Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Al Jazeera)   Need more than one condom? New York thinks you're a hooker   ( america.aljazeera.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, New York, New York City Council, Trina Vuitton, sex workers, stop and frisk  
•       •       •

3144 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Apr 2014 at 5:51 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-04-30 08:10:35 PM  

Dahnkster: I'm pretty sure this fortune cookie is telling me to masturbate...

[i.imgur.com image 765x1024]


Heh... that's pretty funny.  Good one.

Haven't had a fortune cookie in years.  My local Chinese food place gives you a zip-lock bag of animal cookies.  They're weird.  But the food is pretty damn good.
 
2014-04-30 08:18:17 PM  
So from what I read they don't just assume you're a hooker. They assume you're a tranny hooker?
 
2014-04-30 08:28:29 PM  

ZAZ: Does anybody have an informative article rather than a propaganda piece? What I get from the article seems entirely reasonable: possession of multiple condoms creates suspicion, but is not an offense.


The problem is that under current US case law, "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity is grounds for the police to conduct what is called a "Terry Stop", where they can briefly detain you to determine your identity (and if you have any outstanding warrants) and frisk you to see if you have weapons (and if they can feel the presence of any other contraband on you), all without a warrant.   This is from the Supreme Court precedent Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).  The intent was to let Officers stop somebody and search them for weapons if they had a reason to think they could be dangerous, on the grounds of Officer safety.

The NYPD is downright notorious for their very aggressive use of this tactic, pushing it to it's limits as a method of warrantless searches.  Their tactic is to use some tiny foothold of "reasonable suspicion" to stop & frisk everybody they can, looking for anything illegal.  Their use of it against the poor and minorities (i.e. people who aren't likely to cause a media stink with doing it to them) is well documented.

All they need is something specific (as in not a hunch or vague feeling) they can point to later and say that it was suspicious of criminal activity.

This is about specifically barring them from using the presence of more than one condom as grounds for this process.  So they can't use the fact you have two condoms in your possession as grounds for a warrantless detention and search on suspicion of prostitution.
 
2014-04-30 08:32:04 PM  
Why isn't this article under the Business tab?
 
2014-04-30 08:37:43 PM  
"Oftentimes a responsible sexual encounter will require more than one condom," he said.

Here, here!
 
2014-04-30 08:41:32 PM  

Firethorn: fusillade762: What does owning more than one bulletproof vest make you?

A mall ninja.  Read.  It's hilarious.


Now that's a blast from the past.
 
2014-04-30 09:04:15 PM  

fusillade762: Mugato: socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.

That's sarcasm I assume.

Cops are dicks because liberals. Sounds legit.


"Cops are dicks" - self evident

"because liberals" - self evident
 
2014-04-30 09:17:44 PM  
I always knew those New Yorkers were dirty f*ckers, using the same condom as you switch holes. I bet they go ass to mouth, too.
 
2014-04-30 09:29:09 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: but if you're carrying more than one condom you're considered a criminal.


Well, only if you're a woman.
 
2014-04-30 09:40:10 PM  

sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.


Ugh. New York is a big state. The "west village" from TFA is in NYC. And before you start, the soda thing was NYC, e-cig bans mainly NYC.... NYC is not "all of New York."
 
2014-04-30 10:13:09 PM  

Orange-Pippin: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Ugh. New York is a big state. The "west village" from TFA is in NYC. And before you start, the soda thing was NYC, e-cig bans mainly NYC.... NYC is not "all of New York."


According to farkers from NYC, NYC is the only New York that matters.
 
2014-04-30 10:21:32 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: So what happens if someone walks down to the corner store and buys a whole box of condoms?


Good question.  How do you even acquire condoms without ending up with more than one of them on your person, between the store and your house?  Aren't they customarily sold in boxes of more than one?
 
2014-04-30 11:10:49 PM  

sendtodave: Orange-Pippin: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Ugh. New York is a big state. The "west village" from TFA is in NYC. And before you start, the soda thing was NYC, e-cig bans mainly NYC.... NYC is not "all of New York."

According to farkers from NYC, NYC is the only New York that matters.


The only people who care that NYC is not "all of New York" are the hillbillies who live in the hills between the Bronx and Quebec.
 
2014-04-30 11:27:57 PM  

King Something: sendtodave: Orange-Pippin: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Ugh. New York is a big state. The "west village" from TFA is in NYC. And before you start, the soda thing was NYC, e-cig bans mainly NYC.... NYC is not "all of New York."

According to farkers from NYC, NYC is the only New York that matters.

