View Full Version : 34 of the nicest men in the metro area, NOT...



Pages : [1] 2

SoonerQueen
07-03-2013, 09:18 PM
34 men arrested for sexual acts at Lake Hefner park (http://www.okcfox.com/story/22754172/34-men-arrested-for-sexual-acts-at-lake-hefner-park#at_pco=cfd-1.0)

Dustin
07-03-2013, 09:21 PM
34 men arrested for sexual acts at Lake Hefner park (http://www.okcfox.com/story/22754172/34-men-arrested-for-sexual-acts-at-lake-hefner-park#at_pco=cfd-1.0)

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6b5jzqWvw1qa5uid.gif

CuatrodeMayo
07-03-2013, 09:28 PM
So a 4 day sting netted men only?

krisb
07-03-2013, 09:38 PM
There must be a lot of sexual repression among gay men in this city. I have heard that lewd acts in public are a way for gays to validate their sexual desires. If our culture weren't so homophobic I doubt we would have these excessive displays.

PennyQuilts
07-03-2013, 09:43 PM
There must be a lot of sexual repression among gay men in this city. I have heard that lewd acts in public are a way for gays to validate their sexual desires. If our culture weren't so homophobic I doubt we would have these excessive displays.

I used to think that but have about decided that some people just like anonymous, casual sex. If that weren't so, you wouldn't have so many prostitutes in business.

PennyQuilts
07-03-2013, 09:46 PM
34 men arrested for sexual acts at Lake Hefner park (http://www.okcfox.com/story/22754172/34-men-arrested-for-sexual-acts-at-lake-hefner-park#at_pco=cfd-1.0)

Don't know any of them.

SoonerQueen
07-03-2013, 09:51 PM
Don't know any of them.

I didn't know any of them either.

Celebrator
07-03-2013, 11:30 PM
There must be a lot of sexual repression among gay men in this city. I have heard that lewd acts in public are a way for gays to validate their sexual desires. If our culture weren't so homophobic I doubt we would have these excessive displays.

Oh c'mon....

Gene
07-04-2013, 12:33 AM
There must be a lot of sexual repression among gay men in this city. I have heard that lewd acts in public are a way for gays to validate their sexual desires. If our culture weren't so homophobic I doubt we would have these excessive displays.


I used to think that but have about decided that some people just like anonymous, casual sex. If that weren't so, you wouldn't have so many prostitutes in business.

It's a bit of both. Gay men who seek out prostitutes are no different from straight men who do it. They both do so because they believe it will be easy, exciting, and without consequence to career and family.

Personally, I don't judge people who get entangled in these situations. While I know I'd never do it, some people see themselves as trapped and feel they can't be honest about it (I've never been in such a sorry state). Whether they are gay or straight, doesn't make any difference.

Oh, one last thing... this applies to women also, but infinitesimally by comparison.

Bunty
07-04-2013, 01:03 AM
There must be a lot of sexual repression among gay men in this city. I have heard that lewd acts in public are a way for gays to validate their sexual desires. If our culture weren't so homophobic I doubt we would have these excessive displays.

It has to do with lack of sex appeal. Those miserable guys looked like women wouldn't want to touch them with a 10 ft. pole, let alone a lot of gay guys. So misery tried to love company out at Hefner Park.

Bunty
07-04-2013, 01:11 AM
So a 4 day sting netted men only?

My guess is cops never arrest straight couples getting it on, other than maybe telling them they better quit and go get a room. Maybe people don't even complain about them.

kevinpate
07-04-2013, 04:11 AM
So a 4 day sting netted men only?

No real surprise since it was Hobie Point. Ditto if the policia conduct a sting at DropTrou, er, Trosper Park on the south side. A sting on S. Robinson or one of the larger truck stops, and a few other places, will net mostly male/female combinations. I don't recall reading or seeing stories about female/female hotspots. Though it would not surprise me if there were one or more areas in the metro for such connections, It would surprise me if it was very common. By and large, women are more selective and tend to exercise more discretion.

WilliamTell
07-04-2013, 04:56 AM
I got a joke for you - So 27 white guys, 4 blacks, and 3 mexicans walk into a bathroom and....



