Police admit that it's unlike anybody would go within six feet of the flag-caped diaper man

[willnotwill]

https://chroniclet.com/news/210319/vermilion-protester-dons-an-american-flag-cape-and-a-diaper/

[dyperbole]

Reminds me of this Far Side comic:

 

 

 

[repetitivediaperwetter88]

 

 

[babypb]

...........hmmmmmm, that's only an hour away from me. One thing said "white briefs" and the cops said "diaper? Maybe I need to get up there and check it out, LOL. If he is wearing a diaper, sounds like the cops are cool with it as long as he's not bothering anyone.

[BBoy]

"Others wryly observed they didn’t think the man was disturbing the peace, as it would be unlikely strangers would voluntarily go within 6 feet of the man."

bwaaaaaahaaa!!!!

[babypb]

.....just read it again where the police said he's not breaking any laws? Thought(and this gets lots of arguments state by state)that being in a diaper in public was/is considered "indecent exposure"?

[willnotwill]

15 hours ago, babypb said:

.....just read it again where the police said he's not breaking any laws? Thought(and this gets lots of arguments state by state)that being in a diaper in public was/is considered "indecent exposure"?

Not in anywhere I am aware of.   Most indecent exposure laws require you to do one of two things:

1.  Expose your genitals.
2.  Commit some sort of lewd act (masturbate, etc...).

Here's the Ohio law (where this incident takes place):

(A) No person shall recklessly do any of the following, under circumstances in which the person's conduct is likely to be viewed by and affront others who are in the person's physical proximity and who are not members of the person's household:
(1) Expose the person's private parts;
(2) Engage in sexual conduct or masturbation;
(3) Engage in conduct that to an ordinary observer would appear to be sexual conduct or masturbation.

(B) No person shall knowingly do any of the following, under circumstances in which the person's conduct is likely to be viewed by and affront another person who is in the person's physical proximity, who is a minor, and who is not the spouse of the offender :
(1) Engage in masturbation;
(2) Engage in sexual conduct;
(3) Engage in conduct that to an ordinary observer would appear to be sexual conduct or masturbation;
(4) Expose the person's private parts with the purpose of personal sexual arousal or gratification or to lure the minor into sexual activity.

[babypb]

On 5/3/2020 at 12:30 PM, willnotwill said:

Not in anywhere I am aware of.   Most indecent exposure laws require you to do one of two things:

1.  Expose your genitals.
2.  Commit some sort of lewd act (masturbate, etc...).

Here's the Ohio law (where this incident takes place):

(A) No person shall recklessly do any of the following, under circumstances in which the person's conduct is likely to be viewed by and affront others who are in the person's physical proximity and who are not members of the person's household:
(1) Expose the person's private parts;
(2) Engage in sexual conduct or masturbation;
(3) Engage in conduct that to an ordinary observer would appear to be sexual conduct or masturbation.

(B) No person shall knowingly do any of the following, under circumstances in which the person's conduct is likely to be viewed by and affront another person who is in the person's physical proximity, who is a minor, and who is not the spouse of the offender :
(1) Engage in masturbation;
(2) Engage in sexual conduct;
(3) Engage in conduct that to an ordinary observer would appear to be sexual conduct or masturbation;
(4) Expose the person's private parts with the purpose of personal sexual arousal or gratification or to lure the minor into sexual activity.

...well, it looks like I can just go up in diapers and hang out with him? LOL!!! Wonder if he truly is ABDL or just doing it for the stunt & attention?

[Babyme67]

On 5/17/2020 at 5:54 PM, babypb said:

...well, it looks like I can just go up in diapers and hang out with him? LOL!!! Wonder if he truly is ABDL or just doing it for the stunt & attention?

Maybe we all should go and hangout with him 

[babypb]

On 5/18/2020 at 7:56 PM, Babyme67 said:

Maybe we all should go and hangout with him 

...I'm in.

[Puer Aeternus]

Don't encourage him. It seems like there is one in every city.

In Las Vegas there was diaper man, everyday along Fremont street and people would give him money as he danced around in a diaper. IIRC he was also a sore point with the local government as they wanted to get rid of the panhandlers there. I seriously doubt these people are ABDL in any way and it's always some diaper they grabbed from Walgreen's.

@babypb

Briefs are generally used to describe adult diapers that tape, but is now being used to describe those colored Depends protective/incontinence underwear. It's kinda like onesie, ABDLs always take it to mean a bodysuit, but the mainstream definition has become blanket sleeper. Nobody ever said english was easy.

[ValentinesStuff]

And Onesie™ is a trademark of Gerber.

[dyperbole]

1 hour ago, ValentinesStuff said:

And Onesie™ is a trademark of Gerber.

Onesies is a trademark of Gerber, both in the US and Canada at a minimum.  Onesie itself is not trademarked.  Rearz was trying to trademark "Onesie" in Canada, but it's pretty apparent if it was allowed to be trademarked, Gerber would have gotten it decades ago.

The only reason I even remember this is because of Rearz' attempts to trademark a bunch of terms like ABDL, and a lot of ABDLs went nuts.  But a quick check of both the US and Canada trademark databases show that Onesies is a Gerber trademark, and Onesie is not trademarked at all as a baby or adult bodysuit.  The approved US trademarks for "Onesie" are as a hand sanitizer, and as a beer.