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 think the term "Red State Model" is a better descriptor for what we are talking about rather than Republican and Democrat, as there truly is tremendous variability in each party.
What amazes me is that, despite incredible failures like described in this article, this kind of thinking continues to be very popular. Perhaps its part of the American dream (delusion) that we all think that we could be the rich one who will be on the receiving end of these kinds of economic structures.
Brownback talks about using entitlement programs to try to force people back into the workplace. That is truly a delusion. While in my kind of work I see many, many people who are not working and I wonder why, I also know that many people don't work because they really can't. Workplaces for the most part are highly physically and cognitively demanding. Many, many people are not able to do that.
So, who takes care of them? Not the people controlling the Red State Model. To me, Brownback's logic is equal to cutting off someone's legs to force them to walk and then blaming them because they can't.
Frankly, I prefer the "Blue State Model". Hubby has been out of prison for nearly a week. I have had the greatest (wonderful) shocks of my life. No GPS, no community notification ("registry is enough"), no signs, no labels. They are not requiring him to work so he can just retire. He has a list of limitations and has to register, as well as get counseling and polygraph/drug testing, regularly, but it is going to be livable!!
BTW. In my state, governor, lt. governor and AG are all Democrats. They are definitely Blue State Model in a purple state. They quietly allowed these changes to happen. They were the answers to my prayers!
News like this always energizes me. I see so many sad stories in not only my work here, but also in prison reform that when I see a guy able to be left alone and live his life after prison, it is like a breath of fresh air.
Everyone needs to read this and realize that there is life after prison and there IS life on the registry. That life is different for sure, but not necessarily worse. People can and do go on with their life after these tragedies and your husband just proved it.
God bless you, your family, and your husband.
rewdiazepam
On a side note many believe that Scalia is totally against gay rights and same sex marriage but the reality is Scalia actually authored the original brief arguing for a Constitutional right to same sex marriage as part of his dissent in a sodomy case. The reasons for his dissent in that case are complex and nuanced but It's his logic and reasoning presented there that's being used right now to support gay rights and he pointed out 12 years ago that that's exactly what would happen.
I say this not to stir the pot but to point out there's always a lot more going on in the cases the Supreme Court hears than the way a particular justice voted.
This is my last post directed to you on this thread...
I give you documented facts and you get mad and again can't rebut with any facts.
How about this, liberals had FULL control of the three branches of government from 2008-2012, WH, Congress(Both Houses) and DOJ. Show me just one democrat that lobbied to ease restrictions on SO's during that time, just one. You can't. I can't tell you, and you can look it up, The DEMOCRAT controlled Senate and House passed the reauthorization of the AWA which was signed by a DEMOCRAT President. and it was co sponsored by the Chairman of the Democrat Party, Debbie Wasserman Schultz...
Do you recall a few years ago in Georgia when the REPUBLICAN controlled State House EASED the residency restrictions? No? Well they did.
One last time, I live in the most conservative state in the country, yet it is probably the easiest place for an SO live...Can't say that for any liberal controlled state.
I can't understand how you don't see this. Well, like I said in another post, "Be careful of what you wish for".
"Just the facts please" Sgt Joe Friday.....
You all suck in my opinion!
Your answer, your nothing but the facts, is neither have supported us. That we agree upon. I am not debating that point. I'm asking everyone to look into a crystal ball and predict based on the stances of liberals and conservatives whoch side is most likely to help us in the future.
This is what we are looking for. Red politicians in this state had actually started some of this and it is being carried forward by blue politicians. Its not always about red and blue but about who is thinking things through instead of relying on raw emotion.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/California-First-Conviction-of-Child-Molestation-Through-the-Internet-306161581.html
You guessed it, California. Can other states be far behind?
This is way too much!!!