On a more serious note, ladies be suspicious if your husband has plans to go by mcd's on my way to the goodwill, to drop off some clothes he got from windors clothing, get his hair cut at ally cat salon, go to express personel to look for a job, then stop by castels jewelry to get you a gift, and then out to dinner with his friends at Mahogany Steak House.

ThomPaine
07-04-2013, 06:11 AM
I got a joke for you - So 27 white guys, 4 blacks, and 3 mexicans walk into a bathroom and....



On a more serious note, ladies be suspicious if your husband has plans to go by mcd's on my way to the goodwill, to drop off some clothes he got from windors clothing, get his hair cut at ally cat salon, go to express personel to look for a job, then stop by castels jewelry to get you a gift, and then out to dinner with his friends at Mahogany Steak House.

Especially if their husband works for Jimmy's Egg...

BBatesokc
07-04-2013, 06:32 AM
I did an brief interview with KFOR regarding the sting. 34 men busted for sex acts at OKC?s Hobie Point park | KFOR.com (http://kfor.com/2013/07/03/34-men-busted-for-sex-acts-at-okc-park/)

A large number of these men are married. They also come from all walks of life - some were basically transient while a couple lived in $500,000+ homes.

Personally, I completely separate this sort of activity from someone simply 'being gay.' This is out-of-control deviant behavior that is very similar to the 'straight' men who go trolling around S. Robinson and/or homeless shelters looking for individuals to pay to have sex with.

Sexual urges are completely normal - its how we react to them that brings the truly deviant to light. When an individual is willing to risk (or doesn't take into consideration) their job, their marriage, their health, their reputation, etc. and instead puts that all in jeopardy for anonymous public sex with multiple strangers, then you have an individual (male, female, straight, gay) with issues that need to be addressed.

betts
07-04-2013, 06:48 AM
It has to do with lack of sex appeal. Those miserable guys looked like women wouldn't want to touch them with a 10 ft. pole, let alone a lot of gay guys. So misery tried to love company out at Hefner Park.

I suspect this is closest to the truth. And, aside from the fact that a few people sailing by saw this, which I agree isn't cool, who was harmed by this behavior? Maybe the men who were arrested who were married grew up when and where there was heavy stigma to being gay. Maybe they married to look "normal" and this is how they cope as (usually) anonymously as possible. I'm more worried about prostitutes being exploited by a pimp than their customers. The definite victims of this "crime" were the kids who inadvertently saw what was going on. Men who expect a girl (or guy) to have sex with them because they took them out and bought them a nice meal are no different. People who marry for money are no different. It is the location rather than the act that's truly a problem for society.

BBatesokc
07-04-2013, 10:28 AM
I suspect this is closest to the truth. And, aside from the fact that a few people sailing by saw this, which I agree isn't cool, who was harmed by this behavior? Maybe the men who were arrested who were married grew up when and where there was heavy stigma to being gay. Maybe they married to look "normal" and this is how they cope as (usually) anonymously as possible. I'm more worried about prostitutes being exploited by a pimp than their customers. The definite victims of this "crime" were the kids who inadvertently saw what was going on. Men who expect a girl (or guy) to have sex with them because they took them out and bought them a nice meal are no different. People who marry for money are no different. It is the location rather than the act that's truly a problem for society.

I actually couldn't disagree more. Comparing taking a girl out to dinner with the hopes it will lure her into the sheets is a far cry from making the conscious decision to approach strangers in public spaces and then without even so much as an exchange of names, engaging in lewd acts with them in public. Its not even the same thing as horny 20-somethings picking each other up in some random Bricktown bar for a one-night stand. I'm sure a psychologist could more eloquently put it into perspective, but this is so far outside of social norms that to try and normalize or minimize it is simply enabling it.

WilliamTell
07-04-2013, 10:37 AM
I actually couldn't disagree more.
Its not even the same thing as horny 20-somethings picking each other up in some random Bricktown bar for a one-night stand. I'm sure a psychologist could more eloquently put it into perspective, but this is so far outside of social norms that to try and normalize or minimize it is simply enabling it.

Is it really?

I know i dont pay my bills by taking pictures of johns and this cuts into your revenue stream, but...

If two grown people want to have sex, and are both very willing participants why does it matter if they know each others name or not?


