| thomasquinn 32989 27.01.2007 07:59 |
javascript:cnnVideo('play','/video/law/2007/01/27/sanchez.sex.offender.cnn','2007/02/10'); (copy link to your navigation bar) A sodomy law from the fucking 18th Century. And still you call yourselves a civilized country?! Do you still burn witches too, perhaps?! |
| thomasquinn 32989 27.01.2007 08:00 |
The full first line is the link, btw. Including the semi-colon. |
| Haystacks Calhoun II 27.01.2007 09:09 |
Country? Yes. The county prosecutors? Shameful. Complete idiots. The idiots who changed the law in the state because of what happened in this case, but were too ignorant to make it retro-active? Complete ineptitude. Why do you insist on painting with such a broad brush? I don't think that anyone, other than the punk prosecutors in this case, is deserving of that. They are thes one that deserve to be in prison.... |
| Haystacks Calhoun II 27.01.2007 09:11 |
This is a better link, anyway. link |
| John S Stuart 27.01.2007 09:14 |
B.J. - what a great name for his attorney! |
| YourValentine 27.01.2007 09:46 |
What a horrible verdict - to send a good boy to prison for nothing. Sign the online petition and help with a small donation, they have paypal link |
| magicalfreddiemercury 27.01.2007 10:11 |
YourValentine wrote: What a horrible verdict - to send a good boy to prison for nothing. Sign the online petition and help with a small donation, they have paypal linkThanks for this link, Barb (and TQ for calling attention to it). I hope everyone signs the petition and donates. This situation is inexcusable. Everyone should be asking themselves what they would do if this happened to their child. If the law was overturned but specifically did not apply to your son/daughter, what would you do? Imagine the heartbreak. Convicted rapists get out in less time than this kid will. And he did nothing wrong. It's disgusting. The 'system' will have succeeded only in turning a boy with a bright future into a justifiably angry man. Just what society needs. |
| thomasquinn 32989 27.01.2007 10:37 |
Haystacks Calhounski wrote: Country? Yes. The county prosecutors? Shameful. Complete idiots. The idiots who changed the law in the state because of what happened in this case, but were too ignorant to make it retro-active? Complete ineptitude. Why do you insist on painting with such a broad brush? I don't think that anyone, other than the punk prosecutors in this case, is deserving of that. They are thes one that deserve to be in prison....The state that kept such a law for a century after it's overdue is retarded in my eyes. |
| PieterMC 27.01.2007 11:01 |
While I agree that the verdict is stupid you are once again painting the entire United States as an awful place. That state is not the only place in the entire world that has outdated laws. You are using this awful verdict as another opportunity to bash the United States. Trust me, you have NO idea what it's really like here. |
| Saif 27.01.2007 11:09 |
It has happened before in Georgia. Many husbands were arrested in the past for having been caught on tape anally fucking their wives. That is called 'sodomy' and it's a crime there. Georgia is a shitty state. Sex should be okay as long as the participants of the fuck(the fucker/fuckor/fuckist and the fuckee) are atleast or almost 13 years old and use a condom. Sex is a good thing. Not everyone has it, but everybody should. Putting a kid in jail just because of a one-year disparity between the supposed age of the "victim" and the legal age of consent is...gay. Teens have sex everywhere. They fuck in the USA, Japan, India, the UK, the street, inside sewers, underneath their parents' beds, within closets...yeah, just about everywhere. Fuck and let fuck. |
| Maz 27.01.2007 11:12 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Everyone should be asking themselves what they would do if this happened to their child. . . . And he did nothing wrong.To begin, the 10 year sentence is unfair, especially in light of what other child molesters have received (like that white schoolteacher mentioned in the article). But let me point out one thing: He helped plan a party that included younger teens, alcohol, marijuana, and videotaped sex. To say he "did nothing wrong" ignores those facts. If the 15 year old were my daughter, I would be justifiably angry with both her behavior and the behavior of those older boys. EDIT - ah, Pieter beat me to it. I agree with what he said. |
| Maz 27.01.2007 11:18 |
Saif wrote: Sex should be okay as long as the participants of the fuck(the fucker/fuckor/fuckist and the fuckee) are atleast or almost 13 years old and use a condom. . . . Fuck and let fuck.That is just incredibly stupid. |
| Haystacks Calhoun II 27.01.2007 11:23 |
The young man arrested was admittedly not a saint... That said, the punishment here does NOT fit the crime. Should he have been in legal trouble over what happened? Absolutely. 60 days in jail perhaps? 3-5 years probation? Sure. But, it should have had nothing to do with the sex act, and had to do with setting up the party where kids were drinking illegally, and using illegal drugs. |
| Serry... 27.01.2007 11:24 |
We should ban sex from our lives and lives of our children and lives of their children. No sex - no problem. Read the books rather! |
| magicalfreddiemercury 27.01.2007 11:40 |
Zeni wrote:Yes, it does ignore those facts, and so it's a mis-statement on my part. However, it was my understanding that the cause for his arrest and incarceration was the sex and nothing more, and so I agree with Haystacks...magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Everyone should be asking themselves what they would do if this happened to their child. . . . And he did nothing wrong.But let me point out one thing: He helped plan a party that included younger teens, alcohol, marijuana, and videotaped sex. To say he "did nothing wrong" ignores those facts. Haystacks Calhounski wrote: The young man arrested was admittedly not a saint... That said, the punishment here does NOT fit the crime. Should he have been in legal trouble over what happened? Absolutely. 60 days in jail perhaps? 3-5 years probation? Sure. But, it should have had nothing to do with the sex act, and had to do with setting up the party where kids were drinking illegally, and using illegal drugs. |
