trespassing will get you thrown in jail. (Charged for Loitering / Prowling)

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

The OP and his friend, yes. Again, it's a construction site

Well that's an interesting way to read it. 😕

You people amaze me sometimes.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

have you been asleep sence 9-11 or something? ive been manhandled by the popo in broad fucking daylight in a public park for taking pictures of stuff with my camera

it isnt even news at this point in time

And you are saying this is ok? It happened so its right and ok? Come on man.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

The OP and his friend, yes. Again, it's a construction site

Well that's an interesting way to read it. 😕

You people amaze me sometimes.

Being in a construction site at night is safe? 😕

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Anubis

Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

have you been asleep sence 9-11 or something? ive been manhandled by the popo in broad fucking daylight in a public park for taking pictures of stuff with my camera

it isnt even news at this point in time

And you are saying this is ok? It happened so its right and ok? Come on man.

OK: sort of
to be expected: yes

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Anubis

Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

have you been asleep sence 9-11 or something? ive been manhandled by the popo in broad fucking daylight in a public park for taking pictures of stuff with my camera

it isnt even news at this point in time

And you are saying this is ok? It happened so its right and ok? Come on man.

OK: sort of
to be expected: yes

Thats a really twisted perspective.

 

[Venix]

Originally posted by: rivan
Why is the cop wrong for holding someone accountable to the law? Did the cop lead the kid to the site and say, "Hey! Go take pics! The worst I'll do is give you a warning!"?

I mean, why the hell is it so hard for you to accept that someone broke a law, then was held accountable for it?

What the fuck? It's people like you, who eschew any personal responsibility for one's actions, that make this world so damned difficult to live in.

The purpose of the law and the police force is to protect the community. What benefit is there in making criminals out of kids who caused no damage, hurt no one, and made no attempt to flee?

The legal system is (or was) based on the concept of "actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea"--a guilty act requires a guilty mind. Unfortunately, many people today are more concerned with punishment than justice, which gives us this horrible "he broke the law, so he must be punished" attitude. This shitty attitude and the shitty laws it spawns are why America has an astounding percentage of its population in prison.

As far as personal responsibility, there are plenty of ways to make the kids responsible for their actions without arresting them on felony charges. A good cop will do whatever he can to avoid putting someone through the system. Lazy cops just arrest as a first resort and let someone else deal with the problem.

Of course, this all assumes that the OP and his friend are telling the truth.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

The OP and his friend, yes. Again, it's a construction site

Well that's an interesting way to read it. 😕

You people amaze me sometimes.

Being in a construction site at night is safe? 😕

Thats funny. so dangerous that photography could cause alarm or threat to safety but not dangerous enough to warrant any kind of sign. Simply stunning.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Thats funny so dangerous that photography could cause alarm or threat to saftey but not dangerous enough to warrant any kind of sign. Simply stunning.

At a construction site, that probably has "Hard Hat" signs posted (if it is where I think, open steel work with cranes)? The law, or at least OSHA would disagree.

Was this by the McDonald's?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Venix

Originally posted by: rivan
Why is the cop wrong for holding someone accountable to the law? Did the cop lead the kid to the site and say, "Hey! Go take pics! The worst I'll do is give you a warning!"?

I mean, why the hell is it so hard for you to accept that someone broke a law, then was held accountable for it?

What the fuck? It's people like you, who eschew any personal responsibility for one's actions, that make this world so damned difficult to live in.

The purpose of the law and the police force is to protect the community. What benefit is there in making criminals out of kids who caused no damage, hurt no one, and made no attempt to flee?

The legal system is (or was) based on the concept of "actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea"--a guilty act requires a guilty mind. Unfortunately, many people today are more concerned with punishment than justice, which gives us this horrible "he broke the law, so he must be punished" attitude. This shitty attitude and the shitty laws it spawns are why America has an astounding percentage of its population in prison.

As far as personal responsibility, there are plenty of ways to make the kids responsible for their actions without arresting them on felony charges. A good cop will do whatever he can to avoid putting someone through the system. Lazy cops just arrest as a first resort and let someone else deal with the problem.

Of course, this all assumes that the OP and his friend are telling the truth.

