$58.00 donated in past month
How did SF police chief become ruler of city?
SFPD chief unilaterally changed policy at BAY TO BREAKERS,
Open letter to the San Francisco
Board of Supervisors:
[ board_of_supervisors [at] ci.sf.ca.us ]
I attended Board and committee meetings when the Board was considering the
"Wiener ordinance" on nudity in the streets of San Francisco.
Unless memory fails, all eleven supervisors
understood that the ordinance would allow traditional nudity
[ clothing-optionality] at BAY TO BREAKERS, at Pride,
and at the Folsom Street Events [ "Up Your Alley" in July,
and Folsom Street Fair in September].
I cannot recall even one Supervisor
-- not among the six who voted FOR the ordinance.
nor among the five who voted AGAINST it--
who openly advocated banning nudity at
Bay to Breakers. Not one.
The ordinance took effect in February 2013,
and nudity was duly and fully tolerated by SFPD at B2B 2013, in May.
Nobody was surprised.
But fast-forward to the days leading up to B2B 2014:
Out of the blue, SFPD Chief Suhr announces that the tolerance of 2013
will not continue in 2014.
[ http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/05/13/sfpd-chief-spells-out-bay-to-breakers-rules-nuditys-not-okay/ ]
So, WHAT HAD CHANGED, from May 2013 to May 2014?
On television, Suhr said there would be families with kids at B2B 2014.
Did he forget that such families had been present in 2013, and in previous years?
[San Francisco parents already expected nudity at B2B; so some may
chose to bring their kids anyway, and some may chose to boycott this event.]
What was different about 2014, compared to 2013?
Some persons, online, have also mentioned that Bay to Breakers
has a vague rule* concerning "clothing" worn by "competitors. Yet, so far as I know, the rule has been on the books --- and IGNORED by B2B organizers -- for several years, or more.
As far as this rule goes, WHAT HAD CHANGED, from 2013 to 2014?
Was Suhr's attitude the only thing that changed?
Did Suhr consult the Board Of Supervisors, before abolishing the tolerance which
prevailed as a consensus policy in 2013 and before?
Did he even consult the Mayor?
[ Was I sleeping when martial law was declared, imposing one-man rule
in San Francisco?]
Citizens can read, and debate, proposed laws;
elected legislators can vote YES or NO; then courts can weigh constitutional issues.
That's how American democracy works. Loud, complex, and messy? For sure!
Our system has flaws; but it's still better than dictatorship
*** This citizen respectfully requests that the Board, or a committee, investigate HOW and why the Police Chief ignored the B2B consensus of 2013, and unilaterally imposed his own policy in 2014. ***
Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom!
Tortuga Bi LIBERTY,
PO Box 426937-SUN
San Francisco, CA 94142-6937
28 May 2014
"6.2. Athletic Attire: In all events competitors must wear clothing that is clean, designed and worn so as not to be objectionable. USATF Rule 142"
[ Questions about Rule 142:
(A) Precisely what is "objectionable"? By the standards of Saudi Arabia, or Denmark?
Tehran or Sidney?
In some countries, a man's bare chest would be objectionable; in Los Angeles, a man's bare chest might be okay, but a woman's bare chest would be illegal;
in Santa Cruz and in San Francisco, any person may lawfully go bare-chested on the streets
. So the meaning of "objectionable" is subjective; varying widely with geography, religions, cultures, subcultures, personal tastes, etc. Could PETA object to costumes made of real animal fur; but "non-object" to fake fur?
[B] Precisely which persons are considered "competitors" in B2B?
Spectators and bystanders? Pirates? Walkers?
Anyone who officially registers?
Or just those registrants who move across the starting line and continue moving
until they cross the finish line?