| Saif 27.01.2007 11:45 |
Serry... wrote: We should ban sex from our lives and lives of our children and lives of their children. No sex - no problem. Read the books rather!lmao.... |
| Maz 27.01.2007 12:52 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote:Yes, I agree with Haystacks as well. My only issue is that while we feel justifiably upset over the poor verdict, it should not ignore the other problems involved.Zeni wrote:Yes, it does ignore those facts, and so it's a mis-statement on my part. However, it was my understanding that the cause for his arrest and incarceration was the sex and nothing more, and so I agree with Haystacks...magicalfreddiemercury wrote: Everyone should be asking themselves what they would do if this happened to their child. . . . And he did nothing wrong.But let me point out one thing: He helped plan a party that included younger teens, alcohol, marijuana, and videotaped sex. To say he "did nothing wrong" ignores those facts.Haystacks Calhounski wrote: The young man arrested was admittedly not a saint... That said, the punishment here does NOT fit the crime. Should he have been in legal trouble over what happened? Absolutely. 60 days in jail perhaps? 3-5 years probation? Sure. But, it should have had nothing to do with the sex act, and had to do with setting up the party where kids were drinking illegally, and using illegal drugs. |
| Mr.Jingles 27.01.2007 12:55 |
|
| deleted user 27.01.2007 13:24 |
PieterMC wrote: While I agree that the verdict is stupid you are once again painting the entire United States as an awful place. That state is not the only place in the entire world that has outdated laws. You are using this awful verdict as another opportunity to bash the United States. Trust me, you have NO idea what it's really like here.Did you expect anything less from him? |
| Winter Land Man 27.01.2007 13:24 |
Now that's a stupid law. Two year age differences... it's like that up here in NH here too though. |
| iron eagle 27.01.2007 16:04 |
fine words and wisdom from SC |
| Winter Land Man 27.01.2007 16:42 |
A friend of mine was 17 and had sex with a 15 year old and they both said they were willing but the girls parents didn't like it and my friend almost had 30 days. Sucks for him because he didn't get it, but he can't get in any kind of trouble till he's 21, and it's on his record till then. |
| user name 27.01.2007 17:35 |
This isn't exactly on topic, but on a side note: If you don't keep up to date with sex laws, then it's understandable to accidentally break them. However, when kids who are fully versed in age of consent laws, etc. (and many, if not most, of them are) get in trouble for breaking them, I really can't have any sympathy for them. |
| PieterMC 27.01.2007 21:23 |
I agree. The sentence was harsh but at the end of the day the girl was 15 and that makes her a minor. |
| YourValentine 27.01.2007 21:43 |
"However, when kids who are fully versed in age of consent laws, etc. (and many, if not most, of them are) get in trouble for breaking them, I really can't have any sympathy for them." You don't think ten years of prison is an adequate response of the society to the "breaking of consent laws", do you? You don't think that each and every law is good and should be upheld through the centuries no matter what, do you? I don't want to bore you with laws we had under the Nazis but there are laws in democracies which have also to be revised because they do not apply to the social reality we live in. Not to have any sympathy for this boy is beyond my comprehension. |
| john bodega 27.01.2007 22:25 |
I wonder if he'd get ten years if he stabbed someone. |
| sparrow 21754 27.01.2007 22:47 |
what people do on their own time is their buisness, there was no harm in it (the word consensual stands out). it was their choice to do what they did. but to pull out a law that is old and defunkt is just stupid. |
| deleted user 27.01.2007 23:24 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I wonder if he'd get ten years if he stabbed someone.I'm not a student of law... but... I found this here : link Battery: Occurs when one intentionally causes substantial physical harm or intentionally causes visible bodily harm to another. The State needs to show some proof that an injury even a relatively minor one took place. The penalty is a misdemeanor unless: Second conviction for battery against the same victim. In such cases, the offense is a high and aggravated misdemeanor with 10 days to 12 months in prison, or $1,000.00 fine, or both. Third conviction for battery against the same victim is a felony. This carries punishment of 1 to 5 years in prison. <b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: However, when kids who are fully versed in age of consent laws, etc. (and many, if not most, of them are) get in trouble for breaking them, I really can't have any sympathy for them.In the video it said that if he had had sex with the girl (as opposed to receiving oral sex)it would have been a misdemeanor (therefore certainly not ten years). Yes, it would have still been illegal - but the disparity between the past punishment for intercourse and oral sex is absurd. Also, I don't think most people my age know about the age of consent - I'm not sure that adults would even know (most people go "whoopie, I'm legal !" when they're 18, even if they could have been legally having sex with people of certain ages already). And it can be different from state to state, gender to gender, and if you're having homosexual intercourse (and even differences if you're two girls or two boys). True, "ignorance is no