(Im not touching on prostitution, because i know the whole human trafficking side of it and all the drugs, etc)

JayhawkTransplant
07-04-2013, 11:07 AM
Why was their place if employment listed in the story? That seems bizarre to me.

venture
07-04-2013, 11:12 AM
Why was their place if employment listed in the story? That seems bizarre to me.

That does seem a bit odd. Does every criminal, especially those like johns and such, have that disclosed publicly?

pw405
07-04-2013, 11:50 AM
That does seem a bit odd. Does every criminal, especially those like johns and such, have that disclosed publicly?

I've never seen it, and I think that is really ****ty, sort of seems like an extra punishment to hopefully have these people's livelihoods, health insurance, careers upended... Why try and get somebody fired?

pw405
07-04-2013, 11:52 AM
Like others have said, this is a mental health problem, in my opinion. I don't get why our society wants to publicly ruin these guys. How embarrassing.

kevinpate
07-04-2013, 11:56 AM
Why was their place if employment listed in the story? That seems bizarre to me.

Not so uncommon to my recall. But I did note when looking up a similar sting from a few years ago they did not list everyone, let alone everyone's occupation.
Compare the recent article to this one from 2009
Oklahoma City park sex stings raise many questions | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-park-sex-stings-raise-many-questions/article/3368231)

or this S Okc prostitution sting article from April of this year:
10 arrested in Oklahoma City prostitution sting | News OK (http://newsok.com/10-arrested-in-oklahoma-city-prostitution-sting/article/3801306)

betts
07-04-2013, 01:19 PM
I actually couldn't disagree more. Comparing taking a girl out to dinner with the hopes it will lure her into the sheets is a far cry from making the conscious decision to approach strangers in public spaces and then without even so much as an exchange of names, engaging in lewd acts with them in public. Its not even the same thing as horny 20-somethings picking each other up in some random Bricktown bar for a one-night stand. I'm sure a psychologist could more eloquently put it into perspective, but this is so far outside of social norms that to try and normalize or minimize it is simply enabling it.

It's fine to shoot a stranger, but not to have sex with them? I realize these are apples and oranges, but lets put this "crime" into perspective. I think I could sleep better after having had sex with a stranger than had I shot them, regardless of the circumstances.

PennyQuilts
07-04-2013, 04:37 PM
Like others have said, this is a mental health problem, in my opinion. I don't get why our society wants to publicly ruin these guys. How embarrassing.
I don't see this as necessarily indicative of a mental health problem, whatsoever. This is common behavior all over the country and has been going on forever. Homosexuality is not a mental illness. Anonymous sex, by itself, doesn't mean you are mentally ill. Going to a public park when it is so common wouldn't rise to a mental illness, either, seems to me. This is anti social behavior flaunting the rules of standard civility. These aren't teenagers groping in the backseat of a car and it is very common for these types to be grown men who are able to afford to get a nice, private room if that is what they wanted. Meeting someone at the park, no names, no entanglements and no money is just a way of behavior outside mainstream but that doesn't mean it isn't widespread and commonplace. I think it probably is difficult for most of us to get into the head of people who would behave that way but to call it mental illness strikes me as a stretch. Personally, I think it is deviant and antisocial, particularly if it takes place in an area where people might happen upon them. That is not an accident. Lovers of any orientation meeting in the dark of the night are one thing. Strangers picking up people in public and engaging in anonymous sex near people who didn't sign on to see that sort of activity is completely different.

PennyQuilts
07-04-2013, 04:38 PM
It's fine to shoot a stranger, but not to have sex with them? I realize these are apples and oranges, but lets put this "crime" into perspective. I think I could sleep better after having had sex with a stranger than had I shot them, regardless of the circumstances.

Huh?

BBatesokc
07-04-2013, 05:36 PM
Is it really?

I know i dont pay my bills by taking pictures of johns and this cuts into your revenue stream, but...

If two grown people want to have sex, and are both very willing participants why does it matter if they know each others name or not?


(Im not touching on prostitution, because i know the whole human trafficking side of it and all the drugs, etc)

Its a telling part of your (lack of) character that you routinely cannot try and make a point without making it personal (while at the same time hiding your personal details from scrutiny).

