Why not have a Pissy Laing tour. He could travel the country, spending a day at VFW posts around the country. We could sell tickets, and make a fortune.

I would support said memorial urination if it was an artistic expression, but just being a drunk moran? Urine big trouble mister.

Why have an article about a picture and not show the picture.

/pics or it didn't happen.

Also this happened in Ottawa at the National War Memorial a few years back on Canada Day as well. It makes no sense when there are perfectly good bushes just a few feet away.

Earl of Chives: I would support said memorial urination if it was an artistic expression, but just being a drunk moran? Urine big trouble mister.

Where are all those badass WWII vets who beat the hell out of muggers when you need them?

This is in England, and there are people there who still remember the London blitz-a lot of civilians died in that war as well as soldiers. There are war memorials in every city, village and widening of the road in the UK. I'm surprised he wasn't placed in the public stocks in the town square.

here

StoneG: Why have an article about a picture and not show the picture.

Don't worry, this is FARK. Picture coming up in 3...2...1....

remember the alamo

here
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220579-06D574A7000005DC-942_ 4 68x664.jpg

how do you do embedded pics? damn hmtl

Happy Happy, Joy Joy!

Here it is. His junk is blurred, but I've lost track of what is NSFW anymore.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220579-06D574A7000005DC-942 _4 68x664.jpg (new window)

If he gets time, it will solely be based on biased, emotion-based decision of the judge. There is no rational reason to put the perp in jail for this.

There are so many other things worthy of peeing on...Why would this douchebag decide this was a good idea.

There had to be a cop or lawyer around somewhere.

Even Hitler had more class.
/Godwin'd yet?

J.Garcia'sRightMiddleFinger: If he gets time, it will solely be based on biased, emotion-based decision of the judge. There is no rational reason to put the perp in jail for this.

Public urination, indecent exposure, public drunkenness, disturbing the peace, damaging public property... take your pic, dude.

Of course, he could just be ticketed instead of being thrown in jail.

The Doubting Apostle: remember the alamo

Remember the Maine

J.Garcia'sRightMiddleFinger: If he gets time, it will solely be based on biased, emotion-based decision of the judge. There is no rational reason to put the perp in jail for this.

No, he should do some time. 30 or 60 days would be nice. It would be a fine addition to his education.

I think he should be killed.

Not really so much for the peeing on a memorial but that there are too many people on the planet and most of them are just plain stupid.

Just wait until I'm elected Emperor of the World. Yeah, you'll see some change all right.

I'm uncomfortable with some public and private property being more illegal to urinate on than others. The question I have is this... what possible advantage to anyone would it be to put a guy in jail for pissing on an inanimate object? It'd probably be more beneficial to have him perform a few hundred hours in community service delivering meals to WWII vets and that kind of crap.

Ottawa Memorial Urinators (new window)

He was just pouring out "a forty" (or as they're called in the UK, "a point") for his departed homies. Of course, he did filter it through his kidneys first....

Look let's not be too hard on the boy, he was trying to make a statement. All he was saying was: "give pees a chance"

What was Obama doing in Sheffield?

/Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all night.

I always stand on the New Hampshire side of the state line and piss into Massachusetts.

Unlikely that he'll get time for it.

Too bad his Grampa ain't right there to set him straight.

Remember Granada.

/did I do it right?
//hasn't been a TFette in a while.

Magorn: Look let's not be too hard on the boy, he was trying to make a statement. All he was saying was: "give pees a chance"

OK that was pretty good.

Is public urination or public drunkeness (post facto) a jailable offense, or is he being sent to jail only because it was a war memorial?

If it's the latter, then it's wrong. You can't adapt the punishment simply because it hurt your feelings. A judge should know better than to let his personal feelings override logic & reason.

"What shocking disrespect."

schattenteufel: Is public urination or public drunkeness (post facto) a jailable offense, or is he being sent to jail only because it was a war memorial?

If it's the latter, then it's wrong. You can't adapt the punishment simply because it hurt your feelings. A judge should know better than to let his personal feelings override logic & reason.

Here's the thing people rarely realize about criminal law. Even some of the most minor infractions have draconian maximum punishments. Now as a practicval matter no one ever gets the max, and so people are unaware of exactly how badly the judge can fark you if he gets a bee up his bonnet.

Dead people don't care if you piss on things, they're dead.

Zip him up while he is still hanging out.
It will help him refocus.

thecolour: here
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220579-06D574A7000005DC-942_ 4 68x664.jpg

I think it's funny that they pixellated the piss.

Swampthing in Korea: What was Obama doing in Sheffield?

/Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all night.

