Bookstore

There are a lot of things we do in life and in the pursuit of pussy that are not always legal. It is good that you are curious about the legality of the situation so that you are not flying into it blind and can do some proper risk assessment. Whether you are in Texas or some other state, there are some places where such activity regularly happens in bookstores despite the legal risks. There are risks. Just because a bookstore or private club hasn't been "raided" lately or yet, doesn't mean it can't happen that particular day you decide to play. Chances are it won't happen, but it could.

I believe part of the thrill of the bookstore play is that the people are playing in a semi public place. You don't know who might walk in or what other people may say or do while you are trying to have fun. For some that adds to the excitement and passion of things.

So you and the friend just got to decide whether you two are comfortable with the risks involved in such activity.

Sure there's a difference but the question remains, is there a reasonable expectation of privacy at a members only section of an ABS? if so, what are the implication regarding the legalities of this? Originally Posted by MyselfCCS

Adding a "members-only" section to the hypothetical wouldn't change my opinion. The "members-only" section would still be a public place under the court's broad holding in Cammack.

So my final question is this, since there is a precedent of an appeal being denied, anyone in a similar situation has absolutely no chance of a different outcome even if the judge agrees with the dissenting opinion? Originally Posted by MyselfCCS

Absolutely no chance? I wouldn't go THAT far. But under the rule of stare decisis, judges follow precedents, and Cammack is still good law, as far as I know. Dissents have no precedential value because, well, they're dissents.

Well said SJ

+1 SJ

OP, I still want an answer to my question.

MCCS, unless you are a judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals AND you have a majority of judges to vote with you, how you would "hold" matters not!!! Cammack is the law unless you can show show us some authority overturning Cammack

Well said SJ

+1 SJ

OP, I still want an answer to my question.

MCCS, unless you are a judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals AND you have a majority of judges to vote with you, how you would "hold" matters not!!! Cammack is the law unless you can show show us some authority overturning Cammack Originally Posted by DocHolyday

No interest in arguing just for the sake of it, I'm no legal expert at all so I appreciate you guys taking the time to explain how things work in the legal realm.

I do not speak for SJ but on behalf of myself, you're welcome.

Here's a good "book" for ya!
--> https://area1255.blogspot.com/2014/1...ling-with.html
--> https://area1255.blogspot.com/2015/1...pbackpage.html