If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTVR)   Sex offender inmate claims he's being punished for watching HBO, says he's not some filthy Lannister   (wtvr.com) divider line 54
    More: Interesting, HBO, residential treatment  
•       •       •

4518 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Jul 2014 at 6:55 PM (16 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-31 05:37:22 PM  
Here's a piece of candy. Oh, you ate the candy? No supper for you!
 
2014-07-31 06:40:38 PM  
"Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.
 
2014-07-31 06:58:46 PM  
Dream on
 
2014-07-31 06:59:05 PM  

doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.


Time for him to take the black.
 
2014-07-31 07:01:55 PM  
i can't seems to recall  any nudity in "We're the Millers", or maybe I'm just that jaded
 
2014-07-31 07:03:10 PM  

Kanemano: i can't seems to recall  any nudity in "We're the Millers", or maybe I'm just that jaded


They probably got caught jerking it to the kid with the swollen balls scene.
 
2014-07-31 07:04:41 PM  

doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.


These people are getting civil treatment because they were deemed to be a threat to society.  Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

These cats require treatment to help them get over their urges hence the reason why they are civilly committed because it has been determined that they pose a risk to society.
 
2014-07-31 07:06:56 PM  
doglover:
Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation.

Now you've done it.  I can hear pitchforks getting sharpened and torches being lit.
 
2014-07-31 07:12:35 PM  
www.armstrongarmor.com

Now, why weren't they using the V-chip that's been a part of our TV's since 1997?

/TV MA  V S L D
//The best you can get.
 
2014-07-31 07:14:30 PM  

Plant Rights Activist: doglover:
Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation.

Now you've done it.  I can hear pitchforks getting sharpened and torches being lit.


Think about it from a practical aspect: if a rapist gets the same/worse punishment than a murder, why wouldn't the rapist kill the victim as a way to eliminate a witness?
 
2014-07-31 07:21:17 PM  
What would have happened if it was skinamax?
 
2014-07-31 07:28:50 PM  
"It's about some people doing it because they can...it's almost bullying," Gastanaga said.

Bullying? By the staff at a mental health treatment center? You know Billy, what worries me is how your mother is going to take this.

www.unsungfilms.com
 
2014-07-31 07:50:43 PM  

sprgrss: These people are getting civil treatment because they were deemed to be a threat to society.  Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

These cats require treatment to help them get over their urges hence the reason why they are civilly committed because it has been determined that they pose a risk to society.


No matter how you justify it, it's still imprisonment without most of the protections afforded to criminal defendants. If we want to keep certain people locked up for longer, there is proper a mechanism for that, which is legislation to make sentencing laws harsher.

/not a criminal, just concerned
 
2014-07-31 08:00:04 PM  

sprgrss: doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.

These people are getting civil treatment because they were deemed to be a threat to society.  Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

These cats require treatment to help them get over their urges hence the reason why they are civilly committed because it has been determined that they pose a risk to society.


These aren't the 18 year you with a 15 year old girlfriend sex offenders. They are probably all scum who committed acts that, if it happened to your sister or mother, you would be screaming for blood.

I haven't the least bit of sympathy for any of them and quite frankly I wouldn't care if they were water boarded evertime they got an erection.
 
2014-07-31 08:01:34 PM  
If the account in the article is true, then that's BS. You can't offer someone a TV channel and then punish them for taking it. Unless it was some sort of ill-thought out therapeutic technique for distinguishing who was closer to being rehabilitated, and even then it was a stupid idea.

Filthy Lannisters? Ramsey Snow makes those guys look like kindergartners playing doctor.
 
2014-07-31 08:14:58 PM  

big pig peaches: I haven't the least bit of sympathy for any of them and quite frankly I wouldn't care if they were water boarded evertime the ...


They, if the complaint is true, are being punished for doing something they were told they could do.
 
2014-07-31 08:29:25 PM  

doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.


Why do you have so much love for perverts?
 
2014-07-31 08:33:14 PM  
Aww, I bet those rapists in Chinese prisons are crying too because they didn't get to watch HBO without being punished.
 
2014-07-31 08:47:20 PM  

sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.


You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.
 
2014-07-31 08:52:14 PM  

doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch".