Another sane and reasonable person on here. Thank god.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Anubis

Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

have you been asleep sence 9-11 or something? ive been manhandled by the popo in broad fucking daylight in a public park for taking pictures of stuff with my camera

it isnt even news at this point in time

And you are saying this is ok? It happened so its right and ok? Come on man.

OK: sort of
to be expected: yes

Thats a really twisted perspective.

I don?t expect to me manhandled every time I?m out with my camera, it was only really bad shortly after 911 and all that, however if a cop came up to me when I was out I would definitely not be alarmed or surprised about it, its happened many times, most are nice, few assholes

But taking pics in a construction site at night where you aren?t supposed to be is not a smart idea,
idea,

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Anubis

Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

have you been asleep sence 9-11 or something? ive been manhandled by the popo in broad fucking daylight in a public park for taking pictures of stuff with my camera

it isnt even news at this point in time

And you are saying this is ok? It happened so its right and ok? Come on man.

OK: sort of
to be expected: yes

Thats a really twisted perspective.

I don?t expect to me manhandled every time I?m out with my camera, it was only really bad shortly after 911 and all that, however if a cop came up to me when I was out I would definitely not be alarmed or surprised about it, its happened many times, most are nice, few assholes

But taking pics in a construction site at night where you aren?t supposed to be is not a smart idea,
idea,

I never argued the OP was smart. :laugh:

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
...

Laws don't rely on common sense which is why it isn't trespassing unless there are signs or you are asked to leave. Thank god there are some reasonable law makers out there that don't assume that everyone only goes from home to work and back.

He wasn't charged with trespassing.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

The OP and his friend, yes. Again, it's a construction site

Well that's an interesting way to read it. 😕

You people amaze me sometimes.

Being in a construction site at night is safe? 😕

Thats funny. so dangerous that photography could cause alarm or threat to safety but not dangerous enough to warrant any kind of sign. Simply stunning.

Doesn't matter what he was doing, the OP and his friend could have been picking each other's nose or having sex with a goat. And being at night, who knows if there was a sign there. Or if someone ripped the sign down. Common sense should tell you that a construction site at night is not public property nor a safe place to be.

 

[summit]

snitch out your friend, take your freedom.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

The OP and his friend, yes. Again, it's a construction site

Well that's an interesting way to read it. 😕

You people amaze me sometimes.

Being in a construction site at night is safe? 😕

Thats funny. so dangerous that photography could cause alarm or threat to safety but not dangerous enough to warrant any kind of sign. Simply stunning.

Doesn't matter what he was doing, the OP and his friend could have been picking each other's nose or having sex with a goat. And being at night, who knows if there was a sign there. Or if someone ripped the sign down. Common sense should tell you that a construction site at night is not public property nor a safe place to be.

Thats nice. The law doesn't agree.

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim


Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

low light photography isnt a crime, but trying to do it while on a construction site where you could fall into a hole, trip on rebar and impale yourself, break very expensive equipment, vandalize or destroy supplies/ materials or steal stuff (including casing the place for a future robbery) are all possibilities. the construction company is held responsible for everything that happens on that site, and if the place is fenced off it is a good warning that you shouldnt be there. we have sites that even the customers arent allowed on, simply due to safety issues. i know none of you guys would actually sue a company after you trespassed and hurt yourself on something at the site, but maybe others wouldnt have your gallantry.

plain and simple, the alarm was unauthorized persons on the property. public safety was your own safety as well as others you may injure by breaking stuff and it not being apparent until the workers start using whatever got broke. the cop should have been less of a dick and let it go at a warning, but he didnt really have to. the way those laws against loitering are worded, he should have given you reasonable time to comply with leaving before arresting you. apparently your explanation of why you were there didnt sit well with him and didnt dispel the feeling of alarm or concern.

take it to court, fight it and probably get off with next to nothing since you served 12 hours already.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

The OP and his friend, yes. Again, it's a construction site

Well that's an interesting way to read it. 😕

You people amaze me sometimes.

Being in a construction site at night is safe? 😕

Thats funny. so dangerous that photography could cause alarm or threat to safety but not dangerous enough to warrant any kind of sign. Simply stunning.

