haircut.
VM|10.17.07 @ 4:46PM|#
hoake - ragging on the toilet. talking trash to the
toilet.
wow. I'll have to revisit that film... :)
twas a really fun one. How was Bierfest?
Rhywun|10.17.07 @ 5:15PM|#
You might notice that the Daily News article was
rightly contemptuous of the whole chalk affair. No sign of New York
submitting to group-think nanny-statism here; please reserve the
boilerplate NY bashing for another thread.
Besides, little girls are far easier target than the punks who
create real graffiti that this law has done nothing to
alleviate.
|10.17.07 @ 7:08PM|#
Cursing her toilet? That was an old Lenny Bruce routine: "You dirty, Communist TOILET you! And the sink and the hamper...you should know better..."
Bopo|10.17.07 @ 7:27PM|#
"Upon further review, many types of these incidents are not as
cut and dry as they originally appear," he said. "Freedom of speech
is not an unfettered right."
Evidently cursing at your toilet is just as injurious to public
safety as yelling fire in a crowded theater(to use the classic
example). She must have taken one hell of a dump.
Mike Laursen|10.17.07 @ 8:38PM|#
Even more technically, they warned her mom that she could be
fined if she didn't clean up the "graffiti" within 45
days.
Oh, sure, if you want to get all technical about it. :-)
SammyG|10.17.07 @ 10:34PM|#
Come on, great moments in law enforcement are found in Chicago,
not Scranton. From today's paper:
"A federal jury late Tuesday held two Chicago police officers
liable for the unreasonable search of a man who alleged that the
officers sodomized him with a screwdriver during a search for
drugs."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-screwdriver_alloct17,0,6801143.story
|10.18.07 @ 12:25AM|#
I just want ot get something striaght.
Let's say I own a property. A vandal tags my property.
Then, to add insult to injury, the city threatens to fine me for
being the victim of a crime?
Is that right?
edna|10.18.07 @ 9:20AM|#
Take a look at the quote about "Mayor [Bloomberg]." I wonder
what name the parent called him?
fortunately, there were no scranton cops nearby.
|10.18.07 @ 11:58AM|#
Then, to add insult to injury, the city threatens to fine me
for being the victim of a crime?
That's exactly the way it happens in Dallas. If you don't clean up
the graffiti, you can be fined.
|10.18.07 @ 12:50PM|#
Let's say I own a property. A vandal tags my property.
Then, to add insult to injury, the city threatens to fine me for
being the victim of a crime?
That actually happened to me last week. My back fence is right next
to a major road. High school kids walk by it every day. I received
a letter on October 11th stating that I had til the 15th to clean
it up, or be fined $50 administrative fee, $25 a day til remedied,
and in a second offense, $500 a day.
The best part is that the city documented the issue on Sep 14th,
and it took them almost a month to send a complaint form to me. And
give me exactly 1 business day to fix it or be fined.
Thank god the pressure washer worked.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245