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
He received 3,200 years for a single incident in Oklahoma----and he wasn't
even guilty. He was later exonerated by DNA evidence through the Innocence Project.
http://tinyurl.com/ok235bt
rewdiazepam
11,000 years.
Yes, 11,000 years. That is not a typo.
His release date is the year 9476. Maybe a little earlier with good time credits.
See for yourself.
http://tinyurl.com/cetnz87
This is in Oklahoma, a conservative state. This is another good reason for any registrant to stay out of the Bible Belt.
rewdiazepam
Between the two of them, they received over 32,000 years;
http://tinyurl.com/ocgaarr
rewdiazepam
Cop out answer.
This is a bi-partisan attack on RSOs. I am not defending any particular person liberal or conservative on their record and what they have voted for. I am looking at the ideologies and making an educated guess which will be more likely to support us.
Let me ask you two questions coastie and anyone else who refuses to answer the question because you don't like the answer.
1. Who are some of our biggest, vocal supporters?
People who study and teach criminology and the social sciences. They do research that we quote on a daily basis. They are the only credible voice in this mess of our injustice system when it comes RSOs.
2. Are college professors liberal or conservative?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html
http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2013/12/30/why-are-so-many-college-professors-politically-liberal/
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/10/24/survey-finds-professors-already-liberal-have-moved-further-left
But the mindset of the liberals toward sex offenders is much more favorable than that of the conservatives. The liberals are much more likely to give us some reform of these laws.
Follow this link------
http://tinyurl.com/2m8msp
Here is a visual image of the red vs blue states in the last few elections. The red states are the conservative, Republican states while the blue states voted Democrat and are more moderate. I do not really mention the word "liberal" as there are very few liberals in government.
Now look at the map more closely.
What color are the states in the Bible Belt, the area from Oklahoma down to Texas and going in an eastern direction, ending up on the east coast? Notice that the red states extend into the upper plains also. Of course, when you look at the map you will see that these Bible Belt states are red, conservative states.
Those red states are Republican, conservative states and they are the worst states for sex offenders. Almost everyone agrees that these states are toxic to sex offenders as they are normally more "tough on crime" than the other states.
Now look at the New England states in the Northeastern part of the country and the section in the far Northwest.
Those blue states are Democratic states, more moderate states and they are the more favorable states for sex offenders. Notice I did not say favorable, but MORE favorable when compared with the red states.
And, of course, there are a few exceptions in that Florida and California are both blue states. But those two exceptions should not be used to show that the more liberal Democrats are more difficult on sex offenders than the right wing, conservative, Republicans, as that is just not the case.
I thought a visual image might enlighten those in this debate.
rewdiazepam
So, here's another perspective. This guy has divided up the country according to the culture and values of each region. Of course, things could be broken down even further politically because areas around major cities tend to be more liberal while rural areas are more conservative.
Thought this might give a little more perspective.
That doesn’t bode well for gun control advocates, Woodard concludes: “With such sharp regional differences, the idea that the United States would ever reach consensus on any issue having to do with violence seems far-fetched. The cultural gulf between Appalachia and Yankeedom, Deep South and New Netherland is simply too large. But it’s conceivable that some new alliance could form to tip the balance.”
Very interesting read peek, thanks for posting it.
And yes rew, I do not think democrats are our friends at this current moment. I think it amounts to political suicide for a lot of politicians with their constituents to vote against these types of laws. But if you put on your prognosticator cap and look at what could possibly happen in the future, I think the future is brighter for us with people with are more willing to give second chances.
As I said earlier there is no such thing as a compassionate conservative but there is such a thing as a bleeding heart liberal. Go read the comments section of a lot of sex offender articles and you'll get people calling anyone that supports evidence based practices bleeding heart liberals.
I think that since our biggest, most credible, and most vocal supporters are liberal (college professors and criminologists) that our best chance someone will listen to them eventually would also be more liberal minded people.
I also think it's telling in the article peek posted that more than 95% of the people put to death were in the Deep South.
I've given you proof that you are wrong in your belief that SOME DAY the libs will change on this subject, well, they haven't in the last 40 yrs or so have they. Go back to my post about Georgia. I've never said that conservatives are any better on THIS issue, but on just about anything else? Too far off topic.
"Answer my question":
I can't because the only answer you will accept is the one you want, In other words, "Believe EXACTLY what I believe", or you're a biggot, homophope, hater etc... Typical liberal attitude.
An 'educated guess'? I'd accept if you said a belief, but I'll leave it alone....
Professors??????? Thanks for the giggle...Isn't Obozo a 'professor'??? Yep, he's doing a 'Bang up' job lmao...
"Those that can't do, teach"... 'Nuff said there.
Now I am done with you on this subject, it's become redundant and pointless.
One a side note, the places with the strictest gun laws have the highest gun violence rates in the country, Oakland, Chicago, Detroit, NYC, Baltimore, Atlanta, New Orleans to name a few.
Care to guess who controls those cities?
Many years ago states instituted laws that forced people with mental illness who are convicted of a sex offense to spend the rest of their lives in civil commitment - effectively handing down a death sentence after the person has served their time in prison. In Missouri, for example, 88 men have died in civil commitment because once in the only way out is in a body bag.
The argument states use is that a person with mental illness needs to be civilly committed because some day in the future they might commit another sex crime. Society turned blind eyes to these unconscionable acts being done that really are no different than what Hitler and the Nazi's did in concentration and death camps.
So, as they say, what goes around comes around.
States are now turning their attention to sex offenders without mental illness to implement the same or substantially similar laws that target people for merely thinking about a sex crime. While I would like to say that it will not be until enough people (and in reality this means men) who do not have mental illness are put in prison for thoughts that are deemed a violation of the law, that society is going to wake up, but in all probability by the time society does wake up, everyone will be in prison.
Yes, you are exactly correct. I have read about the civil commitment program in Missouri and it is outrageously unfair.
Good points.
rewdiazepam
As Independent pointed out, most college professors are liberals and our kids have become idiots with no idea how the real world works because those phd's have NEVER lived in the real world.
I had some very good teachers, and I had a some very libtard teachers, who, if they are still alive, would probably spit on me simply because I decided to give my service to this country...
How about these universities that allow their student to walk on, spit on and otherwise abuse MY flag. Where do you think they got the idea? Yes, unfortunately it's legal, but who taught these little assholes to be so hateful.....Yup, their teachers, and it has infiltrated down into the elementary schools.
Yes, I know you are a teacher and you may be a good teacher but I can only judge by what you post here.
Obviously you are liberal, you have stated that and I am with you that neither side is good for SO's.
I admit(as if there were any question) that I don't like the way this country is going, especially in the last 6 yrs. I don't know what you teach, but I am into very much into history, mainly the last few hundred yrs, but history in general, and the way i see it right now is that Rome is burning and it's not Nero doing the fiddling, It's Barry Obummer...I know, but right now we are "The fall of Rome".
It may be the "Most ridiculous quote you ever heard",)Though I doubt it) but the fact that it pissed you off means it is not altogether untrue...Maybe you don't try to indoctrinate your students but too many do.