excuse" - but the law he was sentenced by is on a level with it being illegal for a woman to cut her hair without consent of her husband. It seems silly that oral sex has a HIGHER punishment than intercourse - especially since some people don't even consider oral sex to be "sex". -- I was found the video (the link wouldn't play), but I didn't get to an article, so I don't know what went on with drugs or anything. Certainly, that should be punished. And him getting oral sex from an under-age girl should be, too. Though he was under 18 and she was willing (and not that much younger) - so I don't see it being a huge punishment. But to send him to jail for ten years for partaking in a sex act that I, personally, see as a lesser offence than actually having penetrative sex (there's the risk of STDs, but they would have to be doing something really... interesting... for there to be a risk of pregnancy) - that's just stupid. If there's no evidence that he forced her to do it, FAIR (and, in my opinion for this case, minimal) punishment should be given, and she should have to live with the fact that she willingly allowed herself to be videotaped giving oral sex. |
| user name 27.01.2007 23:55 |
A) I was in no way supporting or approving of that law. B) I doubt he was aware that he could serve up to ten years in prison for that offense. Hence, he would belong in the former category I listed. C) I stand by my assertion that if one knowingly breaks a law and is fully aware of its consequences, regardless of how illogical a law is, then he hardly deserves my sympathy. The only exception I can think of is if a law SIGNIFICANTLY infringes upon one's natural rights. Preventing teenagers from performing sexual activities, while an infringement of somebody's rights, is hardly significant. |
| Maz 28.01.2007 00:06 |
<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: If there's no evidence that he forced her to do it, FAIR (and, in my opinion for this case, minimal) punishment should be given,If he forced her (which there is no claim that he did), then that is rape. "Minimal" should never enter the equation if it is rape. <font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: and she should have to live with the fact that she willingly allowed herself to be videotaped giving oral sex.Odds on she was drunk and/or high when she was videotaped. |
| deleted user 28.01.2007 00:50 |
<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: and she should have to live with the fact that she willingly allowed herself to be videotaped giving oral sex.Odds on she was drunk and/or high when she was videotaped. If they got her drunk just to have oral sex - that's wrong and that should be punished (though I don't know what the sentence would be). But if they were all in it together - knowing they were going to get wasted and have a "party" at the motel, and it was her choice, though perhaps not the best choice, and she should learn from it and move on - even if she regretted it (of course, the age of consent legal punishment would still hold). I don't know... I can see that point that she was under age - and MAYBE another year would have made a difference in her judgement... : / <b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: C) I stand by my assertion that if one knowingly breaks a law and is fully aware of its consequences, regardless of how illogical a law is, then he hardly deserves my sympathy. The only exception I can think of is if a law SIGNIFICANTLY infringes upon one's natural rights. Preventing teenagers from performing sexual activities, while an infringement of somebody's rights, is hardly significant.I see your point, and it makes perfect sense to me logically, but some part of me still feels it's silly for the law to punish a 17-year-old for sexual actions with a 15-year-old. It's not really that significant, but unless she was unusually undeveloped, I see this as a case of two teens doing what hormones tell them is a great idea (unless they got her drunk) - something they and their parents should deal with and not a court. Unless I'm overlooking something, which is entirely possible. |
| Deacon Fan 28.01.2007 01:26 |
This is complete bullshit. The law needs to be lenient when both parties are under 18. There are many principles of law which state that a person has to have knowledge that they're doing something wrong in order for it to be a crime. Not only have they ruined a young man's life, they've wasted money and invested time that could have gone to lock up some scum who is truly a danger to minors. Even worse is that they've taken an innocent guy and put him in an environment where he's most likely going to learn to become a real criminal when he gets out. Nice work. |
| Crezchi 28.01.2007 02:38 |
Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro. |
| Serry... 28.01.2007 03:32 |
Crezchi wrote: Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro.No way, bro. For the last 80 years all Russians are responsible for invasion of Afghanistan, for communism, for the black holes in the outer space.... Now it's your turn, guys, enjoy! |
| Mr. Scully 28.01.2007 04:20 |
The law system in the USA is incredibly stupid. Everybody knows that but the lawyers lobby in USA is incredibly strong and it won't improve in the future I guess. That however doesn't mean that the whole country is bad. Americans should trash their laws and educational system while Europe should learn from America above all when it comes to business issues (founding a company in our country takes about 40 days - if you're very lucky!). Also people in the USA generally seem to be friendly while Europe is full of envy. |
| The prophet's song 28.01.2007 05:21 |
You know what really makes me sick? Over here you'd get the same ammount of time for murder. It's a bloody joke! |
| Sonia Doris 28.01.2007 12:06 |