But back to the actual topic..... It may matter not to you if you know your sexual partner's name, character or (heaven forbid) sexual history but I feel pretty confident the majority of society falls within my camp of social norms in that regard so I really don't see a need to debate it.

That aside, I too don't see a 'problem' (beyond character) of two consenting adults 'hooking up' however they choose - as long as it is done 100% in privacy.

BBatesokc
07-04-2013, 05:49 PM
It's fine to shoot a stranger, but not to have sex with them? I realize these are apples and oranges, but lets put this "crime" into perspective. I think I could sleep better after having had sex with a stranger than had I shot them, regardless of the circumstances.

That's such a bizarre statement I can only shake my head.

betts
07-04-2013, 06:42 PM
I feel the same way about most of your comments, so clearly we are at different ends of some spectrum.

soonerguru
07-04-2013, 08:26 PM
While I agree it is uncouth to have sex in public, I find FOX News's publication of the arrestees places of employment depressing and unnecessary.

It's true some of these folks are probably conflicted, or closet cases. That's too bad. I agree with Betts that this is a silly "crime." I also am willing to bet that were heteros involved, they might have gotten a stern warning instead.

PennyQuilts
07-04-2013, 09:42 PM
When we start having heterosexuals chronically meeting to have sex with strangers in the park during the daylight hours, we might have some evidence, one way or the other, of how the police would handle it. Under those circumstances, I'm confident you'd get the same result. It isn't about orientation. It is about being a public nuisance.

Just the facts
07-04-2013, 10:35 PM
Dirty Mike and the Boys

u1j4mK6cs_A

mkjeeves
07-04-2013, 10:43 PM
Why should an employer and other employees be punished for something an employee did completely unrelated and off the clock, (essentially what the news people are doing)? Isn't that about the same as punishing a Chick fil worker for something the owners did?

Bunty
07-04-2013, 10:58 PM
I don't know what they can do about the problem except to clear out some tree and bushes and/or make it a more appealing place for families to come to by putting in playground equipment, grills and stuff, but then maybe the offenders would only move on to a different, less developed part of the lake.

kevinpate
07-05-2013, 12:09 AM
Why should an employer and other employees be punished for something an employee did completely unrelated and off the clock, (essentially what the news people are doing)? Isn't that about the same as punishing a Chick fil worker for something the owners did?


Not seeing it as a punishment to an employer or co-worker. In addition to the shaming factor of the authorities not hiding behind a bush that X was not quite hiding behind a bush, it's main purpose, in my opinion, is a deterrent factor to others. Sort of a one may think it's all fun and games to be anonymous and sexual in public, but be forewarned, if one gets busted, the anonymous sex in public may become way more public than one may prefer.

If folks want random hookups that are there and gone again, perhaps the old adage of hey, get a room really isn't asking all that much.

FWIW, the gender pairing of public coupling ought to be completely irrelevant. I'm not certain that is the case, and suspect it likely is not. But, it should not matter whether it's Joe/Joe, Josie/Joe or Josie/Jolene when public conduct is inappropriate.

stick47
07-05-2013, 05:30 AM
I'm in favor of doing all they can to eliminate these goings on. Glad they published the extra information. This is the only way that decent family folks will feel they can safely use these public parks.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 06:22 AM
Not seeing it as a punishment to an employer or co-worker. In addition to the shaming factor of the authorities not hiding behind a bush that X was not quite hiding behind a bush, it's main purpose, in my opinion, is a deterrent factor to others. Sort of a one may think it's all fun and games to be anonymous and sexual in public, but be forewarned, if one gets busted, the anonymous sex in public may become way more public than one may prefer.

If folks want random hookups that are there and gone again, perhaps the old adage of hey, get a room really isn't asking all that much.

FWIW, the gender pairing of public coupling ought to be completely irrelevant. I'm not certain that is the case, and suspect it likely is not. But, it should not matter whether it's Joe/Joe, Josie/Joe or Josie/Jolene when public conduct is inappropriate.

It's shaming an employer in an effort to cause the employer to do something against the employee when the employer had no stake in the issue at hand. I see no difference between that and shaming a drive-through employee for something they had no stake in, in an effort to put pressure on a CEO for something the CEO did unrelated to the company. Both are wrong.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 07:21 AM
I don't know what they can do about the problem except to clear out some tree and bushes and/or make it a more appealing place for families to come to by putting in playground equipment, grills and stuff, but then maybe the offenders would only move on to a different, less developed part of the lake.