The only people who care that NYC is not "all of New York" are the hillbillies who live in the hills between the Bronx and Quebec.


Well, iunno aboot that guy, but I live in Northern Virginia.

You know, the "highest income in the country" Northern Virginia?  Internet root?  Surburb of the capital of the free world?

NYC can go blow, it's not tha timpotant.

'Cept for the bankers, I guess.  But fark bankers.
 
2014-04-30 11:28:41 PM  
Also, "timpotant" is a new world i just made up.

Poor tim.
 
2014-04-30 11:35:12 PM  
See, I'm glad I don't live in New York City. Because if I did, I'd have to run myself ragged getting outraged over them doing stupid shiat like this, the proposed soda ban, the e-cig ban, and so on and so forth. (Haven't researched the SAFE Act, but I'm generally pro-gun and want to see a pretty high bar before I'd be comfortable with a gun control law, and I doubt SAFE would meet my bar. Of course, the gun control in NYC is pretty retarded already, so whatever problems it may cause upstate, in NYC proper it's just a dollop of diarrhea icing on the pre-existing shiat sandwich.)

As it is, living where I do, it's tiring enough just being aggravated over the chronic abuse-of-power problems the SPD has. And realistically, the behavior of Seattle's "finest" is pretty much standard for the gangs police forces of most major US cities, anyway.
 
2014-05-01 12:22:21 AM  

sendtodave: Orange-Pippin: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Ugh. New York is a big state. The "west village" from TFA is in NYC. And before you start, the soda thing was NYC, e-cig bans mainly NYC.... NYC is not "all of New York."

According to farkers from NYC who moved to NYC from a flyover shiathole sometime in their twenties, NYC is the only New York that matters.


FTFY
 
2014-05-01 12:52:08 AM  
Are you kidding me? It usually takes me like eight of them before I can finally get one turned around the right direction and put on properly.

I always end up stumbling around the room with one half stuck on one foot and another half-wrapped around my head trying desperately to not fall over and bang my head on the end table and suffocating again.

I'm not good with sex stuff.
 
2014-05-01 01:21:14 AM  

Wooly Bully: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Did anyone read the article? Some NYC cops have been doing f*cked-up sh*t (news flash: cops are often assholes, and not just in NYC), and apparently the city's going to do something about it. That's good.


Actually the state is trying to do something about it.
 
2014-05-01 01:21:46 AM  

tripleseven: sendtodave: Orange-Pippin: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Ugh. New York is a big state. The "west village" from TFA is in NYC. And before you start, the soda thing was NYC, e-cig bans mainly NYC.... NYC is not "all of New York."

According to farkers from NYC who moved to NYC from a flyover shiathole sometime in their twenties, NYC is the only New York that matters.

FTFY


Pretty much this.  Every NYCer/LIer I know who is into hunting or camping or rafting or just fresh air in general has a freaking ramshackle cabin or timeshare condo upstate* and dreams of moving up there, if only there were like, you know, job options and stuff.

*or in the Poconos, whatever
 
2014-05-01 01:33:54 AM  

socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.


Yeah, because when one thinks of Giuliani and Bloomberg, the first thing that comes to mind is liberal. Combined, those two assholes ran that city for almost 20 years, DeBlasio hasn't even been in office a year.
 
2014-05-01 01:37:30 AM  

sendtodave: According to farkers from NYC, NYC is the only New York that matters.


The only people I've ever known to visit the state of New York only went there to go to New York City, whether it was for business, pleasure, or family stuff. Then there's the fact that nearly half the state's population, and the majority of its tax base, exists in NYC, and yeah, it is the only part of that state that matters.
 
2014-05-01 02:03:52 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: MORE than one?! I wish I just needed ONE.

/sigh, so lonely.


Amen, brother..
 
2014-05-01 02:07:24 AM  
I think I remember reading about the 'more than one condom makes you a suspect' thing before, but perhaps not on Fark.  Seems all kinds of screwed up, no pun intended.
 
2014-05-01 02:09:28 AM  

LectertheChef: socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.

Yeah, because when one thinks of Giuliani and Bloomberg, the first thing that comes to mind is liberal. Combined, those two assholes ran that city for almost 20 years, DeBlasio hasn't even been in office a year.


I usually vote democrat, but I sat this last one out because there's something I don't like about DeBlasio.  He's too liberal for me, or rather liberal in the wrong way.  Or maybe it's because I'm a white guy engaged to a black chick and had a bad taste in my mouth about how his family seemed to be his whole damn campaign.  Or maybe because NYC needs a conservative mayor to cancel out the liberal derp that comes out of some the crazier democrats on the council, like that Puerto Rican guy that wanted to ban salt from restaurants.  Or whoever it was that wanted to hide
 cigarettes from view in stores to discourage smoking among minors, as if any gas station attendants or bodega workers know what any brand other than "Marlboro Lights" or "Newports" or whatever brand they smoke themselves even looks like.