Until a couple of years ago you would go to jail for being gay in my beloved country. Now they were thinking of legalizing same sex marriage, but the orthodox church started screaming and throwing crosses xD. It's really funny to live in Romania, you see all kinds of extremism - in the screaming about it form, coz we talk, we talk, but not a lot of action happens here... Althogh they did promulgate a law to stop the discrimination between the stallions and the mares while the country was under water.... :-) Man I love my country, it's so fun to live in! |
| user name 28.01.2007 12:57 |
On another side note, consensual sex while under the influence of alcohol or drugs should never be considered rape, unless the rapee (I suppose I made that word up) was unwillingly put under the influence by the rapist. However, when the rapee willingly gets drunk, and someone else takes advantage of that, both parties are equally at fault and no legal action should ever be taken or allowed. |
| Donna13 28.01.2007 16:31 |
|
| thomasquinn 32989 28.01.2007 16:33 |
Crezchi wrote: Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro.If I refer to the US and not to "the people of the US" that means I am speaking of THE GOVERNMENT. YES? If I say "The Netherlands" and not "The Dutch" I mean our GOVERNMENT? Is that so difficult to comprehend?!! |
| thomasquinn 32989 28.01.2007 16:34 |
The prophet's song wrote: You know what really makes me sick? Over here you'd get the same ammount of time for murder. It's a bloody joke!EXACTLY! That is the essence of the matter, whether he did something wrong or not, this sentence is a perversion of law! |
| PieterMC 28.01.2007 16:48 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:Perhaps it would make sense. However you contstantly point out faults with the US and barely mention anywhere else. Perhaps you just don't see it but you come across as HIGHLY anti-American.Crezchi wrote: Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro.If I refer to the US and not to "the people of the US" that means I am speaking of THE GOVERNMENT. YES? If I say "The Netherlands" and not "The Dutch" I mean our GOVERNMENT? Is that so difficult to comprehend?!! |
| Maz 28.01.2007 17:01 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: If I refer to the US and not to "the people of the US" that means I am speaking of THE GOVERNMENT. YES? If I say "The Netherlands" and not "The Dutch" I mean our GOVERNMENT? Is that so difficult to comprehend?!!Then you should also know that the Government of the United States has nothing to do with this court case. It is a state law, not federal. |
| thomasquinn 32989 28.01.2007 17:40 |
Zeni wrote:Fine, let me rephrase: THE STATE OF GEORGIA is guilty of living in the 18th century.<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: If I refer to the US and not to "the people of the US" that means I am speaking of THE GOVERNMENT. YES? If I say "The Netherlands" and not "The Dutch" I mean our GOVERNMENT? Is that so difficult to comprehend?!!Then you should also know that the Government of the United States has nothing to do with this court case. It is a state law, not federal. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 28.01.2007 19:19 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: Fine, let me rephrase: THE STATE OF GEORGIA is guilty of living in the 18th century.With regards to this law, I have to agree. I just saw a piece on "Religion and Ethics". Never saw this show before, but I stopped on it when they mentioned Georgia's new sex offender laws. They interviewed a woman who served time in jail (can't recall how much time) and is now and will be forever considered a sex offender. She has to register with the state and go for scheduled counseling until the day she dies. Not only that, but these new laws in Georgia extremely limit the areas where sex offenders can live, ie. not within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop, 1,000 feet of a church, school, playground, etc. Now, maybe on the surface that sounds good because it's an attempt to keep children safe. However, when they showed the map indicating where these forbidden areas were, it was clear the people were simply not welcome anywhere within the state of Georgia. This makes law enforcement personnel nervous. A sheriff they interviewed said the limited space these people are allowed to live in forces them into hiding. Chances are, they will stay in an area they are familiar with, but they won't register and they won't go for their 'treatments'. Yet, it's the sheriff's responsibility to know where these people are. It exhausts the department's funds and personnel and has not been shown to keep children any safer than previous laws, especially since only about 10% of registered offenders are actual offenders. 10%. One woman is now a registered offender because her underage daughter got pregnant and she (the mother) allowed her daughter's boyfriend to move into her house. Eventually, the young couple married, and the mother was arrested for a sexual offense. Her crime? Accomplice to statutory rape. This law applies to ALL offenders regardless of age, offense or state of well-being. They mentioned three specific people on the list that are required to move or they will be imprisoned for up to 30 years. Of these three people, one is in hospice care and has six months to live, another is suffered a debilitating brain disease and the other is likewise unable to do harm to anyone. But it doesn't matter. The law applies to everyone - regardless of circumstance. Back to the first woman I mentioned above. Not the mother, but the woman who did time and will now be a registered sex offender for life. You know what her crime was? At seventeen, she had oral sex with a sixteen year old classmate. Thankfully, a wide range of people - law enforcement, the civil liberties union, some church spokesmen, and even victim's advocates groups - are trying to fight this law in the courts. |
