Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

In relevance to previous threads on the terror/sexpest paranoia this
piece of news caught my attention; a 22 year old guy in Manchester,
England was sentenced to a month in jail and put on the sex offenders
register for 7 years for slapping the bottom of a woman while he was
drunk and then walking off laughing. The woman happened to be an
off-duty police officer who arrested him. It was also found that he was
carrying a knife. Some have thought that placing him on the sex
offenders register for 7 years was far too harsh.
Now, regardless of that, what caught my attention about the whole thing
was this: in response to the outcry about the harshness of the sentence
by some, the police woman who arrested him, whose bottom he slapped,
talked to the paper, and here's part of what she said...
""If he had done it to someone else and they had put up a fight or an
argument, who is to say he wouldn't have got the knife out of his
pocket?
"Who is to say in another period of time he might not graduate to
something more serious? Then people would be asking why something
wasn't done sooner.
"He is on the sex offenders' register to be monitored, so that it can
be properly evaluated whether he is a risk or not. He was drunk at 11am
and that says he was not in control of himself. I don't know this guy,
I don't know what he's capable of."
Now what does this remind me of? Hmmm, it reminds me of Ashcroft, when
asked about detaining terror suspects indefinitely without trial and he
responded along the same lines, ie, who's to say if he lets them go
because he doesn't have enough evidence against them they wouldn't go
and blow up a place. In other words, I find it quite alarming that a
police officer would use the argument that people could go on and do
things they haven't done yet, because the principle in the law is that
you're innocent until proven guilty, and you shouldn't be punished for
crimes you haven't yet committed. Sounds like we may soon be
approaching a Minority Report society, albeit one without the required
prescience.
The news articles
http://tinyurl.com/sye7k
http://tinyurl.com/zonev

Mike Henley

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

Yeah....These kinds of crimes go in and out of fashion, like women's
shorts....Right now, sex crimes are in fashion, so everybody gets accused of
one. If some bum is seen peeing on the street, he gets accused of a "sex
crime".....:^)

William Graham

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

dnZ2d@comcast.com:
Oh I quite agree, but the lady cop isn't the one who decides what the actual
charges are, the prosecutor decides that and the judge decides (usually in
agreement with the prosecutor) what the punishment is. Even if the lady’s
emotions did get the better of her
I agree, key cases in point are the way drinking and driving cases are
handled, and also child/spousal abuse.
If a person falls asleep and drifts across the centerline and hits and kills
an oncoming driver, he had a tragic accident, but if he had 2 drinks before
driving, he will likely be charged with vehicular homicide.
Child abuse/spousal abuse hotlines are used as much for revenge or a type of
weapon as for what they are intended. Not only are they, largely, a huge
waste of manpower for under staffed law enforcement agencies, but also family
services, and the court system. Many L.E.O.'s think of women’s shelters as
the local man haters club (To put it mildly).

Rusty Shakleford

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

I agree that he should take responsibility for his own drunk actions, but do
not agree that slapping a woman on the rear end is a, "sex crime". If he had
slapped a man on the rear end, would that have qualified as a sex crime? -
If he had slapped her on the face, would that have been a lesser crime?

William Graham

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

While I would agree than there are people on the 'sex offenders' list
that probably should have been handled in other ways, the person
mentioned should not be able to use 'I was drunk' as any excuse. I find
it unlikely that the person became drunk accidentally, which means he
has to take responsibility for hie actions while in that state.

Ron Hunter

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 16:14:22 -0700, William Graham added these
thoughts to the list:
What do you mean useless? It can provide content for any number
of milk carton mug shot TV shows. They're very popular with
millions of suspicious, paranoid neighbors. John Walsh's America's
Most Wanted? Cops? Choose your poison.
"Bad boy, bad boy. Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?"

ASAAR

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

I believe that all the "gitmo" prisoners who have half a chance of being
innocents have already had their stories told by the news agencies, and are
free. The ones remaining are there for good reason. They are known
terrorists and insurgents who's release into the society would be dangerous
to the rest of us. In any case, I doubt that any of them are there for some
non-terrorist related, personal vendetta reason.....(John Ashcroft's
daughter's lover, for example) But, as I say, you are perfectly welcome to
take up the case of any of them that you want to champion.......

William Graham

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

It's perfectly obvious to me that the lady policeman should have arrested
the guy for public drunkenness, rather than for a sex crime, and he should
have just spent the night in the drunk tank, and then been let go....End of
story....The idea that he should get on a sex offender's list is
ridiculous....Not only an imposition on him, but it cheapens the usefulness
of such a list to have people like that on it. As a matter of fact, the list
we have here in the US has already been so cheapened by being full of people
who aren't sex offenders at all.......It is full of 18 year olds who have 17
year old girl friends whose mother's don't like them, and have prosecuted
them, as well as several other types who aren't sex offenders either. It's
typical of everything the government gets involved in.....rapidly becomes
useless, but remains a good excuse to spend the taxpayer's money......

William Graham

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

The sad part of it all is, that if any of the pilots and/or flight crew of
any of the four 9/11 planes had been armed, the plane that person was on
wouldn't have been hi-jacked, and would have landed safely on an
airstrip....That's why I am in favor of EVERYBODY being armed, all the time.
Certainly all flight attendants and pilots should be armed....That's a
no-brainer to any conservative.....

William Graham

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

Where casioculture@... is concerned, the "OT" is implied, and near
zero content value should be assumed for all of his posts.

ASAAR

Re: Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

...
And not even the common courtesy of an "OT" before your irrelevant spew?

Helen

Content - Update on the terror/sexpest paranoia

Found 20 post(s). Page 1 of 2
| 1 | 2 |

Kjøkken - Forklift Fuel Cells - Superspeed Usb Drives - David Soard - Existenzgründung

Photoshop questions