Doesn't matter what he was doing, the OP and his friend could have been picking each other's nose or having sex with a goat. And being at night, who knows if there was a sign there. Or if someone ripped the sign down. Common sense should tell you that a construction site at night is not public property nor a safe place to be.

Thats nice. The law doesn't agree.

Only how you read it.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim


Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

low light photography isnt a crime, but trying to do it while on a construction site where you could fall into a hole, trip on rebar and impale yourself, break very expensive equipment, vandalize or destroy supplies/ materials or steal stuff (including casing the place for a future robbery) are all possibilities. the construction company is held responsible for everything that happens on that site, and if the place is fenced off it is a good warning that you shouldnt be there. we have sites that even the customers arent allowed on, simply due to safety issues. i know none of you guys would actually sue a company after you trespassed and hurt yourself on something at the site, but maybe others wouldnt have your gallantry.

plain and simple, the alarm was unauthorized persons on the property. public safety was your own safety as well as others you may injure by breaking stuff and it not being apparent until the workers start using whatever got broke. the cop should have been less of a dick and let it go at a warning, but he didnt really have to. the way those laws against loitering are worded, he should have given you reasonable time to comply with leaving before arresting you. apparently your explanation of why you were there didnt sit well with him and didnt dispel the feeling of alarm or concern.

take it to court, fight it and probably get off with next to nothing since you served 12 hours already.

I concur.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim


Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

low light photography isnt a crime, but trying to do it while on a construction site where you could fall into a hole, trip on rebar and impale yourself, break very expensive equipment, vandalize or destroy supplies/ materials or steal stuff (including casing the place for a future robbery) are all possibilities. the construction company is held responsible for everything that happens on that site, and if the place is fenced off it is a good warning that you shouldnt be there. we have sites that even the customers arent allowed on, simply due to safety issues. i know none of you guys would actually sue a company after you trespassed and hurt yourself on something at the site, but maybe others wouldnt have your gallantry.

plain and simple, the alarm was unauthorized persons on the property. public safety was your own safety as well as others you may injure by breaking stuff and it not being apparent until the workers start using whatever got broke. the cop should have been less of a dick and let it go at a warning, but he didnt really have to. the way those laws against loitering are worded, he should have given you reasonable time to comply with leaving before arresting you. apparently your explanation of why you were there didnt sit well with him and didnt dispel the feeling of alarm or concern.

take it to court, fight it and probably get off with next to nothing since you served 12 hours already.

yeap.

i agree same with them fighting it. courts are more willing to settle and plead out then actually go to court. odds are they will get a fine and community service.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim


Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

low light photography isnt a crime, but trying to do it while on a construction site where you could fall into a hole, trip on rebar and impale yourself, break very expensive equipment, vandalize or destroy supplies/ materials or steal stuff (including casing the place for a future robbery) are all possibilities. the construction company is held responsible for everything that happens on that site, and if the place is fenced off it is a good warning that you shouldnt be there. we have sites that even the customers arent allowed on, simply due to safety issues. i know none of you guys would actually sue a company after you trespassed and hurt yourself on something at the site, but maybe others wouldnt have your gallantry.

plain and simple, the alarm was unauthorized persons on the property. public safety was your own safety as well as others you may injure by breaking stuff and it not being apparent until the workers start using whatever got broke. the cop should have been less of a dick and let it go at a warning, but he didnt really have to. the way those laws against loitering are worded, he should have given you reasonable time to comply with leaving before arresting you. apparently your explanation of why you were there didnt sit well with him and didnt dispel the feeling of alarm or concern.

take it to court, fight it and probably get off with next to nothing since you served 12 hours already.

