| Posted: 21 Jul 2007 15:31 |
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Well about to leave so don't have time to say a lot, but I disagree with your assessment on what the biggest threat is. I think you are going overboard in your worries of risk to individual liberty here because we are dealing with crooks for one. I see the neighborhood information act as just part of their sentence.
Plus people don't ever get over being attacked like that. I don't know why you'd think otherwise. It's messes with them the rest of their lives. So it's not physical murder, but it murders who that person is or was to some extent. I'm not saying their life is over, and some probably take it better than others, but I feel no sympathy for the offender. Like I said the best thing we can do is make sure beyond a reasonable doubt the offender committed the crime, and then deal with them. I also disagree about the idea they aren't likely to reoffend. It only takes once to ruin somone's life. So I don't care if it's 10 or 20 years between offenses. Most of the time though from what I've seen on TV, these guys keep on and on and on. Ever watch NBC dateline?
Same guys keep going after kids over and over again.
__________________
|
| Posted: 21 Jul 2007 16:03 |
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
Welll, I didn't mean it that way, it's the way people react about ALCU.
|
| Posted: 21 Jul 2007 22:25 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
I was talking to preacher, pole.
__________________
|
| Posted: 21 Jul 2007 23:58 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh *heh heh*... this is like weird.
|
| Posted: 22 Jul 2007 03:19 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 118
Join Date: May 2007
|
Its all right if we disagree, Tim. But may I submit to you that most of the arguments you put forth for tracking sex offenders indefinitely can also be applied to tother crimes. We don't track murderers forever, do we?
And the main reason I say that a victim of a sex crime can go on to live a happy life is because I married just such a person.
|
| Posted: 22 Jul 2007 03:35 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 118
Join Date: May 2007
|
As an addendum, let me clarify that I have no sympathy towards child molesters. My point was a simple one.
A) Not all sex offenders are dangerous.
B)Even the ones that are dangerous are not as dangerous or as prevalent as the media would have us think. John Stossel has done some great work on this.
C) Even well-meaning legislation can become a very bad thing.
D) And so even though usually the ACLU is as crazy as an outhouse mouse, their opposition to a law doesn't mean I'm justified in a knee-jerk reaction in the opposite direction.
E) And anytime a government passes a law, the risk of curtailing liberty exists. As Jefferson said "When government expands, liberty contracts."
|
| Posted: 22 Jul 2007 15:06 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
They always do that.
|
| Posted: 22 Jul 2007 17:54 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 264
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
|
Quote:
I'm actually on nobody's side. I'm for liberty and if the ACLU is being stupid, I'll say they are being stupid, but if it is the rare occassion that they're being useful, I'll give credit where credit is due.
Quote:
you got to the point where... it is stupid.
Bingo. That is what its all about.
|
| Posted: 22 Jul 2007 19:28 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
|
Quote:
We don't track murderers forever, do we? Most murderers either stay in jail forever or end up in the electric chair, or at least they should.
Quote:
say that a victim of a sex crime can go on to live a happy life is because I married just such a person. I know they can, but you can't tell me it's easily forgotten about.
Quote:
And so even though usually the ACLU is as crazy as an outhouse mouse, their opposition to a law doesn't mean I'm justified in a knee-jerk reaction in the opposite direction. I just try to address issues from a common sense perspective. I don't tend to worry about the rights of criminals past their right to a good defense because that's what helps keep us from putting away innoccent people, at least it's supposed to. I'm all for making sure without any reasonable doubt a person's guilt or not, but once they are guilty let the punishment fit the crime.
I think I've clarified my opinion on the high schoolers and college kids scenario. It's the old dirty man picking on children that deserves to stay in the jail for the rest of his life if you ask me. So who cares about what happens to him when he gets out. If you're worried about their rights on the outside, I say keep them in jail till they die. I do think the law should make some clearer lines when it comes to the college kid high schooler scenario.
And spiritually speaking, I'm not saying that Jesus won't forgive anyone of anything, but that doesn't mean society has to take their word on it, and let em go.
__________________
|
| Posted: 23 Jul 2007 13:31 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 118
Join Date: May 2007
|
OK Tim, we do have some common ground here. I do think jail out to be a dark unpleasant place with very little creature comforts.But once somebodys out, until they do it again, I'm wiling to treat them more or less like a human being. I may not let them babysit, but I don't really need to track their every move. If I thought they were that dangerous I would say just put them down like a mad dog.
And boy is that a whole new discussion!
|
| Posted: 23 Jul 2007 15:56 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
I'm just saying they are lucky to get out of jail much less belly ache about being tracked. It's like a form of probation.
__________________
|
| Posted: 23 Jul 2007 18:11 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 118
Join Date: May 2007
|
Here's an example of the John Stossel stuff I was talking about..
