It's legal to be topless (and armed)

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Indy317

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 27, 2008
    2,495
    38
    B-Cup is small for some folks I've seen with man-boobs.






    Well RNM, since you asked for it:

    borat2.jpg
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    48,273
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    I wonder how legal something like this would be in Indiana. Guess we'll never know.

    Yes, we know. We have a different definition of nudity than the Wookie Suiters were citing:


    IC 35-45-4-1
    Public indecency
    Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally, in a public place:
    (1) engages in sexual intercourse;
    (2) engages in deviate sexual conduct;
    (3) appears in a state of nudity with the intent to arouse the sexual desires of the person or another person; or
    (4) fondles the person's genitals or the genitals of another person;
    commits public indecency, a Class A misdemeanor.
    (b) A person at least eighteen (18) years of age who knowingly or intentionally, in a public place, appears in a state of nudity with the intent to be seen by a child less than sixteen (16) years of age commits public indecency, a Class A misdemeanor.
    (c) However, the offense under subsection (a) or subsection (b) is a Class D felony if the person who commits the offense has a prior unrelated conviction:
    (1) under subsection (a) or (b); or
    (2) in another jurisdiction, including a military court, that is substantially equivalent to an offense described in subsection (a) or (b).
    (d) As used in this section, "nudity" means the showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area, or buttocks with less than a fully opaque covering, the showing of the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple, or the showing of covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state.
    (e) A person who, in a place other than a public place, with the intent to be seen by persons other than invitees and occupants of that place:
    (1) engages in sexual intercourse;
    (2) engages in deviate sexual conduct;
    (3) fondles the person's genitals or the genitals of another person; or
    (4) appears in a state of nudity;
    where the person can be seen by persons other than invitees and occupants of that place commits indecent exposure, a Class C misdemeanor.

    IC 35-45-4-1.5
    Public nudity
    Sec. 1.5. (a) As used in this section, "nudity" has the meaning set forth in section 1(d) of this chapter.
    (b) A person who knowingly or intentionally appears in a public
    place in a state of nudity commits public nudity, a Class C misdemeanor.
    (c) A person who knowingly or intentionally appears in a public place in a state of nudity with the intent to be seen by another person commits a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior unrelated conviction under this subsection or under subsection (d).
    (d) A person who knowingly or intentionally appears in a state of nudity:
    (1) in or on school grounds;
    (2) in a public park; or
    (3) with the intent to arouse the sexual desires of the person or another person, in a department of natural resources owned or managed property;
    commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior unrelated conviction under this subsection or under subsection (c).
     

    DWFan

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 26, 2008
    76
    6
    Both being topless and open carry have been legal in that state for quite some time. While the person making the complaint, if there actually was one, might not have known that, the officers certainly should have. I believe the same is true in neighboring Vermont.
     

    dburkhead

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    3,930
    36
    Yes, we know. We have a different definition of nudity than the Wookie Suiters were citing:


    IC 35-45-4-1
    Public indecency
    ...(d) As used in this section, "nudity" means the showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area, or buttocks with less than a fully opaque covering, the showing of the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any part of the nipple, or the showing of covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state.

    ....

    IC 35-45-4-1.5
    Public nudity
    Sec. 1.5. (a) As used in this section, "nudity" has the meaning set forth in section 1(d) of this chapter.
    (b) A person who knowingly or intentionally appears in a public
    place in a state of nudity commits public nudity, a Class C misdemeanor.
    (c) A person who knowingly or intentionally appears in a public place in a state of nudity with the intent to be seen by another person commits a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior unrelated conviction under this subsection or under subsection (d).
    (d) A person who knowingly or intentionally appears in a state of nudity:
    (1) in or on school grounds;
    (2) in a public park; or
    (3) with the intent to arouse the sexual desires of the person or another person, in a department of natural resources owned or managed property;
    commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior unrelated conviction under this subsection or under subsection (c).

    It would seem to me that this should fail the equal protection of the law provision of the Indiana State Constitution. You've got two groups of people (males and females) being treated differently under the law.

    That seems obvious enough that I suspect that it has been argued and the courts have decided differently. If so, then, well, so much the worse for the courts in the same vein as "if the law supposes that then...."
     

    Site Supporter

    INGO Supporter

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    530,636
    Messages
    9,955,710
    Members
    54,897
    Latest member
    jojo99
    Top Bottom