So we can agree then that after explaining they were there for photography and that there were no signs present the proper action would have been for the officer to state the dangers present and ask them to leave or call there parents.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim


Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

low light photography isnt a crime, but trying to do it while on a construction site where you could fall into a hole, trip on rebar and impale yourself, break very expensive equipment, vandalize or destroy supplies/ materials or steal stuff (including casing the place for a future robbery) are all possibilities. the construction company is held responsible for everything that happens on that site, and if the place is fenced off it is a good warning that you shouldnt be there. we have sites that even the customers arent allowed on, simply due to safety issues. i know none of you guys would actually sue a company after you trespassed and hurt yourself on something at the site, but maybe others wouldnt have your gallantry.

plain and simple, the alarm was unauthorized persons on the property. public safety was your own safety as well as others you may injure by breaking stuff and it not being apparent until the workers start using whatever got broke. the cop should have been less of a dick and let it go at a warning, but he didnt really have to. the way those laws against loitering are worded, he should have given you reasonable time to comply with leaving before arresting you. apparently your explanation of why you were there didnt sit well with him and didnt dispel the feeling of alarm or concern.

take it to court, fight it and probably get off with next to nothing since you served 12 hours already.

yeap.

i agree same with them fighting it. courts are more willing to settle and plead out then actually go to court. odds are they will get a fine and community service.

I bet money it is totally dismissed.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: waggy
common sense should tell you that going on a construction sight at night is traspassing and will get you in trouble if caught.

QFT....also it's fairly convenient to simply remove a sign and then claim there wasn't one.

This is why despite no signs saying you can't kill someone for no reason, you can't say 'hey there was no sign'.

 

[gsellis]

BTW, it appears that the state of Georgia considers all property posted with or without a sign. Cannot find the reference though, so may be a web lawyer.


And here is the state code (Lexus Nexus)

§ 16-7-21. Criminal trespass


(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person.

(b) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:

(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;

(2) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that such entry is forbidden; or

(3) Remains upon the land or premises of another person or within the vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart.

(c) For the purposes of subsection (b) of this Code section, permission to enter or invitation to enter given by a minor who is or is not present on or in the property of the minor's parent or guardian is not sufficient to allow lawful entry of another person upon the land, premises, vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft owned or rightfully occupied by such minor's parent or guardian if such parent or guardian has previously given notice that such entry is forbidden or notice to depart.

(d) A person who commits the offense of criminal trespass shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

(e) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally defaces, mutilates, or defiles any grave marker, monument, or memorial to one or more deceased persons who served in the military service of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof, or a monument, plaque, marker, or memorial which is dedicated to, honors, or recounts the military service of any past or present military personnel of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof if such grave marker, monument, memorial, plaque, or marker is privately owned or located on land which is privately owned.

§ 16-11-36. Loitering or prowling


(a) A person commits the offense of loitering or prowling when he is in a place at a time or in a manner not usual for law-abiding individuals under circumstances that warrant a justifiable and reasonable alarm or immediate concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity.

(b) Among the circumstances which may be considered in determining whether alarm is warranted is the fact that the person takes flight upon the appearance of a law enforcement officer, refuses to identify himself, or manifestly endeavors to conceal himself or any object. Unless flight by the person or other circumstances make it impracticable, a law enforcement officer shall, prior to any arrest for an offense under this Code section, afford the person an opportunity to dispel any alarm or immediate concern which would otherwise be warranted by requesting the person to identify himself and explain his presence and conduct. No person shall be convicted of an offense under this Code section if the law enforcement officer failed to comply with the foregoing procedure or if it appears at trial that the explanation given by the person was true and would have dispelled the alarm or immediate concern.

(c) A person committing the offense of loitering or prowling shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

(d) This Code section shall not be deemed or construed to affect or limit the powers of counties or municipal corporations to adopt ordinances or resolutions prohibiting loitering or prowling within their respective limits.

Funny - I am going to see if there are any satellites "parked illegally" on my property

§ 44-1-2. "Realty" or "real estate" defined; extent of owner's interest in airspace


(a) As used in this title, the term "realty" or "real estate" means:

(1) All lands and the buildings thereon;

(2) All things permanently attached to land or to the buildings thereon; and

(3) Any interest existing in, issuing out of, or dependent upon land or the buildings thereon.

(b) The property right of the owner of real estate extends downward indefinitely and upward indefinitely.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: alfa147x
I never said i was not doing any thing wrong... ?

So what's the problem? You were doing something wrong, got caught. Man up and take the consequences.

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Venix

Originally posted by: rivan
Why is the cop wrong for holding someone accountable to the law? Did the cop lead the kid to the site and say, "Hey! Go take pics! The worst I'll do is give you a warning!"?