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JohnStossel/2007/03/28/the_kid ...
|
| Posted: 23 Jul 2007 22:26 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Well ok, that report is just trying to put into the perspective the odds of a kid getting kidnapped vs the odds of any other tragedy. It doesn't change the awfulness of the crime itself, nor did it really ,from the way I took it, address how many kids are just taken advantage of through the internet at home when the parents are gone at work.
Watch that show just once and you'll see what I mean. There are thousands of predators out there.
Stossel's point is just that murders and kidnappings like we see on the news every week are rare.
__________________
|
| Posted: 23 Jul 2007 22:27 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Check http://reallypolitical.com/ and see if there is anything on there yet you all want to chat about.
__________________
|
| Posted: 23 Jul 2007 23:38 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
Ok how come you have a different avatar?
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 04:50 Last Edited By: Tim |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
What do you mean pole, are you talking about my other site? I don't have a avatar on that political one yet.
Pole have you visited my Superherouniverse.com site yet? I have a huge gallery section, and message board just like this except it's about all superheroes not just Cap. http://superherouniverse.com/
__________________
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 14:28 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
http://superherouniverse.com/messageboard/article944.htm
I'm visiting, click on the website. Your avatar is some guy.
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 14:41 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
On superherouniverse.com avatar is Jor-El from Superman the Movie. You haven't seen Superman the Movie? 
__________________
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 16:16 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
Which one?
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 16:53 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 118
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
Man, what are they teaching these kids in school nowadays?
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 16:55 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
I don't know.
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 18:27 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
This is sad, the kid's never seen Superman with Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman.
__________________
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 19:31 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
I've seen the most of them, I just never new your avatar was that guy.
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 20:55 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
It's ok, just watch Superman the movie otherwise you'll miss out on one of the great classic movies of all time.
__________________
|
| Posted: 24 Jul 2007 22:34 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
oh, Thanks for being a good sport Tim
|
| Posted: 24 Aug 2007 15:17 |
|
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 264
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Okay- in all likelyhood this is the last political post we'll see from me for awhile. This is because:
1.) Tim has wisely created a political site to hash out this stuff. (How about a link to that on the main Cap page?)
2.) I am really, really out of time these days. Unfortunately, gotta pay the bills before I write these looooooong posts.
But hold your applause folks- I've still got one more left in me for ole CaptainAmerica.us. This one is a response to Tim from a thread we got into earlier this summer. I never really had time to respond before leaving town AGAIN.
I hope all are doing well and that this summer has been fun. See you guys... well, soon- I hope I have some more time soon.
-Danny
-----------------------------------------------------
Quote:
For like the zillionth time, he brought it up in a letter to a clergy to encourage the clergy that government would not interfere with him, his church or religion (you know tell them what to do or not to do) not that his religion couldn't get involved with government.
And for the zillionth time, you are incorrect to paint Jefferson as a supporter of your position. Please read this. I have stood on the spot (as well as unfortunately, parked my car on the site) where this bill was eventually signed into law- if I'm correct, just before the first amendment was added to the constitution. Of course, TN has a radically different history on this issue, and I respect the right of folks from there to any different opinion they please. All the same, don't put words into TJ's mouth.
Quote:
Oh come on, you don't want us to reach a communist country with the gospel. Well, I guess it can't be worse than the time you were going to reach Iraq with democracy.
Quote:
Did you ever consider that advising gay people about the problems with their lifestyle might be helpful to them or done out of love not hostility? As ridiculous a concept as I think that is, the fact remains that it is NOT as important a goal as global poverty. How many gay people did Jesus "heal"? Where's THAT parable? No, instead He concerned himself with the treatment of the poor.
Furthermore, you should see a pattern developing here: You are mad at the ACLU because you think they are taking away people's right to choose what they want in their government buildings. I don't agree with your conclusion, but I do respect part of this preoccupation- that no overreaching, powerful outside entity should get involved with the business of everyday life.
And yet, despite people in this world begging Americans to share things they do want- like food, many of us seem preoccupied with forcing things they don't want, like ideology. One is an act of kindness, the other is just an expression of ego. Which do you think Christ would prefer?
Now, I realize that all Christianity has an evangelical aspect to it, but once people are aware of it- that's where actions begin to speak louder than words. How did Jerry Falwell "help" gay people by demonizing them over the years? Certainly he turned away more gay people from Christianity than he brought into the fold. And judging from how often Jesus mentioned it, homosexuality is nowhere near as big a sin as neglecting the poor.
I could easily go on about the actions of the good reverend, but I don't want this to be a huge ACLU style public beating of a dead evangelist. I'm sure even he had his good points (though apparently seldom televised).
The bottom line is that no one needs more intrusion in their life from outside forces to "fix" what is wrong with them. That brings me to this:
Quote:
You tell me what exactly the Christian right has done in recent years that would actually harm a individual's constitutional right.