The anti-charter school agenda is screwing up his popularity, though--if DeBlasio's proposals ever pass, I expect him to be a one term guy because his challenger will focus on bringing back charter schools and raising the speed limit back to 30 so he'll have both the urban and suburban parts of the city in the bag.  Folks in Staten Island and Queens simply can't accept the notion that doing 50 deserves 6 insurance points.  That's tyranny.  Especially on main roads and outside of school zones.
 
2014-05-01 02:19:11 AM  

socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.


Roight, guv.  Liberals get elected by thumping on Bibles and yelling "Sex is teh evul" and "Mah opponent is SOFT ON CRAHME!"

(DYRTFA?)
 
2014-05-01 02:50:12 AM  

Bloody William: "creates suspicion" is a convenient justification for harassment by the NYPD without a specific reason. Like if a cop wants to give a trans woman a hard time for carrying two condoms.


As with most articulable facts, it should be one item of many adding up to the whole. The totality of circumstances is what justifies any search or seizure.
 
2014-05-01 03:01:13 AM  

Jim_Callahan: ZAZ: Does anybody have an informative article rather than a propaganda piece? What I get from the article seems entirely reasonable: possession of multiple condoms creates suspicion, but is not an offense.

Um... they're treating it as  probable cause, not just suspicion.  "Suspicion" is not police-actionable and can't be used to put someone in custody for 24 hours at a time.


No they are not using it by itself as probable cause, which at the risk of being pedantic is a level of suspicion.
 
2014-05-01 03:05:36 AM  

Silverstaff: ZAZ: Does anybody have an informative article rather than a propaganda piece? What I get from the article seems entirely reasonable: possession of multiple condoms creates suspicion, but is not an offense.

The problem is that under current US case law, "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity is grounds for the police to conduct what is called a "Terry Stop", where they can briefly detain you to determine your identity (and if you have any outstanding warrants) and frisk you to see if you have weapons (and if they can feel the presence of any other contraband on you), all without a warrant.   This is from the Supreme Court precedent Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).  The intent was to let Officers stop somebody and search them for weapons if they had a reason to think they could be dangerous, on the grounds of Officer safety.

The NYPD is downright notorious for their very aggressive use of this tactic, pushing it to it's limits as a method of warrantless searches.  Their tactic is to use some tiny foothold of "reasonable suspicion" to stop & frisk everybody they can, looking for anything illegal.  Their use of it against the poor and minorities (i.e. people who aren't likely to cause a media stink with doing it to them) is well documented.

All they need is something specific (as in not a hunch or vague feeling) they can point to later and say that it was suspicious of criminal activity.

This is about specifically barring them from using the presence of more than one condom as grounds for this process.  So they can't use the fact you have two condoms in your possession as grounds for a warrantless detention and search on suspicion of prostitution.


1. Even if they could not abuse frisking, the terry stop will continue until the reasonable suspicions are explained away.

2. How the fark is the condom going to lead to the terry stop or frisk initially in your scenario? Are you carrying them visibly (not that there should be anything wrong with that)?
 
2014-05-01 03:35:58 AM  

Silverstaff: ZAZ: Does anybody have an informative article rather than a propaganda piece? What I get from the article seems entirely reasonable: possession of multiple condoms creates suspicion, but is not an offense.

The problem is that under current US case law, "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity is grounds for the police to conduct what is called a "Terry Stop", where they can briefly detain you to determine your identity (and if you have any outstanding warrants) and frisk you to see if you have weapons (and if they can feel the presence of any other contraband on you), all without a warrant.   This is from the Supreme Court precedent Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).  The intent was to let Officers stop somebody and search them for weapons if they had a reason to think they could be dangerous, on the grounds of Officer safety.

The NYPD is downright notorious for their very aggressive use of this tactic, pushing it to it's limits as a method of warrantless searches.  Their tactic is to use some tiny foothold of "reasonable suspicion" to stop & frisk everybody they can, looking for anything illegal.  Their use of it against the poor and minorities (i.e. people who aren't likely to cause a media stink with doing it to them) is well documented.

All they need is something specific (as in not a hunch or vague feeling) they can point to later and say that it was suspicious of criminal activity.