Put a bathhouse on the next MAPS projects list?

Just kidding!

OKCTalker
07-05-2013, 08:21 AM
Sex between consenting, adult parties is legal. Doing so in public is not. Is that really asking too much?

kevinpate
07-05-2013, 08:41 AM
It's shaming an employer in an effort to cause the employer to do something against the employee when the employer had no stake in the issue at hand. I see no difference between that and shaming a drive-through employee for something they had no stake in, in an effort to put pressure on a CEO for something the CEO did unrelated to the company. Both are wrong.

mkjeeves. I get what you're saying, but I am more inclined to see its deterrent effect, aimed at those on the fence about draping their clothes on the fence and having public sex. I don't have any interest in who puts what where when intertwined with a consensual adult partner. That lack of interest includes stumbling across folk if I'm out with the pup, my grandbabies, my lovely or just by myself propped against a tree with a book or a Nook. Conversely, knowing the reputation of certain locations, I don't go to those locations.

As for it impacting an employer to act on an employee, learning an employee exercises poor judgment off duty may indeed be reason to examine anew whether the employee's on duty judgment is up to the employer's expected standards. That doesn't much disturb me, irrespective of whether the employee was hooking up randomly in public for sex or was publicly engaging in private behavior with his or her long time and exclusive relationship partner.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 09:18 AM
mkjeeves. I get what you're saying, but I am more inclined to see its deterrent effect, aimed at those on the fence about draping their clothes on the fence and having public sex. I don't have any interest in who puts what where when intertwined with a consensual adult partner. That lack of interest includes stumbling across folk if I'm out with the pup, my grandbabies, my lovely or just by myself propped against a tree with a book or a Nook. Conversely, knowing the reputation of certain locations, I don't go to those locations.

As for it impacting an employer to act on an employee, learning an employee exercises poor judgment off duty may indeed be reason to examine anew whether the employee's on duty judgment is up to the employer's expected standards. That doesn't much disturb me, irrespective of whether the employee was hooking up randomly in public for sex or was publicly engaging in private behavior with his or her long time and exclusive relationship partner.

Slippery slope. Maybe the NSA will just go ahead and give employers the files on their employees.

Besides, the point in publishing the employers was for the public to know to put pressure on the employers. It was not a service to the employers. It was a disservice to the employers.

Just the facts
07-05-2013, 09:26 AM
I remember when my kids were in T-Ball, if our team was first to play on Saturday morning we had to pick up all the used condoms in the parking lot, in the dugouts, and behind the concession stands. Such a great way to start a Saturday morning.

Rover
07-05-2013, 09:34 AM
This occurred in PUBLIC spaces. It doesn't matter if heterosexual or homosexual, it is inappropriate and all means to discourage future such activity in PUBLIC should be used. These are areas where families with small children can accidentally be exposed. This behavior in private areas is a matter for personal morality and safety unless the results incurs a public cost (increased public health problems and costs with sexually transmitted diseases, etc.). But, to do whatever is necessary to protect children from being exposed to this or other inappropriate behavior is the right thing to do. If these people were acting in a reckless and irresponsible way by participating in this activity in PUBLIC, then use whatever means necessary to keep it from happening again. Why do people keep defending adults who should know better rather than kids and others who might be damaged by their behavior? If we must err, let's err on the side of protecting those who should be protected. If these men lose their jobs, then it is a result of their wrong judgement and behavior, NOT because of the exposure. Somehow we have become a society that disassociates actions, responsibilities and accountability. Let's quit making perpetrators victims.

Rover
07-05-2013, 09:52 AM
Slippery slope. Maybe the NSA will just go ahead and give employers the files on their employees.

Why is it that you think NSA will do this? This and most private data resides with corporations who SELL the information they collect (usually with people's agreement - they should read all the things they allow in getting programs, apps, browsers, etc.). To get all paranoid about the NSA and to give GOOGLE et al a pass is just naivety or ignorance.

kevinpate
07-05-2013, 01:02 PM
Slippery slope. Maybe the NSA will just go ahead and give employers the files on their employees.