I don't get it.

thamike: I don't get it.

Lower your IQ 40 points, watch Fox News for a week and read it again.

Click for article with full size image.

Some people pay good money for that. $100 fine. Move along.

knob

Magorn: Here's the thing people rarely realize about criminal law. Even some of the most minor infractions have draconian maximum punishments. Now as a practicval matter no one ever gets the max, and so people are unaware of exactly how badly the judge can fark you if he gets a bee up his bonnet.


Yeah, I realize that the 'maximum sentence' may very well carry jailtime, but generally that would be intended for repeat offenders or people who pose a significant threat to themselves or others. If this guy has a history of pissing on artifacts, or the judge is afraid the dude would get attacked by a mom if jailtime wasn't served, then I could see the justification.

All I'm saying is that the judge is supposed to detach his personal feelings from the matter & rule from a standpoint of honesty, integrity, and neutrality. Rarely is this the case, sadly.

I'd like to ask the judge if he'd send the kid to jail if it were a non-military memorial (say: a regular gravestone at a cemetery, or a plaque commemorating some other event. This whole 'military personnel deserve more respect than general public' is wearing thin on me.

schattenteufel: Magorn: Here's the thing people rarely realize about criminal law. Even some of the most minor infractions have draconian maximum punishments. Now as a practicval matter no one ever gets the max, and so people are unaware of exactly how badly the judge can fark you if he gets a bee up his bonnet.


Yeah, I realize that the 'maximum sentence' may very well carry jailtime, but generally that would be intended for repeat offenders or people who pose a significant threat to themselves or others. If this guy has a history of pissing on artifacts, or the judge is afraid the dude would get attacked by a mob if jailtime wasn't served, then I could see the justification.

All I'm saying is that the judge is supposed to detach his personal feelings from the matter & rule from a standpoint of honesty, integrity, and neutrality. Rarely is this the case, sadly.

I'd like to ask the judge if he'd send the kid to jail if it were a non-military memorial (say: a regular gravestone at a cemetery, or a plaque commemorating some other event. This whole 'military personnel deserve more respect than general public' is wearing thin on me.


FIFM
*mob, not 'mom'.

Savage Bacon: J.Garcia'sRightMiddleFinger: If he gets time, it will solely be based on biased, emotion-based decision of the judge. There is no rational reason to put the perp in jail for this.

"...indecent exposure, public drunkenness, disturbing the peace..."


You can't use any of those to prosecute him from a single photo.

I've heard stories of people pissing in closets and book shelves while wasted drunk.
He was blind drunk and he had a pee on something. I doubt he had any idea of where he even was.
If he had beaten up an old person or stabbed someone we probably wouldn't even know about it.
It's all a bit over the top imo.

Mercutio74: Lower your IQ 40 points, watch Fox News for a week and read it again.

That would just about put me just above Reagan's est. IQ level. I don't think he'd get it either (perhaps for other reasons...).

Earl of Chives Quote 2009-11-06 08:57:25 AM
Here it is. His junk is blurred, but I've lost track of what is NSFW anymore.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220579-06D574A7000005DC-942 _4 68x664.jpg (new window)


Give the kid a break and give him something menial to do instead of jail. He did say that he'd drank a WHOLE bottle of whiskey....who here among us (who isn't an alcoholic) could drink that much and still control where our pee goes...hell, after that I'd be happy with still being upright when I peed..like someone so elegantly said above...

GIVE PISS A CHANCE!!

These two idiots were simply fined and fired from their Yellowstone Park jobs for pissing on Old Faithful.
http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/men_fined_fired_after_webcam_caught_them_p e eing_in_old_faithful/C559/L559/

I'm British, but whenever I'm in DC (it happens occasionally) I go to the Vietnam memorial and it always moves me to tears.

Last time I was there a bunch of teenagers were running around picking up flowers and teddy-bears and the other tributes that had been left in memory to fallen soldiers, shouting and screaming, while the teachers and parents did nothing to stop them. I really couldn't believe it...closest I've ever come to punching a complete stranger in the face.

schattenteufel: Is public urination or public drunkeness (post facto) a jailable offense, or is he being sent to jail only because it was a war memorial?

If it's the latter, then it's wrong. You can't adapt the punishment simply because it hurt your feelings. A judge should know better than to let his personal feelings override logic & reason.

I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand it you can't be charged for outraging public decency for urinating outside in an alleyway behind a skip, but you can if you do it out in the open. Like, say, on top of a memorial. It's the public exposure that leads to the additional offence.

It is kind of a vague situation, and the fact that it was specifically a war memorial may lead to a harsher sentence owing to the severity of public outrage.