This is about specifically barring them from using the presence of more than one condom as grounds for this process.  So they can't use the fact you have two condoms in your possession as grounds for a warrantless detention and search on suspicion of prostitution.


The police always misrepresent Terry v Ohio.  The cops have to have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime AND reasonable suspicion that the person might be carrying a weapon.  They can't make shiat up about either of these two requirements, which is what they do, and NYPD being the world champions at making shiat up for this purpose.  Several of the judges emphasized the need for suspicion of a violent act.  Basically, the court allows it in the RARE instance where the police officer's life could be endangered.
 
2014-05-01 04:09:09 AM  
"How am I supposed to protect myself from HIV and STIs when I am scared to leave my house with condoms in my purse?"

If you always need multiple condoms on you because sex might happen at any time...
 
2014-05-01 04:10:40 AM  

lucksi: "How am I supposed to protect myself from HIV and STIs when I am scared to leave my house with condoms in my purse?"

If you always need multiple condoms on you because sex might happen at any time...


Then you're a lucky person?
 
2014-05-01 04:33:57 AM  
Jokes on them - I am a prostitute, but now that I know about this rule I simply won't bother with condoms, and they'll never suspect a thing!
 
2014-05-01 06:09:53 AM  

a particular individual: fusillade762: What does owning more than one bulletproof vest make you?

If you're Old Dirty Bastard, it makes you a felon:


Technically, it was only illegal for him because he was already a felon.
 
2014-05-01 06:29:01 AM  

IHadMeAVision: LectertheChef: socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.

Yeah, because when one thinks of Giuliani and Bloomberg, the first thing that comes to mind is liberal. Combined, those two assholes ran that city for almost 20 years, DeBlasio hasn't even been in office a year.

I usually vote democrat, but I sat this last one out because there's something I don't like about DeBlasio.  He's too liberal for me, or rather liberal in the wrong way.  Or maybe it's because I'm a white guy engaged to a black chick and had a bad taste in my mouth about how his family seemed to be his whole damn campaign.  Or maybe because NYC needs a conservative mayor to cancel out the liberal derp that comes out of some the crazier democrats on the council, like that Puerto Rican guy that wanted to ban salt from restaurants.  Or whoever it was that wanted to hide
 cigarettes from view in stores to discourage smoking among minors, as if any gas station attendants or bodega workers know what any brand other than "Marlboro Lights" or "Newports" or whatever brand they smoke themselves even looks like.

The anti-charter school agenda is screwing up his popularity, though--if DeBlasio's proposals ever pass, I expect him to be a one term guy because his challenger will focus on bringing back charter schools and raising the speed limit back to 30 so he'll have both the urban and suburban parts of the city in the bag.  Folks in Staten Island and Queens simply can't accept the notion that doing 50 deserves 6 insurance points.  That's tyranny.  Especially on main roads and outside of school zones.


Anti-charter school?  No, he's against allowing for-profit charter schools to operate rent-free in public schools. In other words, leeching off of corporate welfare. You were tricked by the pro-charter school propaganda I guess.  Now I'm against charter schools because they suck money out of public schools and funnel it into private corporation's pockets.  But DeBlasio has made no move to eliminate charter schools.
 
2014-05-01 06:31:22 AM  

socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.


You sound like a failure.
 
2014-05-01 07:23:32 AM  

stewbert: Wooly Bully: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Did anyone read the article? Some NYC cops have been doing f*cked-up sh*t (news flash: cops are often assholes, and not just in NYC), and apparently the city's going to do something about it. That's good.

Yeah, but this particular PD has a national reputation (see recent Twitter fiasco) of being abusive assholes. That's bad.


The sad thing is that the worst behavior for NYPD is Tuesday for cops in Maryland.
 
2014-05-01 08:02:39 AM  

Jormungandr: Jormungandr: ZAZ: Does anybody have an informative article rather than a propaganda piece? What I get from the article seems entirely reasonable: possession of multiple condoms creates suspicion, but is not an offense.

The article doesn't say "creates suspicions" it says "is grounds for arrest"
From the actual text of the bill
New Section 60.47 would be added to the Criminal Procedure Law to prohibit the introduction of possession of a condom or other contraceptive device in NY trial, hearing or proceeding pursuant to Section 60.42 of the criminal procedure law or Section 240.37 of the penal law for the purpose of establishing probable cause for an arrest or proving any person's commission or attempted commission of such offense.

So the bill bans using condoms as probable cause for arrest on sex work related offences. Which if I am not misreading means that a cop currently can haul you in for having multiple condoms, and the prosecutor will gladly use that as evidence that you're a prostitute with no other justification necessary.


