AllDeaf.com
Our Sponsors

Go Back   AllDeaf.com > Deaf Community > Current Events
  
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-26-2004, 04:04 PM   #1 (permalink)
Just me
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wherever i want to be LOL
Posts: 9,101
Send a message via AIM to Fly Free Send a message via Yahoo to Fly Free
conviction for a nipple piercing case

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/sto...08.htm&sc=1120

Court Affirms Nipple Piercing Conviction
By BARRY MASSEY

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) - The state Court of Appeals has affirmed the conviction of an Albuquerque shop owner who offered free nipple piercing if customers underwent the procedure in the store's window.

In 2002, Renee Sachs was convicted of violating Albuquerque's ordinance banning nudity in a public place. She received a 90-day deferred sentence.

In a 3-0 ruling Tuesday, the Appeals Court also upheld the constitutionality of the city's public nudity ban.

Sachs' attorney, Jeffrey Dempsey of Albuquerque, said his client would continue with her legal challenge by asking the court to rehear the case or petition the state Supreme Court to review the ruling.

Sachs ran an advertisement two years ago promoting the free nipple piercing. The first customer to undergo the procedure in the shop's window was a man and the second was a woman.

When police arrived at the tattoo and body piercing shop, a woman was sitting in the window exposing her breasts as she had her nipples pierced. Several people on the sidewalk were watching.

Sachs was convicted of violating the city's ordinance that bans nudity in public and prohibits store owners from allowing people to be nude in a public place of business.

The Appeals Court ruled that the ordinance did not violate the Equal Rights Amendment of the New Mexico Constitution or the state's Human Rights Act, which prohibits gender-based discrimination.

In her appeal, Sachs contended that the ordinance was unconstitutional because it discriminated against women by prohibiting the public exposure of a female breast but not a male breast. She also argued that the ordinance forced her to offer body piercing services in a way that discriminated on the basis of sex.

The court disagreed.

``The city ordinance does not prohibit public nudity of women while allowing public nudity by men,'' the court said in an opinion written by Judge Michael Vigil. ``It recognizes that females and males have different anatomies, so the objective is accomplished in a nondiscriminatory manner.''

The court also concluded that nipple piercing is not a form of expression protected by the First Amendment.

``The Court of Appeals found that the city nudity ordinance did not operate to the disadvantage of women. We disagree with that,'' said Dempsey. ``For example, if it had said that Caucasian people can take their shirts off and all others cannot, it seems hard for me to see how that would not operate to the disadvantage of people of color. We think this is the same thing.''

03/25/04 21:50

© Copyright The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

---------
i think its ridiculous for the court to say its wrong -- if shes a willing customer to have her nipples pierced and be it visable to all at the window in front of the store then i dont see anything wrong with it at the court
Fly Free is offline   Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Deafness

Beitrag Sponsored Links

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com
   
Old 03-26-2004, 04:22 PM   #2 (permalink)
Keepin' it real...
 
Malfoyish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 2,656
First amendment - free speech. She wasn't out in the open...she was in a store window...it would be something else if she were sitting out in the middle of the street on a stool with her shirt open...LOL. But ahh, she was inside of a store, whether she was in the window or not...and she only responded to an advertisement.

If she sees nothing wrong with showing people how nipple piercings (OMG, OUCH) are done, then the cops and courts surely shouldn't. It's her body, and she's comfortable going partially nude for the sake of experiment and free piercing, then she should be allowed. If people don't want to see it, they don't have to stand in the window and watch...LOL.

Malfoyish
Malfoyish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2004, 04:31 PM   #3 (permalink)
Just me
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wherever i want to be LOL
Posts: 9,101
Send a message via AIM to Fly Free Send a message via Yahoo to Fly Free
yea exactly my thoughts Malfoyish!!! at the court *smh*
Fly Free is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2004, 08:30 PM   #4 (permalink)
Am attached and in LOVE!
 
CatoCooper13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sonoma County, California
Posts: 6,418
Send a message via AIM to CatoCooper13 Send a message via MSN to CatoCooper13 Send a message via Yahoo to CatoCooper13
It's pathetic how the government has been trying to suppress our freedom. We ALL were born in our birthday suits...NAKED. So, therefore -- it shouldn't be discriminated against at all.
__________________




Til I hold my bub in my arms.
CatoCooper13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:50 AM.


Join AllDeaf on Facebook!

All text, images, and other content are Copyright © 2002-2008 by AllDeaf.com. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.