Well, first they twice promoted the election of George W. Bush over a vast field of Republicans who would have made better leaders, but weren't as religious. And the violations? Off the top of my head he suspended habeas corpus, unlawfully spied on the American people, and fired US attorneys for not going after his political enemies. I mean, I could go on but that is enough to put him under the jail right? From your own file, he supported the imprisonment of federal employees without a fair trial. Constitutional violations a plenty and Bush is our clearest example of a "Christian Right" president. You may notice I just stuck to the secular offenses, as we're not going to agree on the ones he bases on religion.
Now that doesn't mean I'm against a leader who comes from a Christian perspective. I have actually been very impressed with Governor Mike Huckabee, even though I often disagree with him. It really bothers me that conservatives have gone actively searching for a "true conservative" or a "Reagan Republican" without a second look at the one guy in their party that might really mean what he says about compassionate conservatism. Huckabee WAS a preacher and IS compassionate as well as conservative. You'd think he'd have an edge in that he is not a cross dressing, 9/11 hawking, flip flopping, Falwell courting, Iraq destroying, old wife divorcing, perpetually lazy politician. From what I've seen of him, he likes all the stuff you tend to like- the same stuff I tend to dislike, but at least he is pretty straightforward about it.
I am sincerely asking, without sarcasm, "Why not Huckabee?" So far, all I can tell is that he seems to care about poor people.
Finally, as a point of fact, I must also dispute this:
Quote:
Invoking the name of God the way they used to would never stand with libs today.
Read up on Barack Obama. He has given plenty of speeches to that effect. So have John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, but they don't reach out to guys like you the way Obama does.
In any case, what I'm asking for here Tim is that you stop lending your support and your venom to those who want to impose their narrow political will on others through the law. That won't work anyway. Vietnam didn't work, prohibition didn't work, welfare didn't work, Iraq didn't work, the stamp act didn't work, religious monuments won't work- each just saw the rise of an opposing force the more they have been tried. Clearly the government has an obligation to stop lawlessness or immoral laws like segregation, but 99% of the time when the government makes a mandate out of a molehill- it is because a few similar people tried to force a view upon a lot of different people.
|
| Posted: 24 Aug 2007 15:45 Last Edited By: Pole805 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
A single vote by a San Francisco Board of Supervisors member whose grandfather emigrated from China seven decades ago has halted in its tracks a proposal to condemn as “hate speech†radio personality Michael Savage’s criticism of illegal aliens in the United States.
The vote tonight was 9-1, with third generation San Franciscan Ed Jew turning in the veto vote, after getting up and affirming Savage’s First Amendment right to express his opinion.
Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval had introduced a resolution condemning the radio talker. After the vote, he called for the tally to be rescinded and the proposal sent to committee, which essentially is a polite way of letting the issue die.
“For the record, I do not agree with comments allegedly made by Mr. Savage, but the First Amendment gives him the right to make those comments,†Jew said….
Earlier, one of the nation’s top civil rights attorneys offered his assistance to Savage in suing Sandoval. Daniel A. Horowitz of Oakland, Calif., wrote to Savage after Sandoval introduced his resolution.
“You have a strong federal civil rights action that you can file against Supervisor Sandoval and the city of San Francisco,†he advised. “You have a constitutional right to state your political opinions and no city official has the right to lie about what you said or to call for a mob to come to your door to threaten you and to try to have you fired.â€
Horowitz said the Civil Rights Act of 1871, designed to tame the terror of the Ku Klux Klan, can be used as the basis for a federal civil rights action against the official and the city. “You are protected by this civil rights act….â€
Thats people trying to stop the ACLU
|
| Posted: 24 Aug 2007 19:41 |
|
|
Registered User
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 11
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Tim, for the record, I agree with you on most of your posts. I think Cap would too. After all, a democracy is only as good as the people who support it.
It's amazing that people blame our president for all the evils in this world. While I don't agree with everything the man does, the media constantly and unfairly spews venom at him. I’m glad we’ve got a president with the balls to stand up for what he thinks is right.
Oh, and for the record: I think sex offenders should be castrated! Anyone saying that sex offenders are not dangerous should get their head examined.
Last year I took my 12 year-old sister to a school playground. I was shooting hoops across the street when some strange dude came up to her and asked if she would play ‘hide and seek’ with him. When I saw him talking to my sister, I immediate ran up to her and took her home. I later found out that this guy was a sex offender. A story in the newspaper last week told how he was arrested again for kidnapping another girl in our area. Oh, and for all you so called mercy-motivated people out there, I realize that not every sex offender is the same, just like every murder isn't the same!
|
| Posted: 25 Aug 2007 17:52 |
|
|
|
Administrator
Currently Offline
|
Posts: 1989
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Dude that was a close call. Hey if you get into the mood to rap about politics. I started a new site recently and we've got quite a huge debate going on. I'm the only conservative there so far. So stop by.
http://reallypolitical.com/
__________________
|
| Posted: 25 Aug 2007 19:03 |
|
|
|
Registered User
|
Posts: 1825
Join Date: May 2007
|
|
Me?
|
|
|