| user name 28.01.2007 20:43 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:The correct phrase should be this: The state of Georgia is guilty of having slight legal aberrations and inconsistencies.Zeni wrote:Fine, let me rephrase: THE STATE OF GEORGIA is guilty of living in the 18th century.<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: If I refer to the US and not to "the people of the US" that means I am speaking of THE GOVERNMENT. YES? If I say "The Netherlands" and not "The Dutch" I mean our GOVERNMENT? Is that so difficult to comprehend?!!Then you should also know that the Government of the United States has nothing to do with this court case. It is a state law, not federal. |
| john bodega 28.01.2007 21:44 |
"In such cases, the offense is a high and aggravated misdemeanor with 10 days to 12 months in prison, or $1,000.00 fine, or both. Third conviction for battery against the same victim is a felony. This carries punishment of 1 to 5 years in prison." Boy do I feel safer now... |
| AspiringPhilosophe 28.01.2007 22:41 |
I was gunna point out the whole state vs. federal law thing to Caspar, but it looks like people have beaten me to the punch. Yes, the law is backwards as hell, but it's also the state law, and since the federal courts haven't gotten or refuse to get involved, that's the law that applies. That being said, the law is incredibly stupid, but there are a lot of stupid laws on the books (for example, in Michigan a husband legally owns his wife's hair). But it's not neccessarily the stupid laws that are the problem here...it's the enforcement. Since the legislature in this case decided not to make the new law that fixes this retroactive, that's the problem, not the law itself. I, for one, question whether a white boy would have gotten the same punishment for the same crime in Georgia...I get the distinct whiff of racist overtones here. And this does point out the whole problem with many of these sex laws...guys have consenual sex with their sixteen year old girlfriends, get convicted of rape and spend the rest of their lives on the Sexual Offender and Predator list; I distinctly remember a case where this happend the the boy involved comitted suicide because he couldn't get them to leave him off the list, and that effectivly kills his future. It is easy to break these laws when you don't know about them, but that is half of the problem; parents don't tell their kids about these laws, or about condoms or birth control, because they don't want their kids to know about sex. The just say, don't do it, and expect that to work. Yeah right! For heaven's sake, how in the world do you expect them to make good decisions if you don't give them the tools to do it? Wake up, people. I hope they can get this kid out of prison, but I'm guessing since it's Georgia and the way the case has gone so far, it probably won't happen. I guess all that can be done is we can hope that the young man will be able to use this experience to not only help teach others, but also maybe to fight this injustice to prevent it happening again. Hopefully he won't let this defeat him. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 28.01.2007 23:11 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Yes, the law is backwards as hell, but it's also the state law, and since the federal courts haven't gotten or refuse to get involved, that's the law that applies.I agree with your entire post, but I wanted to comment on this. I learned from the show I mentioned in my last post that a federal judge has gotten involved after all. As of now, he's put a stay on the 1,000 foot zone law in Georgia (where a registered sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of a school, church, etc). The stay will remain until the case is heard and decided. Personally, I'd rather they put a stay on the insane labeling of certain people - like the teens we're talking about - as sex offenders, but, well, I guess this is a start. |
| iron eagle 28.01.2007 23:30 |
yea georgia sucks oh wait i live in georgia i should rethink my first thought |
| YourValentine 29.01.2007 03:08 |
Laws like this or the sex offender laws are against all human rights of self determination and against all common sense. It does not matter in which country they are applied, we should not mix up the two issues. The reason why people get upset that this happens in the USA is because they expect more freedom and justice from the USA. After WWII the United States were the role model for many European countries and now they are the only super power - what happens there matters to the whole free world. We would not expect anything else from African dictatorships or islamistic countries but the USA should not have such laws in my opinion. I do not think that "the law is the law if you like it or not" is a healthy attitude for citizens of a free country. It's easy to raise your voices, you won't go to jail for crizicising laws in your country, so use your voice and do not let such outrageous and unfair laws rule your lives. If people in the 1960s and 70s had not stood up against unfair and inhuman laws black Americans would not be able to use the same toilet as white people up to this day - or gay people would not be able to live in peace and practice their orientation - for example. |
| Mr.Jingles 29.01.2007 09:12 |
I remember once listening to the radio where they talked about the same subject. Some guy called telling that many years ago the parents of his then 17 year old girlfriend (he was 18 at the time) filed a suit against him for statuatory rape. To which he was not given jail time, but he was put under probation and labeled as a sex offender on his record. The whole incident ruined a good part of his life because he wanted to pursue a career as a police officer but he couldn't due to his "criminal record". The laws changed years after, but just imagine having your goals and dreams shattered thanks to old fashioned ultra conservative laws. |
| The Real Wizard 29.01.2007 11:27 |
