Representative Bruce Borders (R-Jasonville) and Representative Sandy Blanton (D-Orleans) plan on making it a crime for adult male tanning salon employees to spray tan nude minor females.
A state lawmaker says he plans to sponsor a bill next session that would bar adult males from applying spray-on tans to female juveniles at tanning salons.
State Rep. Bruce Borders, R-Jasonville, said he was shocked by a recent case where an adult man who works at a tanning salon applied a spray-on tan on a nude 15-year-old girl.
All too often, it seems to me, legislators introduce general legislation based on particular cases. Is this really a common problem? More to the point, is this really *criminal* activity? Because why? Because a man saw a young female’s body? There is no evidence of lascivious intent or any harm to anyone.
As a business owner, I wouldn’t allow my male employees to be alone with or involved with underage females. As an insurer, I wouldn’t insure a business that operated in such a fashion. As a parent, I don’t want my kids naked in front of adults except for the occasional doctor. But is this or should it be criminal behavior? Should we lock people up for this? I don’t think so.
I love the title of this post. I was expecting you to mention the group “W” bench. “What were you arrested for, Kid?”…and I said “Littering”…
Would the legislation also criminally penalize adult females from spraying juvenile males?
And then there’s the pesky problem of a closeted adult lesbian spraying some juvenile of her own gender.
And then there’s the pre-operative transgender adult…..oh forget it. Just outlaw tanning booths.
I’m sure there will be time in the special session.
Damn! I should’ve gone with “What were you arrested for, kid?” Actually, the alternate title I was thinking of was “there oughtta be a law.” But I went ahead and just made that a category because it’s a recurring theme with the General Assembly.
And Don, your point about “what about an adult lesbian” really highlights the point that it’s tough to figure out just what we’re afraid of here.
We should probably be more afraid of “spray on tans” than the fact that the girl’s private parts were visible to someone who – arguably – didn’t give a rat’s ass about seeing them.
And we were convinced we got better laws when there was bi-partisan cooperation. Alas.
Who’s this “we”, Mike? I’m barely convinced we actually have two parties in Indiana. And at that I suspect it’s because it’s easier to keep track of venality when there are two columns.
I know everything’s golden in retrospect, but we did get better laws back when the World’s Third-Worst State Legislatureâ„¢ met biennially. But only in the off years.
“And Don, your point about “what about an adult lesbian†really highlights the point that it’s tough to figure out just what we’re afraid of here.”
It seems as if what “we” are really afraid of is some notion that because somebody might be thinking unacceptable thoughts in a situation where that might not be transparent to a potential victim of some often vague something we need to resort to the criminal justice system to resolve it.
There’s a tie-in with the whole discussion on “hate crimes” legislation really punishing thought, but it’s too early in the morning to try and sort that one out.
Don’s point reminds me of something that has always irritated me about the homosexual-military debate.
Seems to me, the issue boils down to 4 barracks or 1. Either soldiers can’t be trusted sharing sleeping and bathroom space with those they could potentially be sexually attracted to, or they can.
But the more I think of it, even 4 barracks wouldn’t be enough (being silly for a moment). After all, you couldn’t put all of the gay men in the same barracks, right? So, you’d have to have a limit of one gay man per straight women barracks, and one lesbian women per straight men barracks.
Sounds like we need to accept that adults are capable of being professional, regardless if they are soldiers, physicians, or spray-tan appliers. Yes, there are some that will break the law, but we already have laws against that type of wrong activity.
Well said, Jason.
The gays in the military debate usually revolves around morale, and the expectation that the straight soldier just couldn’t possibly continue to do his job as well if there were a gay person nearby. I would propose that a soldier is supposed to maintain his/her military bearing regardless of circumstances. Some soldiers can’t do that (see occasional instances of rape/murder by soldiers in Iraq). But that doesn’t mean we should allow the expectation that none would, and use that as an excuse to discriminate (and keep otherwise capable, professional individuals out of the military).
“But the more I think of it, even 4 barracks wouldn’t be enough (being silly for a moment).”
Just think of how high the military housing piece of the defense budget would become if separate accomodations were necessary for each subset of potential sexual fantasy. And that’s BEFORE the PX starts selling spray tanning lotion.
If you finish a spray tan with two coats of a quality marine varnish, it really lasts!
Plus, you get real shiny!
And, you stay barnacle free. Really, there’s just no down side.
[Okay, I think that’s sillier than the proposed legislation – but remember that the bar was set high…]
Doghouse, I’d be happy if the legislature met once a decade. Less is more, to be sure. This is just another one of those things we laugh at, but it points to too great a willingness to micromanage so many aspects of every day life.