The worst part is we have made it impossible for anyone who self-identifies as having a sexual disorder to seek treatment. If you tell your physician that you are having sexual thoughts about children and want treatment he must report you. So now responsible citizens who want to protect us from their mental illness are thrown in jail, and the only rational choice is to go without treatment and hope that it all works out.

This "think of the children" crap has to stop. We're spending so much time imagining ways that children might be harmed that we have lost sight of our responsibility to build a just world for them.
 
2014-07-31 09:04:49 PM  

profplump: doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch".

The worst part is we have made it impossible for anyone who self-identifies as having a sexual disorder to seek treatment. If you tell your physician that you are having sexual thoughts about children and want treatment he must report you. So now responsible citizens who want to protect us from their mental illness are thrown in jail, and the only rational choice is to go without treatment and hope that it all works out.

This "think of the children" crap has to stop. We're spending so much time imagining ways that children might be harmed that we have lost sight of our responsibility to build a just world for them.


It's the Commerce Clause of the 21st Century.
 
2014-07-31 09:06:34 PM  

Ed Grubermann: big pig peaches: I haven't the least bit of sympathy for any of them and quite frankly I wouldn't care if they were water boarded evertime the ...

They, if the complaint is true, are being punished for doing something they were told they could do.


Considering who they are, don't care. Not even a little.
 
2014-07-31 09:48:50 PM  

doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.


Not only is rape not worse than murder, it's not even close to the same scale of crime.

Rape is essentially assault with a sexual component.  Should the sexual component be considered worse than an assault without it?  Sure.  But there is no legitimate reason that a rape that doesn't result in injury should be treated as a more serious crime than a beating that leaves someone in the hospital for months.

And don't start about the rape and psychological injury either - I guarantee that a beating that severe is going to be able to cause at least as much if not significantly more psychological damage as a rape.

And while an assault that leaves someone hospitalized can be prosecuted as a felony, it can also in most states be prosecuted as or plea bargained down to a misdemeanor, at the DA's discretion.  If the victim doesn't end up in the hospital, it's almost certain to be a misdemeanor.  Rape is always treated as a serious felony, even if no injury occurs, and there's lifetime sex offender list punishment attached as well.

I know that's not going to be a popular opinion, but we really need to take a serious look at both how over the top we treat rape, and how ridiculously trivially we treat assault.

I would propose the following:

Given that most states have classes of misdemeanors and felonies, let's use a scale of seriousness of offense, we'll call the least serious a class 1 (say, up to 2 years in prison) and the most serious a class 6 (up to 25 years in prison).  Murder is in a class of its own, call it class 7 if you want, and it's the only crime for which a life sentence is an option.  Life without parole and murder by the state are removed from the table.

Assault causing no injury should be treated as a class 6 misdemeanor, the most serious class.

Assault causing any injury (scrapes, bruises, etc.) should be treated as a class 1 felony.  Add 1 class point for the victim being under 14 or over 70.  If there is serious injury that will completely heal, add .5 class points.  If there is a hospitalization of one week, add .5 class points.  If there is a hospitalization of one month, add 1 class points.  If there is hospitalization over one year, add 3 class points.  If there is permanent injury, add 3 class points.  If there is permanent injury causing a disability (blindness, deafness, loss of a limb, etc.) add 5 class points.  If there is disabling psychological damage, add 3 class points.

Rape should be treated as a class 1 felony, no misdemeanor option.  If there is any injury, add one class point, otherwise add the class points as above for assault.

Destroy the sex offender registry.  Allow any misdemeanant with a 3 year clean record or any felon with a 10 year clean record to have all criminal records expunged, either upon request or automatically.

The statute of limitations on either assault causing no injury or rape causing no injury should be 1 year.  If there is injury, 5 years, and if there is serious injury, 10 years.  If the victim is under the age of majority or is not physically able to report the crime, the statute is tolled until that situation changes.

False rape charges resulting in an unjust conviction should carry the same penalty as rape, plus restitution in the amount of the falsely convicted person's legal costs and $100k per year of unjust imprisonment, adjusted for inflation.  False rape charges not resulting in a conviction should be a class 6 misdemeanor, plus restitution of the accused person's legal costs.

Oh, and...  Drunken sex should ONLY be considered rape if one party is sober.  Otherwise, both parties should be considered to be equally capable of consent unless there is evidence of force or injury.
 