YourValentine wrote: If people in the 1960s and 70s had not stood up against unfair and inhuman laws black Americans would not be able to use the same toilet as white people up to this day - or gay people would not be able to live in peace and practice their orientation - for example.Might I note that there are plenty of areas in the US where this still isn't true yet. |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 11:45 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:You may, and should indeed. Whilst I am labeled as being 'anti-American' (and incorrectly so), some of you 'free thinking *good* Americans' should get off your asses and actually *DO* something about that. The US is in Iraq because that country didn't treat its people right...now make sure your OWN country is in order before you police the world again.YourValentine wrote: If people in the 1960s and 70s had not stood up against unfair and inhuman laws black Americans would not be able to use the same toilet as white people up to this day - or gay people would not be able to live in peace and practice their orientation - for example.Might I note that there are plenty of areas in the US where this still isn't true yet. |
| Maz 29.01.2007 12:06 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: some of you 'free thinking *good* Americans' should get off your asses and actually *DO* something about that. ...now make sure your OWN country is in order before you police the world again.There you go with overgeneralizations. And you wonder why you are labeled "anti-American" by many users. I suppose more internet ramblings on a Queen forum is good place to start in our "Free Thinking Good Americans" quest to change our country; it seems to work for you. |
| user name 29.01.2007 13:37 |
"The law is the law if you like it or not," is indeed an unhealthy attitude, but any law that does not significantly infringe upon one's natural rights should always, always be followed. Just because the law should be followed doesn't mean that one should not try to change it. Just don't be stupid and break the law before it's changed. |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 14:54 |
You've got a hell of a lot to learn about how changes happen, MM. |
| iron eagle 29.01.2007 15:25 |
theres a helluva lot to learn about the people of this country you really should take your rose colored glasses off so you can see the whole picture and not just bits and peaces that afirm your slanted perception |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 15:29 |
It's not my problem if you fail to grasp what I'm saying, and would rather replace it with your own distorted view of what you would *like* for me to have implied. |
| iron eagle 29.01.2007 16:36 |
you *never* have a problem its always *someone elses* problem its all a bore for me really and as said in a earlier post i shouldnt be surprised at all by your attitude/comments and admitted prejudice |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 16:39 |
Do with it as you please. There's no use arguing with one who is immune to sense anyway. |
| Mr.Jingles 29.01.2007 16:58 |
Here's a movie I'd love to see: CASPAR: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Netherlands |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 18:21 |
Don't you think I'd have something better to do? Like counting grains of sugar? |
| Mr.Jingles 29.01.2007 18:22 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: Don't you think I'd have something better to do? Like counting grains of sugar?That's what I'm doing right now... ...3465 3466 3467 3468 3469... |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 18:24 |
I think you doubled one around 1265 or 1266. So that means starting over yet again. |
| iron eagle 29.01.2007 19:19 |
there you go again... dont like my post decide what and who i am by a few words.. you do that alot around here talk about pompus, self-centered, misguided arrogance! oh wait i forgot...its my problem not yours... it must be very difficult to be so young and so perfect at the same time |
| AspiringPhilosophe 29.01.2007 19:28 |
Caspar, it's not up to us to change the law...the federal law doesn't say that. It's the state of Georgia that needs to change the law, and only citizens of the state can vote to change it. The most we can do is apply outside national pressure, which this story on the national news is effectively doing. Other than that, everyone outside of Georgia's hands are tied. Besides, laws don't get changed over night. You can't just snap your fingers and fix things. On a side note...I realize you may not think you do, but you do come off as very anti-American based on the way that you say things. You never seem to point out when any other country does anything wrong...and don't hide behind the "US is a superpower" thing, because we aren't anymore since the troops are bogged down...China is the only superpower now. Maybe if you started pointing out inconsistancies in other countries...perhaps even your own...you might come across as more unbiased. Just a thought. |
| thomasquinn 32989 29.01.2007 19:36 |
I'll let you in on a little secret: I spend quite a lot of my time on pointing out the problems in my country. The only difference being: they are of no interest to those on an international forum, as my country doesn't have nukes and a problem with international restraint; neo-nazis growing in numbers and government corruption exceeding novelists' wildest dreams are of no interest when they occur in Holland. But rest assured that I spend far more time on the problems here than on the US. Heck, it's landed me a file with the secret service just for being in a protest. |
| user name 30.01.2007 01:45 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: You've got a hell of a lot to learn about how changes happen, MM.How changes tend to happen and how they should happen are two entirely different things. |
| YourValentine 30.01.2007 04:03 |
