Hacker News Reader

Comment by dekhn | Hacker News Reader

It kind of depends on what your goal is here.

The school doesn't have that, but in california "loitering near a school" is illegal and you can go to jail. Even so, how you act in the situation determines the outcome. You have several options, including arguing with the school staff (guaranteed police visit), arguing with the police (likely will make the police less likely to sympathize even if you're not doing something illegal), behaving suspiciously (IE, not making eye contact, not following direct orders from cops, slumping, wearing clothes that cover your face, being a member of a minority that cops believe are prone to being criminal) will get you beaten up, arrested, sent to jail, etc.

How you act in public situations makes all the difference. For example, you could set up in front of the school with a protest sign that says ("Fund police and schools"), you're not going to get the police called on you.

View on HN

I found that surprising. According to the first Google result[1], it is true that loitering near a school is illegal, BUT loitering doesn't mean just being there. It means being there with an unlawful purpose; they give an example of someone waiting to abduct a child. Watching kids play isn't otherwise a crime, so wouldn't qualify.

I definitely sympathize with the author. As a male, I would expect an even stronger reaction to hanging around watching kids with no clear intent. As others have pointed out, even if you're not committing a crime you can be in for an unpleasant response. It's sad that there are creeps out there. It's sad that as a result, certain innocent behaviors make others nervous (rationally or irrationally). It also gives me a small taste of what it's like to be judged by my category/appearance.

[1]https://www.losangelescriminallawyer.pro/california-penal-co...

Do you understand that the interpretation of unlawful purpose is left to the enforcement agency at the moment of possible infraction? Note that many municipalities in the US openly publish the names of people who are arrested, and what for, but then don't publish that people got off because they weren't guilty.

I totally agree that police at the moment would not likely respect the finer points of that law and may well detain you. I would not advise testing them. However, it's not likely that the DA would eventually be able to convict you. I was sharing what I found interesting about the actual law in question, which was a different impression than when I first read the claim that loitering at a school was illegal (which is technically true!) It's not actually illegal to watch kids play (with no other criminal purpose), even if we both agree that in practice you're likely to get a negative response.

but you're basically just arguing that "intent matters", when it's clear (empircally) that it doesn't.

We agree that intent isn't likely to matter for what will happen to you that day. No one is arguing otherwise.

It does appear to matter in the law, and the day you show up in court (if you're foolish/stubborn enough to test it).

Whether or not you will eventually win the case will have little bearing on how your day goes that day. If everyone tried just hanging around a school and asserting their rights to do so the number of folks that would be the rightest person in the morgue would not be 0.

This is very true. There was a period I had to live in a tent on some un-used land that was accessed through a residential neighborhood and I managed to live there for several months without any problems or complaints. I came and went as I wished and whenever I saw anyone whether walking a dog or driving a car I smiled at them, waved, made direct eye contact, and said "hello" or "good morning" if we passed close enough for conversation.

I tried to keep myself clean, but even on my poorly groomed days people just assumed I was some random neighbor taking a walk and moved on without suspicion. Most people don't want to talk to their neighbors so if you look friendly they will avoid you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com