2014-07-31 11:25:46 PM  

DarkVader: doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.

Not only is rape not worse than murder, it's not even close to the same scale of crime.

Rape is essentially assault with a sexual component.  Should the sexual component be considered worse than an assault without it?  Sure.  But there is no legitimate reason that a rape that doesn't result in injury should be treated as a more serious crime than a beating that leaves someone in the hospital for months.

And don't start about the rape and psychological injury either - I guarantee that a beating that severe is going to be able to cause at least as much if not significantly more psychological damage as a rape.

And while an assault that leaves someone hospitalized ca ...



Well, you shoulda quit after that second paragraph.  Now you divided by zero and the thread's gonna blow.
 
2014-07-31 11:38:00 PM  

El_Dan: sprgrss: These people are getting civil treatment because they were deemed to be a threat to society.  Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

These cats require treatment to help them get over their urges hence the reason why they are civilly committed because it has been determined that they pose a risk to society.

No matter how you justify it, it's still imprisonment without most of the protections afforded to criminal defendants. If we want to keep certain people locked up for longer, there is proper a mechanism for that, which is legislation to make sentencing laws harsher.

/not a criminal, just concerned


No, civil commitments have the same protections as a criminal prosecution.  You have the right to an attorney, you have the right to put on evidence, you have the right to confront witnesses against you.

A judge has to find the defendant poses a continued threat to the public in order to commit.
 
2014-07-31 11:39:21 PM  
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/XjzC2DRgEo4?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
2014-07-31 11:40:04 PM  

profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.


I support the creation of sex offender registries.  People have a right to know.
 
2014-07-31 11:46:40 PM  

profplump: doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch".

The worst part is we have made it impossible for anyone who self-identifies as having a sexual disorder to seek treatment. If you tell your physician that you are having sexual thoughts about children and want treatment he must report you. So now responsible citizens who want to protect us from their mental illness are thrown in jail, and the only rational choice is to go without treatment and hope that it all works out.

This "think of the children" crap has to stop. We're spending so much time imagining ways that children might be harmed that we have lost sight of our responsibility to build a just world for them.


no, physicians cannot be compelled to handover that information unless the physician has reason to know or reasonably knows the patients is going to harm someone.

You are arguing from ignorance.
 
2014-07-31 11:50:13 PM  

sprgrss: profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.

I support the creation of sex offender registries.  /em>

Well, morally, you're wrong. But luckily politicians don't have to follow any real codes of ethics.

 
2014-08-01 01:18:18 AM  

doglover: sprgrss: profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.

I support the creation of sex offender registries.  /em>

Well, morally, you're wrong. But luckily politicians don't have to follow any real codes of ethics.


How am I even remotely morally wrong?  Why should people not have the right to know if sex offenders live near them?
 
m00
2014-08-01 01:27:17 AM  

sprgrss: doglover: sprgrss: profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.

I support the creation of sex offender registries.  /em>

Well, morally, you're wrong. But luckily politicians don't have to follow any real codes of ethics.

How am I even remotely morally wrong?  Why should people not have the right to know if sex offenders live near them?



Out of curiosity, what list of crimes do you think people have the right to know about and what list of crimes they do not? Should all criminal records of every person be searchable on the web?
 
2014-08-01 01:31:58 AM  
Doesn't say what their sex crimes were, but I say chop off their peckers anyway as part of their 'rehab'.

i.chzbgr.com
 
2014-08-01 01:45:56 AM  

big pig peaches: Ed Grubermann: big pig peaches: I haven't the least bit of sympathy for any of them and quite frankly I wouldn't care if they were water boarded evertime the ...

They, if the complaint is true, are being punished for doing something they were told they could do.

Considering who they are, don't care. Not even a little.


Justice is a Good unto itself, regardless of who is benefited or punished in its name.
 
2014-08-01 01:48:08 AM  

m00: sprgrss: doglover: sprgrss: profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.

I support the creation of sex offender registries.  /em>

Well, morally, you're wrong. But luckily politicians don't have to follow any real codes of ethics.

How am I even remotely morally wrong?  Why should people not have the right to know if sex offenders live near them?


Out of curiosity, what list of crimes do you think people have the right to know about and what list of crimes they do not? Should all criminal records of every person be searchable on the web?