I mean, why the hell is it so hard for you to accept that someone broke a law, then was held accountable for it?

What the fuck? It's people like you, who eschew any personal responsibility for one's actions, that make this world so damned difficult to live in.

The purpose of the law and the police force is to protect the community. What benefit is there in making criminals out of kids who caused no damage, hurt no one, and made no attempt to flee?

The legal system is (or was) based on the concept of "actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea"--a guilty act requires a guilty mind. Unfortunately, many people today are more concerned with punishment than justice, which gives us this horrible "he broke the law, so he must be punished" attitude. This shitty attitude and the shitty laws it spawns are why America has an astounding percentage of its population in prison.

As far as personal responsibility, there are plenty of ways to make the kids responsible for their actions without arresting them on felony charges. A good cop will do whatever he can to avoid putting someone through the system. Lazy cops just arrest as a first resort and let someone else deal with the problem.

Of course, this all assumes that the OP and his friend are telling the truth.

Another sane and reasonable person on here. Thank god.

Well, he just admitted he knew he wasn't supposed to be there. He realizes his guilt.

As for being obsessed with the punishment, I'm not. Where there is a law, there must be consequences for breaking it, else it will have no influence - that's common sense. What's bothering me here is that this kid a) did something wrong, then b) is refusing to accept responsibility for it.

I'm not arguing the validity of the law. I'm not arguing anything but someone admittedly doing something they knew to be against the law, then being too immature to accept the consequences. The purpose of laws are to provide structure to society. The purpose of the police is to enforce the law, NOT to interpret it - there's nothing lazy about that. It's why we pay judges - to handle the careful consideration of the circumstances and to mete out appropriate consequences. I don't see an arrest, holding some bail money (you get that back if you show up for your court dates) and what will likely end up being some community service and a sealed juvenile record as anything out of the realm of reason for this.

The way I see it, construction sites are dangerous places - the cop was protecting the kid from himself if nothing else - and perhaps protecting the construction company from the lawsuit that would have resulted if the OP had slipped and impaled himself on a piece of rebar.

If I park my car on McDonald's landscaping, I expect to get towed. There's no sign about not parking on the grass at McDonald's. And yet, if I did it, and I got towed, the last thing I'd do is try to make a stink about it.

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: hanoverphist

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim


Low light photography is alarming and a threat to public safety......interesting perspective....and I am being called crazy?

low light photography isnt a crime, but trying to do it while on a construction site where you could fall into a hole, trip on rebar and impale yourself, break very expensive equipment, vandalize or destroy supplies/ materials or steal stuff (including casing the place for a future robbery) are all possibilities. the construction company is held responsible for everything that happens on that site, and if the place is fenced off it is a good warning that you shouldnt be there. we have sites that even the customers arent allowed on, simply due to safety issues. i know none of you guys would actually sue a company after you trespassed and hurt yourself on something at the site, but maybe others wouldnt have your gallantry.

plain and simple, the alarm was unauthorized persons on the property. public safety was your own safety as well as others you may injure by breaking stuff and it not being apparent until the workers start using whatever got broke. the cop should have been less of a dick and let it go at a warning, but he didnt really have to. the way those laws against loitering are worded, he should have given you reasonable time to comply with leaving before arresting you. apparently your explanation of why you were there didnt sit well with him and didnt dispel the feeling of alarm or concern.

take it to court, fight it and probably get off with next to nothing since you served 12 hours already.

So we can agree then that after explaining they were there for photography and that there were no signs present the proper action would have been for the officer to state the dangers present and ask them to leave or call there parents.

i agreed with that in the beginning of this debacle. but thats not how cops act with 17 yr olds out at night sometimes. i got pulled over for a missing gas cap, had my car searched as well as my person, they traced my record and called my mom waking her up at 2am asking if she knew where i was. they ticketed me for 3 different things including the missing gas cap. my mom was a court clerk, went in to her supervisor the next week and he ripped the tickets up and put a notice up about the cops involved. doesnt make it right, and he was allowed to do everything he did based on the law. he was just a bit overzealous and didnt use common sense however, and the courts agreed.