YT2095 Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 I came across this:http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cavendishcaninecamp.com/images/kitty_litter_cake.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cavendishcaninecamp.com/humor3.htm&h=246&w=330&sz=20&tbnid=-l7O44f4KzSbcM:&tbnh=89&tbnw=119&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkitty%2Blitter%2Bcake&start=1&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=1 this morning. it got me wondering that IF you were to walk about in the streets say in town and sit on a public bench eating this, say at Noon Lunch hour. obviously there would be several complaints, some may even react by Loosing their lunch. Are you breaking any Laws? this is a perfectly legit and edible cake, what grounds could/would you be arrested on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcol Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 What a hoot! laughing while being sick is seriously uncomfortable, and not to be recommended for someone with a weak heart. Could the consumer be prosecuted? Dont know, but in the dying days of Blairism, he might consider a new law against it as a final fling to create a legacy. Just imagine, going down in history as the anti-pooper scooper cake crusader. Better than Bush's poodle, perhaps. (Oh, wait, there is a connection there somewhere) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 8, 2006 Author Share Posted September 8, 2006 well there are indecent oxposure laws (even though nudity never hurt anyone). we KNOW there would be complaints about this also. so there`s infringement on civil liberties at stake here, for Both sides, or Is there? that`s the Debate should you be allowed to do this? how are you harming anyone? Should the public have the right to stop you? and based upon what exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 well there are indecent oxposure laws (even though nudity never hurt anyone). I can imagine sunburn on places normally covered could hurt... "Oxposure" — is that being too revealing with your beast of burden? As far as the original question, what are the criteria for causing a breach of the peace? I think it's not something you should be convicted for, but being arrested is a different matter. In the US it would probably ultimately be considered protected speech/expression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 8, 2006 Author Share Posted September 8, 2006 so if you sit in the middle of a busy town/city during lunch hour, eating a tray of kitty litter, passers by are being Sick and or throwing their own food away, kids are seeing this, soccer moms are protesting etc... there`s no Harm done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 so if you sit in the middle of a busy town/city during lunch hour' date=' eating a tray of kitty litter, passers by are being Sick and or throwing their own food away, kids are seeing this, soccer moms are protesting etc... there`s no Harm done?[/quote']I wouldn't say no harm done, but I would say nothing that deserves prosecution. It's gross and possibly in bad taste but where do you draw the line? Outlaw kitty litter cake and pretty soon no more gummy worms or fake barf novelties and then where would we be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 8, 2006 Author Share Posted September 8, 2006 and what if one (or several) of these kids went home, and started tucking into Tiddles` little toilet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcol Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 . Written in jest, hopefully: ...Or drank the household bleach, drain cleaner, metal polish, oven cleaner. What about all those chemicals and electrical toys you play with at home. Are all these things non-lethal compared to kitty litter? I presumed this was one of your joke threads. If not, and kitty litter cake causes you serious concern so that you think someone ought to ban it, You ought to keep a sense of proportion, or perhaps others might start to agitate against the storage and use of dangerous chemicals at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 I can't believe anyone would seriously suggest this infringes on the rights of anyone. I don't care if you're literally eating a litterbox full of kitty crap. It's none of your business. Of course they shouldn't be arrested, prosecuted - absolutely nothing. You should be able to eat this on national TV during prime time while sitting at the table with the president. That's called freedom... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 so if you sit in the middle of a busy town/city during lunch hour' date=' eating a tray of kitty litter, passers by are being Sick and or throwing their own food away, kids are seeing this, soccer moms are protesting etc... there`s no Harm done?[/quote'] That's your problem if it makes you sick. It's your problem if you look while I'm eating it. It makes me sick to see people chewing their food without their mouth fully closed. I've thrown my food away before because someone disgusted me with their lack of manners while eating. However, that's my problem, not theirs. I wouldn't suggest arresting someone because they have bad manners. I would suggest letting them know they are nasty and have gained recognition as a disgusting pig - also free to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 8, 2006 Author Share Posted September 8, 2006 . I presumed this was one of your joke threads. If not' date=' and kitty litter cake causes you serious concern so that you think someone ought to ban it, You ought to keep a sense of proportion, or perhaps others might start to agitate against the storage and use of dangerous chemicals at home.