Given that the Constitution requires speedy and *public* trials, it only makes sense that the results of those trials (i.e., criminal convictions) be made public.
 
m00
2014-08-01 02:00:52 AM  

jshine: Given that the Constitution requires speedy and *public* trials, it only makes sense that the results of those trials (i.e., criminal convictions) be made public.


So you believe every ex-con should be searchable on a public registry?
 
2014-08-01 02:51:16 AM  

sprgrss: doglover: sprgrss: profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.

I support the creation of sex offender registries.  /em>

Well, morally, you're wrong. But luckily politicians don't have to follow any real codes of ethics.

How am I even remotely morally wrong?  Why should people not have the right to know if sex offenders live near them?


First, and most importantly, is that a lot of the people on the list simply don't belong there. They even put minors on the registry. It's just something DAs can use to make the night last forever. It's a flawed, barbaric system and something I'd expect from the Spaniards circa 1420 not America 2014.

Secondly, sex crimes are not special. Stabbing you with a knife and stabbing you with a penis are roughly the same thing. In fact, the knife is worse. So in a society with no Stab Offenders' Registry, having a sex offender registry is silly. There's people out there who have killed other human beings on purpose who now walk free with no registry to track them. They could be your neighbors or coworkers or work around your children. Meanwhile an underaged high school kid who sent some pictures to his girlfriend is going to be sent to jail and placed on the registry?

If you can't see how you're morally wrong here, maybe your local community class offers Ethics 101. You could start there.
 
2014-08-01 03:52:55 AM  

DarkVader: doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.


I think that sentencing has to be looked at for a wide variety--I would go so far as to say the vast majority--of crimes.

Regarding the sex offender registry, that's its own clusterfark.

1--kids sexting to each other shouldn't ever be put on it. Period. The idea that they are or can be is complete nonsense.

2--the idea that a person whose "crime" was pissing in an alley can be put on it is equally ridiculous.

3--the idea that a rapist, who has presumably served his or her time and gone through the appropriate counseling, can be put on it with no means of identifying that their crime happened twenty years prior and has never occurred since is as ridiculous as 1 and 2.

4--sex offender registries' original intent was for police to keep track of pedophiles, to prevent them from violating restrictions prohibiting them from being within so many feet/meters of children. The idea that they have ever been in the hands of the public is horrifying. (Though, to be honest, the idea that today's police forces have them is equally horrifying, but I don't have a better solution. You can't legitimately murder a sick person for being sick, no matter how much I'd personally like to.)

5--The idea that sex offender registries been expanded to the point that they have, to include anyone who has ever so much as looked at, thought about, or thought about looking at the opposite sex in a manner that might possibly indicate they might consider them attractive, should terrify everyone everywhere. The idea that someone can be added to one for having to pee in a place where there is no restroom facility is straight out of science fiction and should make most people very, very alarmed.

TL;DR--the damned things should not be published on the internet, newspaper, etc., but neither should they be secret (No-fly lists, terror watch lists, I'm looking at you), and anyone placed on one should not only be aware they are on one, but should be able to have a day in court--with a jury of non-idiots--to appeal being placed on one in the first place, with the jury of (hopefully intelligent, common-sense type) non-police/lawyer folks making the final decision of who gets placed on the list and who does not--independent of any trials. Those registries are a menace. I won't deny that, in some cases, they do have their place, but for a lot of people who are placed on them (unfairly and unjustly), they do little more than ruin lives because some imbecile thought "think of the children" was a perfectly sound legislative principle. It isn't. It never was. And it never will be.
 
2014-08-01 07:22:31 AM  

DarkVader: doglover: .

And don't start about the rape and psychological injury either - I guarantee that a beating that severe is going to be able to cause at least as much if not significantly more psychological damage as a rape.


Yeah, going to have to chime in here and say that I think this comment is pretty much off the mark.  Sexual assault can have a lasting psychological impact on the sexual life of that person for years to come.  The aftermath can tear apart relationships due to the victim not wanting to engage in sex due to the association.

If you have a strong 'beat my wife on Friday night' thing going, a simple assault might have the same effect on your relationship, but I still thing you are talking apples to oranges here.
 
2014-08-01 08:27:36 AM  

LoneDoggie: DarkVader: doglover: .

And don't start about the rape and psychological injury either - I guarantee that a beating that severe is going to be able to cause at least as much if not significantly more psychological damage as a rape.