Besides, the point in publishing the employers was for the public to know to put pressure on the employers. It was not a service to the employers. It was a disservice to the employers.

Just gonna leave the NSA blip alone. If they wanna discuss it with you, that's between you and them I suppose.
As for who initiates pressure with an employer, potato/patatah. If someone's judgment is so skewed that daytime sex in a public park is a non-issue in the decision making process, an employer can act or not act as he or she sees fit. And again, so no one is confused, I'm fine with the outcome irrespective if the public behavior is random no strings hookups or folk in long term committed relationships.

It's just not that difficult to get a room, or at least exercise a modicum of discretion and get a concealed bit of shrub if the great outdoors is one's only option.

We basically disagree on how much privacy someone who doesn't seek out privacy for his or her private behavior ought to receive. I'm ok with affording less privacy after the fact than you appear to believe is appropriate. I doubt either of us will change the other's mind in that regard.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 01:06 PM
This occurred in PUBLIC spaces. It doesn't matter if heterosexual or homosexual, it is inappropriate and all means to discourage future such activity in PUBLIC should be used. These are areas where families with small children can accidentally be exposed. This behavior in private areas is a matter for personal morality and safety unless the results incurs a public cost (increased public health problems and costs with sexually transmitted diseases, etc.). But, to do whatever is necessary to protect children from being exposed to this or other inappropriate behavior is the right thing to do. If these people were acting in a reckless and irresponsible way by participating in this activity in PUBLIC, then use whatever means necessary to keep it from happening again. Why do people keep defending adults who should know better rather than kids and others who might be damaged by their behavior? If we must err, let's err on the side of protecting those who should be protected. If these men lose their jobs, then it is a result of their wrong judgement and behavior, NOT because of the exposure. Somehow we have become a society that disassociates actions, responsibilities and accountability. Let's quit making perpetrators victims.

You did comprehend in none of my posts about publishing the employers' names did I defend those arrested and accused or their illegal behavior in public places? You and others seem to be confused about that.

If we should do whatever is necessary including shaming employers for something out of their control, why beat around the bush, maybe you would want to just shut the employers down. It would be about as fair to the employer, more direct and more effective. The ends justify the means, right?

Rover
07-05-2013, 01:42 PM
That's quite a leap... from publishing where someone works to shutting down their employer. Improperly extrapolating anything is dangerous and illogical.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 01:47 PM
That's quite a leap... from publishing where someone works to shutting down their employer. Improperly extrapolating anything is dangerous and illogical.

You are okay with impacting an employers' bottom line and reputation by public shaming the employer in mass media, even though the employer has really nothing to do with what happened. If they aren't strong enough to handle that, it doesn't matter right? Any means necessary.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 01:50 PM
Why is it that you think NSA will do this? This and most private data resides with corporations who SELL the information they collect (usually with people's agreement - they should read all the things they allow in getting programs, apps, browsers, etc.). To get all paranoid about the NSA and to give GOOGLE et al a pass is just naivety or ignorance.

Right. We can all pay to learn pretty much anything about anybody. You support employers doing that and using all that information to make decisions about their employees? I don't.

That's all pretty far from the topic.

BBatesokc
07-05-2013, 02:52 PM
... I also am willing to bet that were heteros involved, they might have gotten a stern warning instead.

Actually, the reality is the complete opposite. The identities of heteros soliciting public sex from prostitutes are routinely published in the paper and on news stations. Additionally, most often the gay stings result in city tickets while the straight prostitution arrests almost always result in far more serious and expensive state charges.

BBatesokc
07-05-2013, 03:04 PM
Honestly, I have mixed feelings about the media publishing the employment information - only because its hard to see the 'newsworthiness' of it. Other than that, its not top secret info. is pretty readily available and the person being arrested should have been smart enough not to have given their employment information to the cops - there is no law saying you have to that I'm aware of and the lawyers I work with usually tell their clients not to divulge such info when being arrested for ANY crime.

Also, I find most people overreact on this sort of topic. The idea this somehow routinely and exorbitantly punishes the employer is not the reality in most cases. People are not going to stop patronizing a particular business in measurable numbers simply because an employee was arrested for public lewdness.