CMU girl, I think I brought up the "super power" thing (and I am sure the USA is still so much stronger than China). I only wanted to point out why things happening in the USA are so much more important to the rest of the Western world than vice versa. In fact, nobody here disagreed that the verdict about the young boy in question is wrong, the whole argument was about off-topic issues. I understand that none of you Americans here like the raging attacks by TQ, I do not like them, either. I am not happy to be blamed for all the injustices that happen in my own country, either. I am used to it, I am blamed for the atrocities that happened before I was born. In my country we are brought up to live with the collective guilt. I have often wondered what would have happened if only one out of 10 Germans had stood up against the Nuernberg laws that deprived the Jews of all rights. Would the Nazis have been able to enforce these laws if 8 million people had protested in Berlin? Most likely not. It was dangerous to do, it was a dictatorship and I am NOT comparing the Nazis with the USA or the Nuernberg laws with US sex offender laws. However, I am truly convinced that we are guilty of all the injustices and human rights violations comitted in our countries if we just watch and do not raise our voices. It's not dangerous today, it's only an email to send or a membership fee to pay or a phone call to make. When we do not get involved and do not tell our congress members or whoever is in charge that we disapprove, we are guilty. If only one out of ten citizens sends one single email of protest each week in cases of injustice - imagine the difference. |
| Crezchi 30.01.2007 06:27 |
Serry... wrote:LOL That made no sense what so ever.Crezchi wrote: Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro.No way, bro. For the last 80 years all Russians are responsible for invasion of Afghanistan, for communism, for the black holes in the outer space.... Now it's your turn, guys, enjoy! |
| Crezchi 30.01.2007 06:30 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:Is it so difficult to comprehend that you have already made such accusations about the whole US? Come on dude, i am just sick of people labeling everyone and NOT the government! When your say "The US is so fucking stupid", that statement means, everyone who lives there. Learn the english language, and specify, i expected better from you, since you are usually precise on your ignorant rants.Crezchi wrote: Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro.If I refer to the US and not to "the people of the US" that means I am speaking of THE GOVERNMENT. YES? If I say "The Netherlands" and not "The Dutch" I mean our GOVERNMENT? Is that so difficult to comprehend?!! |
| Crezchi 30.01.2007 06:32 |
YourValentine wrote: CMU girl, I think I brought up the "super power" thing (and I am sure the USA is still so much stronger than China). I only wanted to point out why things happening in the USA are so much more important to the rest of the Western world than vice versa. In fact, nobody here disagreed that the verdict about the young boy in question is wrong, the whole argument was about off-topic issues. I understand that none of you Americans here like the raging attacks by TQ, I do not like them, either. I am not happy to be blamed for all the injustices that happen in my own country, either. I am used to it, I am blamed for the atrocities that happened before I was born. In my country we are brought up to live with the collective guilt. I have often wondered what would have happened if only one out of 10 Germans had stood up against the Nuernberg laws that deprived the Jews of all rights. Would the Nazis have been able to enforce these laws if 8 million people had protested in Berlin? Most likely not. It was dangerous to do, it was a dictatorship and I am NOT comparing the Nazis with the USA or the Nuernberg laws with US sex offender laws. However, I am truly convinced that we are guilty of all the injustices and human rights violations comitted in our countries if we just watch and do not raise our voices. It's not dangerous today, it's only an email to send or a membership fee to pay or a phone call to make. When we do not get involved and do not tell our congress members or whoever is in charge that we disapprove, we are guilty. If only one out of ten citizens sends one single email of protest each week in cases of injustice - imagine the difference.Great post Barb! |
| ***Marial-B*** 30.01.2007 06:35 |
Serry... wrote:But that's unfair!!!!!!!!Crezchi wrote: Yes this is totally fucked up. But TQ, quit talking shit about 'us', we as people are NOT responsible for everything that happens, ok? You sound like Osama! Just because we live here, does not mean we agree. Good day bro.No way, bro. For the last 80 years all Russians are responsible for invasion of Afghanistan, for communism, for the black holes in the outer space.... Now it's your turn, guys, enjoy! I'll still blame Russia for Comunism :P |
| AspiringPhilosophe 30.01.2007 07:59 |
YourValentine wrote: CMU girl, I think I brought up the "super power" thing (and I am sure the USA is still so much stronger than China). I only wanted to point out why things happening in the USA are so much more important to the rest of the Western world than vice versa. In fact, nobody here disagreed that the verdict about the young boy in question is wrong, the whole argument was about off-topic issues. I understand that none of you Americans here like the raging attacks by TQ, I do not like them, either. I am not happy to be blamed for all the injustices that happen in my own country, either. I am used to it, I am blamed for the atrocities that happened before I was born. In my country we are brought up to live with the collective guilt. I have often wondered what would have happened if only one out of 10 Germans had stood up against the Nuernberg laws that deprived the Jews of all rights. Would the Nazis have been able to