Yeah, going to have to chime in here and say that I think this comment is pretty much off the mark.  Sexual assault can have a lasting psychological impact on the sexual life of that person for years to come.  The aftermath can tear apart relationships due to the victim not wanting to engage in sex due to the association.

If you have a strong 'beat my wife on Friday night' thing going, a simple assault might have the same effect on your relationship, but I still thing you are talking apples to oranges here.


I'm going to have to chime in here and say "I have no idea".

Some women have a problem being intimate after rape.  Some people won't even go outside after being mugged.  Who is harmed more, and what's the probability of significant psychological trauma happening?  I have no idea.

Does anyone have a link to a study that shows the relative psychological harm done by rape and assault, cross-indexed by degree of violence?  If not, I suggest we all just get back to arguing on the internet.
 
2014-08-01 08:33:05 AM  

GhostfacedFiddlah: LoneDoggie: DarkVader: doglover: .

...  If not, I suggest we all just get back to arguing on the internet.


But... I thought that's just what we were doing?

maybe we can all agree (haha, it's the internet, not bloody likely) that murder causes the most long lasting psychological harm.
 
2014-08-01 08:37:53 AM  
LoneDoggie:

maybe we can all agree (haha, it's the internet, not bloody likely) that murder causes the most long lasting psychological harm.

In the spirit of being a dick, I'm gonna have to contend that it causes the absolute shortest-lasting psychological harm.
 
2014-08-01 08:52:51 AM  

GhostfacedFiddlah: LoneDoggie:

maybe we can all agree (haha, it's the internet, not bloody likely) that murder causes the most long lasting psychological harm.

In the spirit of being a dick, I'm gonna have to contend that it causes the absolute shortest-lasting psychological harm.


I've never heard of anyone getting over it.
 
2014-08-01 09:03:32 AM  
I'm more pissed that they have better TV channels than I can afford...great use of our tax dollars assholes.
 
2014-08-01 09:19:34 AM  

doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.


I don't always agree with you but when you are right, you are right and this nail-on-head right.
 
2014-08-01 09:20:22 AM  

gshepnyc: doglover: "Sex offender" is the modern charge of "witch". They can be treated as you please because if you stand up for their basic human rights, you're an agent of the devil and a witch yourself er, called a pedophile defender.

It's quite terrible, really. We erode citizens' right because of the Helen Lovejoys of the world shrieking "think of the children" but history shows us a million times over the folly of such a tact as well as its basic immorality. When you subjugate a single group, even criminals, beyond reason it always backfires on society.

Rapists are repugnant, there's no doubt. But there's nothing that makes rape worse than murder. Killing someone is by far the worse violation. It might take 30 years, but if you serve your time for a murder, it's over. You're free. You totally ended someone's life against their will and now you can go to Starbucks like the rest of us. Meanwhile if you have consensual sex with your girlfriend while you are both high school students or pee on a guard rail at a baseball game and you can be flagged as a sex offender for life. People can look up your name and persecute you forever. Jails can pull this kind of entrapment behavior just to pick on you. Gang bangers will beat you to death.

It's just horrible to see the disparate level of punishment vs infraction.

I don't always agree with you but when you are right, you are right and this

IS nail-on-head right.

FTFM
 
2014-08-01 09:30:47 AM  

doglover: GhostfacedFiddlah: LoneDoggie:

maybe we can all agree (haha, it's the internet, not bloody likely) that murder causes the most long lasting psychological harm.

In the spirit of being a dick, I'm gonna have to contend that it causes the absolute shortest-lasting psychological harm.

I've never heard of anyone getting over it.


I've never heard anyone complain.
 
2014-08-01 09:35:20 AM  

jshine: m00: sprgrss: doglover: sprgrss: profplump: sprgrss: Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

You must not be familiar with the sex offender registry.

I support the creation of sex offender registries.  /em>

Well, morally, you're wrong. But luckily politicians don't have to follow any real codes of ethics.

How am I even remotely morally wrong?  Why should people not have the right to know if sex offenders live near them?


Out of curiosity, what list of crimes do you think people have the right to know about and what list of crimes they do not? Should all criminal records of every person be searchable on the web?

Given that the Constitution requires speedy and *public* trials, it only makes sense that the results of those trials (i.e., criminal convictions) be made public.