[/quote'] it certainly is Not a joke thread, and by "ONE OF THEM" what do you mean:confused: actualy it doesn`t cause me a jot of concern, I have plans for making one myself for Hallow`en. I`m just interested in both side of this arg, and will (given the opportunity) ask questions from both sides also as this progresses. how does this extend to Video censorship for example? or computer games? hopefully that`s cleared matters up for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcol Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 it certainly is Not a joke thread' date=' and by "ONE OF THEM" what do you mean:confused: [/quote'] Not a joke? What a shame, it would have been a good'un. Strange how often I laugh like a drain at someone's joke and they glare at me furiously and shout "That was not meant to be funny!" Perhaps I am empathically challenged. The "ONE OF THEM" left me uncomprehending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 8, 2006 Author Share Posted September 8, 2006 One of my joke threads, I`ve only EVER made one jokes thread, and it`s still active, you imply More than this, how Odd? Do try to keep up will you, there`s a good chap now, Back to Topic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 Is the question whether this actually violates any British law? If so, I have no idea. However, if the question is whether there ought to be a law, then I wholeheartedly say no. That would be a very silly reason to so blatantly attack civil liberty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 I agree. I don't think there's anything justifiably wrong with something just because it grosses people out. There's nothing blatantly and definably wrong beyond that it mimics something "gross" and some people just aren't suited to handling grossness with any self-control or dignity. I mean, I wouldn't go out of my way to accuse an especially ugly person of doing anything wrong just for showing their face in public Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
padren Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 Someone sitting in a park playground when kids are out and downing a bottle of bleach could easily cause kids to try the stuff under their sinks...there is a fine line between verbal encouragement (telling kids they should try to drink bleach) and non-verbal encourangement that gets a bit gray. I think most people would consider the guy in the wrong for non-verbally encouraging kids to drink bleach. I consider the kitty litter gag (NPI) harmless and in good humor...unless it was done in a manner than involved some neglegence that fairly directly encouraged children or the mentally handicapped to do the same with real litter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted September 8, 2006 Share Posted September 8, 2006 Is the question whether this actually violates any British law? If so, I have no idea. However, if the question is whether there ought[/i'] to be a law, then I wholeheartedly say no. That would be a very silly reason to so blatantly attack civil liberty. I think that were you to try and make behavior like this illegal, you'd end up banning a whole lot of (more) legitimate freedom expression. The social price you pay for having such a freedom is that some of it is going to be silly, and some of it is going to offend a fraction of the population. If kids see it, tell them it's not really kitty litter, and that the person is being silly. Like candy bugs, gummi worms etc. that Phi mentioned. Are people so far removed from real dangers that we have to manufacture this stuff? The example of drinking from a bottle labeled "bleach" would be stupid, but not so irresponsible as leaving that stuff where your kids could get at it. It is somewhat reminiscent of the recent story to cut some scenes from Tom & Jerry cartoons because Tom is smoking, and people are worried that it will encourage that type of behavior. Aren't they worried about encouraging hitting people with frying pans, to see faces take that shape? It's a cartoon cat, for crying out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 Someone sitting in a park playground when kids are out and downing a bottle of bleach could easily cause kids to try the stuff under their sinks...there is a fine line between verbal encouragement (telling kids they should try to drink bleach) and non-verbal encourangement that gets a bit gray. I think most people would consider the guy in the wrong for non-verbally encouraging kids to drink bleach. I consider the kitty litter gag (NPI) harmless and in good humor...unless it was done in a manner than involved some neglegence that fairly directly encouraged children or the mentally handicapped to do the same with real litter. Why should I have any responsibility to your children? Since when is it my problem that handicapped people might look at me do stuff? What constitutes a "child"? Are there varying degrees of wrongdoing based on the age of said child? Where exactly is the line in what is considered wrongfully non-verbally encouraging kids or the handicapped to do stupid things? There's murder and mayhem all over TV, where millions of children all over the globe are being non-verbally encouraged to do all kinds of horrible sh!t. All of your favorite directors would be serving life sentences. I think your treading on a nasty, insanely subjective can of worms with that mentallity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 and what if one (or several) of these kids went home, and started tucking into Tiddles` little toilet?Yes, that might be a bit of an issue... however I can't see any sensible legal reason why you should not be able to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 9, 2006 Author Share Posted September 9, 2006 but if the complaints come in thick and fast from Joe-Public, and most will be to law enforcement, what do they do? do they ask you to "Move along" and on what basis can they do this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 I 'spose they could fall back on the good ol' "public disturbance of the peace" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 but if the complaints come in thick and fast from Joe-Public' date=' and most will be to law enforcement, what do they do? do they ask you to "Move along" and on what basis can they do this?[/quote']I don't know. But going back to the route of the problem, you are saying that some kids might copy what it looks like you're doing. If a child recognises what the man seems to be doing then he will think it is disgusting and would not copy it. I could also try and argue that if a child saw someone jump off a cliff to their death the child would not copy and apply the same logic to this situation... however then you would argue that children are impressionable and might... then I would argue that a child would not be so stupid... you would say a young one might... and at the end of the day it comes down to the individual anyway! I can't imagine a vast number of complaints coming in, if any. ... And I don't think the person who made the recipe intended it to be talked about like this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now