BBatesokc
07-05-2013, 03:05 PM
I feel the same way about most of your comments, so clearly we are at different ends of some spectrum.

Really 'most' - Does your drama know no bounds? Regardless, I'm pretty sure I'm thankful for that 'fact.'

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 03:14 PM
Part of what sticks in my craw about this is the fox site linked at the top and again below this post devoted more than half the space for the story on the first page to highlight who the employers were. They didn't give height, weight, home address, time/date of arrest, arresting officer, or any other specific details that one might obtain if they really want to be informed of facts. They did give the most irrelevant fact related to the men, (not even related to the crime), for the reasons I stated.

34 men arrested for sexual acts at Lake Hefner park (http://www.okcfox.com/story/22754172/34-men-arrested-for-sexual-acts-at-lake-hefner-park#at_pco=cfd-1.0)

Bill Robertson
07-05-2013, 03:14 PM
I don't know what they can do about the problem except to clear out some tree and bushes and/or make it a more appealing place for families to come to by putting in playground equipment, grills and stuff, but then maybe the offenders would only move on to a different, less developed part of the lake.Actually, this was a problem on the east side of lake Hefner many years ago. The city cleared out the east side of the lake and installed the playground off Britton, the area for wind-surfers, etc. and the East Wharf. This was done against the will of many users that wanted the area left "natural". I was involved with the Oklahoma Bicycle Society at the time and attended many OKC Govt. meetings concerning lake Hefner planning. The area around Hobie Point was left "natural" due to a ton of protests from the area users complaining about the "scalping" of the east side of lake Hefner. In my opinion, the south side of Hefner needs to be "scalped" just like the East side. Yes, it will derail efforts to keep the lake area natural. But what is more important? Keeping the area natural or keeping the area safe?

BBatesokc
07-05-2013, 03:21 PM
Part of what sticks in my craw about this is the fox site linked at the top and again below this post devoted more than half the space for the story on the first page to highlight who the employers were. They didn't give height, weight, home address, time/date of arrest, arresting officer, or any other specific details that one might obtain if they really want to be informed of facts. They did give the most irrelevant fact related to the crime, for the reasons I stated.

34 men arrested for sexual acts at Lake Hefner park (http://www.okcfox.com/story/22754172/34-men-arrested-for-sexual-acts-at-lake-hefner-park#at_pco=cfd-1.0)

I would agree that it would make more sense for the media to post a rough idea of the person's address over their employment (something like "400 block of elm street in OKC" etc.). That said, I do think its at least arguable to publish the employer when the person works closely with children, etc.

However, in this day and age it matters little. Co-workers, bosses, neighbors, etc. constantly check people they know on OSCN and OKC.gov and sites like those - so the secret would get out to those it matters eventually anyway.

Rover
07-05-2013, 03:41 PM
Right. We can all pay to learn pretty much anything about anybody. You support employers doing that and using all that information to make decisions about their employees? I don't.

That's all pretty far from the topic.
Again, a great leap and conclusion to indicate I approve of either. You don't want reason, you apparently want an argument. Hostility just for hostility.

Rover
07-05-2013, 03:48 PM
You are okay with impacting an employers' bottom line and reputation by public shaming the employer in mass media, even though the employer has really nothing to do with what happened. If they aren't strong enough to handle that, it doesn't matter right? Any means necessary.

I seriously doubt that this will impact any employers bottom or top line unless they deal in services where this behavior or level of judgement is relevant. I don't really care who is changing my tires but I might care if they are taking care of my children.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 03:51 PM
Again, a great leap and conclusion to indicate I approve of either. You don't want reason, you apparently want an argument. Hostility just for hostility.

Right. Your posts have been only emotion, no reason and you haven't responded to the issue directly about the negative impact on employers but it hasn't kept you from posting.

mkjeeves
07-05-2013, 03:56 PM
I seriously doubt that this will impact any employers bottom or top line unless they deal in services where this behavior or level of judgement is relevant. I don't really care who is changing my tires but I might care if they are taking care of my children.

Fast and loose with others bottom lines because the ends justify the means.

stick47
07-05-2013, 04:38 PM
An unintended consequence would be if two people of the same name both work at a place listed in the news report.