Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
I read a lot every day and I am constantly amazed---saddened actually---to see the lengths some states will go to arrest someone on a sex crime.
This gentleman apparently wrote a fictional story of him have sexual contact with three girls in his church congregation. His wife was putting an ink cartridge in the printer and out popped this sheet of paper with the story on it.
http://tinyurl.com/pssfyvu
http://tinyurl.com/nvqxqvl
So it has come to this----basically prosecuting someone for their inner thoughts.
Did the wife confront her husband about it? Nope, straight to the police. I would think anyone with any sense would have shown him the story and allowed him to explain the paper she found. She even later told the police that several times she saw him viewing pornography on his computer.
Oklahoma apparently has a statute making it against the law to write about fiction stories regarding children. They call it "Possession of Obscene or Indecent Writings." And apparently it is treated like child pornography.
In fact in one article I read, it was equated to child pornography.
Now here is a guy who is just writing his thoughts on a piece of paper. Now let's remember that this story was only a fantasy, a thought in his mind, and there was not evidence that he would commit a crime.
Was what he was writing about distasteful? Probably Icky? For certain. But there were no pictures and it was just his thoughts.
My God, are we now prosecuting thought crimes in this country? Even if you find it terrible that he wrote such a story, it should not have been illegal.
Many people who want to prosecute CP with ridiculous sentences usually point to two things they want us to believe----------1) that every time the image of a child is viewed, it re-victimizes the child, and 2) by downloading the images, it creates a demand for more images to be made.
So I ask, what child was re-victimized in this story? Since it was purely fiction and there was no indication that Mr. Jones planned b a sexual assault against anyone, I ask----what child was re-victimized here?
And did him writing and creating the thoughts in his mind cause a demand and more to be produced?
My fellow friends, this is just a silly law they have passed to give an excuse to arrest more people they "think" "might possibly" "someday" "in the right circumstance" harm a child.
Another aspect of this story is that the wife, after she found the story, went straight to the cops.
I don't even know what to say when I read these articles.
rewdiazepam
This gentleman apparently wrote a fictional story of him have sexual contact with three girls in his church congregation. His wife was putting an ink cartridge in the printer and out popped this sheet of paper with the story on it.
http://tinyurl.com/pssfyvu
http://tinyurl.com/nvqxqvl
So it has come to this----basically prosecuting someone for their inner thoughts.
Did the wife confront her husband about it? Nope, straight to the police. I would think anyone with any sense would have shown him the story and allowed him to explain the paper she found. She even later told the police that several times she saw him viewing pornography on his computer.
Oklahoma apparently has a statute making it against the law to write about fiction stories regarding children. They call it "Possession of Obscene or Indecent Writings." And apparently it is treated like child pornography.
In fact in one article I read, it was equated to child pornography.
Now here is a guy who is just writing his thoughts on a piece of paper. Now let's remember that this story was only a fantasy, a thought in his mind, and there was not evidence that he would commit a crime.
Was what he was writing about distasteful? Probably Icky? For certain. But there were no pictures and it was just his thoughts.
My God, are we now prosecuting thought crimes in this country? Even if you find it terrible that he wrote such a story, it should not have been illegal.
Many people who want to prosecute CP with ridiculous sentences usually point to two things they want us to believe----------1) that every time the image of a child is viewed, it re-victimizes the child, and 2) by downloading the images, it creates a demand for more images to be made.
So I ask, what child was re-victimized in this story? Since it was purely fiction and there was no indication that Mr. Jones planned b a sexual assault against anyone, I ask----what child was re-victimized here?
And did him writing and creating the thoughts in his mind cause a demand and more to be produced?
My fellow friends, this is just a silly law they have passed to give an excuse to arrest more people they "think" "might possibly" "someday" "in the right circumstance" harm a child.
Another aspect of this story is that the wife, after she found the story, went straight to the cops.
I don't even know what to say when I read these articles.
rewdiazepam
I used to wonder when growing up why my grandfather hated what the world had become as being new to it myself I couldn't see it. I certainly see it now! I feel that I am a 2nd class citizen now who has no ability to enact any change and find myself more and more comfortable hiding under my rock until I die.
The movie is about a 14 year old girl (Sue Lyons) and a much older man (James Mason) having an affair and it intimated that the two were in a sexual relationship. Of course, being made in 1957 there was no nudity or sex scenes, but it left little to the imagination.
I don't know if there was ever a remake of the original Lolita.
Why is that film not banned in the United States? Why is not the director of that film arrested? If simple words in a story can get a person arrested---as it did with Mr. Jones---then it seems to me that a graphic movie would do the same.
Several years ago there was an author who wrote fictional stories about men having sex with much younger females, some as young as eight years old. The author of these fictional stories was arrested.
So where does all this stop? Prosecuted for a person's thoughts?
I am afraid this country is headed down the proverbial slippery slope and we will never recover.
Mr. Larry Jones, the person who wrote these stories, is from Oklahoma.
This is a prime example of why I tell all registrants to avoid states in the Bible Belt.
rewdiazepam
We already have the highest incarceration rate in the World and no where near the highest population. When a country has the highest incarceration rate in the World how can it still call itself the home of the free? The Code of Federal regulations (laws) is so enormous it is impossible for anyone to know what is against the law and what is not. Then many of the laws are based on emotion and not empirical evidence. In addition, so many laws (Federal and State) are so ambiguous that they are open to interpretation by LE and judges.
Its about control and keeping certain people in a dominating role (and others in a subjugating role).
Over the past 40 years, those people have been feeling their control slip out of their hands. Society has changed rapidly since the 1960's. The extreme laws are not about sex offense, or protecting children, or about the wellbeing of people. They are about keeping the patriarchy in place.
Look at the Duggars. They are unabashedly patriarchal and believe that the world should follow their ways. The purpose of having so many children is to spread their values and beliefs. Men are in control while the women "crank 'em out".
The pastors who have come to their defense speak about forgiveness. God's forgiveness. But guess who is actually deciding who God chooses to forgive? Not to offend anyone. We all have our beliefs, but some people take things way too far.
Two things to consider:
One is that matriarchal societies have always existed and continue to exist. Many people live is very different ways than we do.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/31274/6-modern-societies-where-women-literally-rule
Now, this comment is not about politics. Each of us will have a different reaction when they hear this lady's name, but Hillary Clinton, if elected, could have a very significant effect on all of this. Yes, she still represents politics as usual, but she has also worked tirelessly to promote rights and opportunities for women. When women are empowered, societies become more egalitarian.
Its going to interesting...
Ruth Ginsburg will retire within the next four years and be replaced by the President. A conservative Republican would most certainly appoint a conservative justice to take her place.
That would throw the Supreme Court to the right on most all issues, including criminal justice issues. As it stands now, the Supreme Court consists of four conservatives and four moderates with Kennedy being the swing vote on many issues.
Right wing justices are bad for us. Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Alito are all Republican appointed conservative justices and they usually make their decisions in favor of law enforcement. They certainly are not our friends.
Just my opinion.
rewdiazepam
I have my opinions on all those guys, most of which I will keep to myself. I will say, however, that Roberts has proven to be more thoughtful than I thought he would be.
Above is an excerpt from linked article.
http://www.cato-unbound.org/2015/06/01/galen-baughman/questionable-committments
This man, who was known to be innocent, was held in jail nearly 30 years. He would be in civil commitment now if the governor had not pardoned him...even though they all knew he was innocent. WT.....