FTFM


Here's one from last year, it focuses on New Orleans but mentions New York.
 
2014-05-01 08:06:29 AM  

Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York. Where they're so worried about your health that they try to tell you how much soda you can buy, but if you're carrying more than one condom you're considered a criminal.

So what happens if someone walks down to the corner store and buys a whole box of condoms? Do they call in SWAT?


Baliff! Whack his pee pee
 
2014-05-01 08:49:24 AM  
I got some extra ones to give away. I don't need them, I'm married.
 
2014-05-01 09:33:06 AM  

47 is the new 42: Wooly Bully: sendtodave: Pokey.Clyde: Ah, New York.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nanny state.

Did anyone read the article? Some NYC cops have been doing f*cked-up sh*t (news flash: cops are often assholes, and not just in NYC), and apparently the city's going to do something about it. That's good.

Actually the state is trying to do something about it.


That's true. I should have said "state" instead of "city", although it's irrelevant. Apparently you're one of the people who actually did read the article. The knee-jerk "haha New York sucks and liberals suck" posts were what I was responding to.
 
2014-05-01 10:02:00 AM  
Well at least it's nice to know that my fellow liberals are often as full of shiat as those on the right.

 So I can pay somebody to take a fetus out of a woman, but I can't pay a woman to let me pretend to put one inside her. My body my choice right?

 

socodog: NYC.  LIberal paradise.


You be trolling but this same shiat happens (or worse) in Conservative paradise. (TX)
 
2014-05-01 10:05:02 AM  

gameshowhost: "Oftentimes a responsible sexual encounter will require more than one condom," he said.

Here, here!


Seriously if you have to use condoms and you only need one your sex is boring.
 
2014-05-01 10:19:22 AM  

lucksi: "How am I supposed to protect myself from HIV and STIs when I am scared to leave my house with condoms in my purse?"

If you always need multiple condoms on you because sex might happen at any time...


He's a transformer, one for him and one for the other guy.  I see no issue here.  When you were single did you have a condom in your wallet?
 
2014-05-01 10:26:01 AM  

TNel: gameshowhost: "Oftentimes a responsible sexual encounter will require more than one condom," he said.

Here, here!

Seriously if you have to use condoms and you only need one your sex is boring.


They are like shirts. You can get another use by going inside-out.
 
2014-05-01 10:30:17 AM  

Smackledorfer: They are like shirts. You can get another use by going inside-out.


I was going to recommend just washing it in the sink and then using a rubberband/cockring to keep it on.
 
2014-05-01 10:54:49 AM  
I know my girlfriend in high school liked sex, but we were exclusive. She bought the 24 pack or whatever it was of condoms. Good thing we didn't live in New York, I guess. That would have been an awkward call.
 
2014-05-01 12:46:26 PM  

No Such Agency: a particular individual: fusillade762: What does owning more than one bulletproof vest make you?

If you're Old Dirty Bastard, it makes you a felon:

Technically, it was only illegal for him because he was already a felon.


18 US Code 931 "Prohibition on purchase, ownership, or possession of body armor by violent felons".

ODB might actually have a case for unconstitutionality on the law, given that he's been shot at a number of times even though he wasn't otherwise committing a crime at the time*.  Right to life and such.  Body armor isn't a offensive weapon.

*IE the armor was the only violation.  Yes, he was shot at by the cops one of the times, but they never found the gun he supposedly shot at them with, and you KNOW they'd go through everything with a fine tooth comb to find it.
 
2014-05-01 01:10:36 PM  

Firethorn: No Such Agency: a particular individual: fusillade762: What does owning more than one bulletproof vest make you?

If you're Old Dirty Bastard, it makes you a felon:

Technically, it was only illegal for him because he was already a felon.

18 US Code 931 "Prohibition on purchase, ownership, or possession of body armor by violent felons".

ODB might actually have a case for unconstitutionality on the law, given that he's been shot at a number of times even though he wasn't otherwise committing a crime at the time*.  Right to life and such.  Body armor isn't a offensive weapon.

*IE the armor was the only violation.  Yes, he was shot at by the cops one of the times, but they never found the gun he supposedly shot at them with, and you KNOW they'd go through everything with a fine tooth comb to find it.


If they were that dirty, why no drop gun?
 
2014-05-01 01:35:33 PM  

mjjt: Sometimes you need a lot more

Huh image is too big?

ok see it here  http://www.talkingeasy.com/meaning/condoms.html


Hah! Those pics were great-- most I hadn't seen before.

Thanks for the laugh.
 
Displayed 50 of 102 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report