enforce these laws if 8 million people had protested in Berlin? Most likely not. It was dangerous to do, it was a dictatorship and I am NOT comparing the Nazis with the USA or the Nuernberg laws with US sex offender laws. However, I am truly convinced that we are guilty of all the injustices and human rights violations comitted in our countries if we just watch and do not raise our voices. It's not dangerous today, it's only an email to send or a membership fee to pay or a phone call to make. When we do not get involved and do not tell our congress members or whoever is in charge that we disapprove, we are guilty. If only one out of ten citizens sends one single email of protest each week in cases of injustice - imagine the difference.Yeah, Barb, I did bring up the Superpower thing. And I'm not saying the US isn't a superpower anymore...but we are definately on the decline. We may still have impact on the world stage militarily, but other countries with access to things like nukes (Russia, Israel and India for example) are beginning to be in a better position to make an impact, especially since they have the troops to spare if they needed, and we don't. Economically, China has surpassed the US as being a superpower, if for no other reason than for the US budget deficit, which keeps balloning every day. Culturally, well, that's a different can of worms. Suffice to say that the US used to be the example of how to behave in the world (not that we were ever particularly good at that to begin with) but now the view has changed worldwide, with that you can't disagree. It's gone from, "Let's follow the US policies are far as we can" to "See what they are doing? Let's not do that...ever". Honestly, even as an American I can say that I really don't care about TQ's attacks on the US...most of the time there is a grain of truth down there somewhere which I agree with. I'm not a very nationalistic person, and to be honest most of the time I'm downright embarassed that I am an American because of the reputation that will proceed me everywhere I go. I was just pointing out that the process of change looks like it has begun from the article (the lawyer working pro-bono and with legislators and such) and there isn't anything the rest of us can do beyond that point, besides draw attention to and condem the issue, which the national media has now done. We can't vote on whether Georgia passes a law that will free this young man...only Georgians can do that. Even if the federal court gets involved (and someone earlier said it was going to) our hands are tied, because the people have NO control over the judiciary, who are picked by the president with the sole purpose of interpreting the law passed by legislators. We may have a smidgen of control over the legislators, but not a whole lot. Brilliant post though, Barb. In fact, that's the subject of a book written by a professor from my history department...well, kind of. The book |
| Donna13 30.01.2007 10:13 |
|
| YourValentine 30.01.2007 11:18 |
@CMU History Girl In this particular case it's very easy to get involved. Just sign the online petition, you do not even have to send an email to someone. Donate a few dollars to support the case if you are able to. link Imagine that 50 000 people sign the petion - that would make an impression. The more people just say: "I disapprove" the bigger the chances are that a change happens much faster. You do not need to live in Georgia to voice your opinion. Amnesty Intl campaigns are mostly international, you get the case, the email address or postal address where you can send your petition and there have been many people released from prison after such campaigns. It's a very rewarding thing to do and does not need much effort. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 30.01.2007 11:58 |
Will do....but recognize that once we sign the petition, power is out of our hands. We can't make them do anything, at that point all we can do is just hope that common sense will kick in. That was all I meant when I said we couldn't do anything. Write petitions, e-mail, that's all fine and dandy. But ultimately, it may not lead to anything. We don't actually have the power to vote to change the law...that lays with the citizens of Georgia. |
| PieterMC 30.01.2007 12:29 |
Actually this law is being rewritten in Georgia already. link "As the court considers Wilson's appeal, the Georgia legislature is rewriting the law that sent Wilson to prison. In a bill that has passed the House and is pending in the Senate, the crime would become a misdemeanor, punishable by no more than a year in prison, or even probation. And anyone convicted would not have to register as a sex offender." What is more surprising from that article is this. "And in Georgia, that they'd had oral sex made matters worse. Until 1998, oral sex between husband and wife was illegal, punishable by up to 20 years in prison." |
| Haystacks Calhoun II 30.01.2007 12:47 |
They DID, if I read the ESPN article right, rewrite the law already... Problem with this case is, this kid was the sole reason form them rewriting the law, and the people behind getting it re-written were too ignorant of the system to make the new law retro-active. Essentially, at this point, that is the problem. |
| john bodega 30.01.2007 12:49 |
"And in Georgia, that they'd had oral sex made matters worse. Until 1998, oral sex between husband and wife was illegal, punishable by up to 20 years in prison." That Blows |
| Mr.Jingles 30.01.2007 13:33 |
Zebonka12 wrote: "And in Georgia, that they'd had oral sex made matters worse. Until 1998, oral sex between husband and wife was illegal, punishable by up to 20 years in prison." That BlowsWhich means that in the state of Georgia you'd get: For a 69: 40 Years For a GOLDEN SHOWER: 60 Years For a DIRTY SANCHEZ: Life sentence For a CLEVELAND STEAMER: Electric chair For any of the above with the same sex partner: Listening to Bob Dylan's entire catalog. |