That's NOT what a sex offender registry is, and you know it.

There's a massive difference between the results of a trial being published in a newspaper and a requirement that someone register his address with the police every six months, and have that and a photograph published by the police in a searchable database.

Oh, and the Constitution DOES NOT require speedy and public trials.  It guarantees that the rights to a speedy and public trial are granted to the accused, it was put there to protect the people from secret courts and indefinite detentions without trial.  It was never intended to be used against the accused, and should not be treated that way.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
 
2014-08-01 09:56:27 AM  

LoneDoggie: DarkVader: doglover: .

And don't start about the rape and psychological injury either - I guarantee that a beating that severe is going to be able to cause at least as much if not significantly more psychological damage as a rape.

Yeah, going to have to chime in here and say that I think this comment is pretty much off the mark.  Sexual assault can have a lasting psychological impact on the sexual life of that person for years to come.  The aftermath can tear apart relationships due to the victim not wanting to engage in sex due to the association.

If you have a strong 'beat my wife on Friday night' thing going, a simple assault might have the same effect on your relationship, but I still thing you are talking apples to oranges here.


I'm not comparing apple to oranges at all.

ANY traumatic event can have psychological ramifications that can affect all aspects of a person's life.  I am in no way suggesting that rape isn't a traumatic event.  But to suggest that an assault isn't a traumatic event, or can't cause lasting psychological damage that can be just as destructive to relationships is absolutely ridiculous.

Psychological injury is not like physical injury - you can compare two people with broken arms and know that the repair techniques and healing time will be similar.  You can't do that with psychological injury - the same event, whether it be a rape or a punch in the face, will not have the same psychological effect on two different people.  Where one person might be able to shrug off a rape, another might not be able to leave home alone again.  But the same absolutely holds true for the face punch, I've seen assaults trigger severe PTSD and agoraphobia.
 
2014-08-01 10:03:56 AM  

DarkVader: LoneDoggie: DarkVader: doglover: .

And don't start about the rape and psychological injury either - I guarantee that a beating that severe is going to be able to cause at least as much if not significantly more psychological damage as a rape.

Yeah, going to have to chime in here and say that I think this comment is pretty much off the mark.  Sexual assault can have a lasting psychological impact on the sexual life of that person for years to come.  The aftermath can tear apart relationships due to the victim not wanting to engage in sex due to the association.

If you have a strong 'beat my wife on Friday night' thing going, a simple assault might have the same effect on your relationship, but I still thing you are talking apples to oranges here.

I'm not comparing apple to oranges at all.

ANY traumatic event can have psychological ramifications that can affect all aspects of a person's life.  I am in no way suggesting that rape isn't a traumatic event.  But to suggest that an assault isn't a traumatic event, or can't cause lasting psychological damage that can be just as destructive to relationships is absolutely ridiculous.

Psychological injury is not like physical injury - you can compare two people with broken arms and know that the repair techniques and healing time will be similar.  You can't do that with psychological injury - the same event, whether it be a rape or a punch in the face, will not have the same psychological effect on two different people.  Where one person might be able to shrug off a rape, another might not be able to leave home alone again.  But the same absolutely holds true for the face punch, I've seen assaults trigger severe PTSD and agoraphobia.


don't forget fistaphobia
 
2014-08-01 10:05:42 AM  

sprgrss: El_Dan: sprgrss: These people are getting civil treatment because they were deemed to be a threat to society.  Plenty of sex offenders serve their sentence and are released.

These cats require treatment to help them get over their urges hence the reason why they are civilly committed because it has been determined that they pose a risk to society.

No matter how you justify it, it's still imprisonment without most of the protections afforded to criminal defendants. If we want to keep certain people locked up for longer, there is proper a mechanism for that, which is legislation to make sentencing laws harsher.

/not a criminal, just concerned

No, civil commitments have the same protections as a criminal prosecution.  You have the right to an attorney, you have the right to put on evidence, you have the right to confront witnesses against you.

A judge has to find the defendant poses a continued threat to the public in order to commit.


It's utterly untrue to say the same protections exist.

The burden of proof is lower, "clear and convincing evidence" is not at all the same thing as "beyond a reasonable doubt".

And as you point out, a judge makes the determination, there is no right to a jury trial in many states.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report