Posts Tagged ‘bathroom’
The Drone Bros of Golden Gate Park: Whose Drone is Hovering Three Feet from Your Bathroom Window on Fell Street? This Dude’sTuesday, May 26th, 2015
Here’s the scene without any arrows pointing things out:
And here are the arrows:
And here are the bros:
Now it could be that bro was just checking out his own pad using his new toy, but man, some people might have been surprised if they saw this drone hovering just outside their windows.
The drone slowly increased altitude to rooftop level and I didn’t stick around to see where it went next.
This is How We Live in 2015…
What It’s Like to Stay at a Mid-Market Hotel for $60-Something per Night: “Budget Inn,” 1139 Market StreetThursday, November 13th, 2014
Well, here’s an upbeat take:
Hotel Tour : Budget Inn San Francisco CA by DieselDucy:
Compare that with Yelp – a very low one-star rating:
“I want to leave, but it’s already 1am and we are both too afraid to leave our locked room. We get 4 hrs or interrupted sleep (the walls are paper thin and the doors have cracks in them), pray that we didn’t get exposed to tuberculosis, hepatitis and/or herpes and book it out of there. Trust me folks, this place isn’t worth the $60. I’ve stayed in $15 hostels while traveling though Europe that were both cleaner and safer than this place.”
And there’s this:
” If you have less than $150 night for a decent place to stay, youre actually safer just camping at golden gate park than any of these SROs…”
And there’s the bedbug allegations, natch.
Words You Don’t Want to Hear Shouted from Inside the Panhandle Park Bathroom: “Knife!” – “Protect Yourself!”Thursday, October 16th, 2014
This is about as close as I usually get to the infamous half-million dollar bathroom that we paid for back in the aughts.
But it’s close enough to hear the following:
“Trying to get myself clean!”
“Just trying to protect yourself!”
Note that these dudes were conversing inside the women’s bathroom on the east side of the building.
One assumes somebody pulled out a knife, because he felt threatened.
On It Goes…
Phuket Thai Restaurant Opens Up Its Bathrooms to the General Public – They Charge Just $2 Each Time You GoMonday, October 21st, 2013
What People are Thinking But Not Saying About the Michael Petrelis / Supervisor Scott Wiener Peeping Tom ConvictionFriday, June 14th, 2013
“Scott Wiener was standing at the urinal and had just started to tinkle as I entered and the camera took 4-6 seconds to focus, enough time for him to put away his wiener and zipper up.”
Of course when I think of the word “peeking,” I’m thinking it’s to:
“Look quickly, typically in a furtive manner.”
Now let’s see how California Penal Code subdivision 647(j) might apply here:
“647. Except as provided in subdivision (l), every person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor…
…(j) (1) Any person who looks through a hole or opening, into, or otherwise views, by means of any instrumentality, including, but not limited to, a periscope, telescope, binoculars, camera, motion picture camera, camcorder, or mobile phone, the interior of a bedroom, bathroom, changing room, fitting room, dressing room, or tanning booth, or the interior of any other area in which the occupant has a reasonable expectation of privacy, with the intent to invade the privacy of a person or persons inside. This subdivision shall not apply to those areas of a private business used to count currency or other negotiable instruments.”
So, where’s the “injustice” here?
I’m not seeing it.
Les mise-en-scene. (This shot could be used to show how the mirrors on the second-floor bathroom at City Hall were mounted too low, just saying)
“It gives me great pleasure to announce that my legal hassle with an elected official, after he abused the power of his office as a member of the Board of Supervisors to put me through the law enforcement wringer over eight months and waste $26,000 in City dollars, has concluded.”
…is wrong. It’s the kind of thing you’d say after getting acquitted perhaps, but it doesn’t apply to this case, IMO.
And this too…
“Had I taken a photo of an ordinary gay citizen in a public men’s room, and he complained to the legal authorities about it, I seriously doubt the complaint would have resulted in the investigation and prosecution I have faced.”
…is wrong. I mean, this is testable, right? Go do the same thing again to an “ordinary gay citizen in a public men’s room” and you just might have another expensive legal hassle from The Man.
Supervisor Scott Wiener is super-human. That’s why he’s so tall and why he only needs to sleep just three hours* every Earth-day, correct? He came to our planet to fight for the rights of millionaire property owners and members** of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, which is his right to do.
He should be able to do so without having to worry about camera-toting Mike Petrelis whenever nature calls.
Anyway, that’s not necessarily what people are saying online.
It’s just what most people are thinking.
*Or so I’ve been told, something like that. Prove me wrong!
**The members with unpopular restaurants especially. These crybabies want a free market except when they don’t. Someday we’ll get San Diego-style cleanliness letter grades posted in front of restaurants the way Chris Daly wanted. Someday.
Here’s How the “Drop Charge Against Petrelis” Blogspot is Dead Wrong About Attempted Bathroom Penis Photo TakingThursday, February 7th, 2013
Here’s how the “Drop Charge Against Petrelis” Blogspot looks at things:
“Page 5 of the transcript illustrates how the DA’s office frames the taking of a photograph: “The conduct in this case amount to a gross invasion of privacy.” Let’s get real! While Michael’s action can be seen as an annoyance, the innocuous photograph hardly warrants such an overblown mischaracterization.”
But here’s the reality, from the webpage entitled “peaking-at-wieners-wiener-in-city-hall”
“Of all the luck an activist could ask for in terms of an impromptu run-in with an ambitious homosexual politician of the Democratic persuasion. My new camera was ready for use in the second floor men’s room at City Hall on Friday afternoon when I walked in. Scott Wiener was standing at the urinal and had just started to tinkle as I entered and the camera took 4-6 seconds to focus, enough time for him to put away his wiener and zipper up.”
If Michael Petrelis is unapologetic then he’s forcing the DA’s office into a prosecution.
Any money “wasted” on this action is on M. Petrelis and not on SFGov.
Simply, M Petrelis is not being oppressed by SFGov.
So this kind of thing is absurd:
“Needless to say, as an independent blogger who frequently displeases the powerful and politicians with access to law enforcement agencies that create legal hassles for me, I stand in strong solidarity…”
A Few Questions for Blogger Michael Petrelis of the Petrelis Files re: the Scott Wiener Bathroom IncidentWednesday, December 5th, 2012
So, let’s see here.
1. The idea of taking a photo of Supervisor Scott Wiener’s weiner in a bathroom was good because…
Because why? I don’t get it.
2. Making a federal case (potentially, eventually), a cause celebre, out of this incident is helpful because…
Because why? I don’t get it.
And you say you “allegedly” attempted to violate Section 647(j)(1) of the California Penal Code because, like, you don’t know what you actually did and why you did it?’
Isn’t that the kind of thing criminals say?
I think so.
Here’s what you should do, you apologize.
1. I’m sorry for what I did. I got carried away over the whole nudity ban thing (or whatever it was) and I did something I shouldn’t have. I won’t do anything like that ever again; and
2. You say it like you mean it, whether you mean it or not.
And if you had done that already, then we wouldn’t be here with you wasting your time and the time and money of other people, like taxpayers ‘n stuff.