KrustyKidd

We are all prison wardens, so know far more than she. Interesting topic. Too much for here but will say that it plays a good part of it, but is not all.

I got the three page one. It had my address printed on it and I had to fill in my name. As i live by myself, it was pretty much done so I sealed the envelope.

How about doubling their sentence if they act up? How about solitary confinement? How about transfer to a prison up at Alert? How about bread and water alone in your cell until you behave yourself? Draconian punishment to instill positive beharvior is only workable in theory. People in groups, when faced with nothing but a downside just don't give a shit, and, become unmanageable, angry and, begin to bond in a directional manner to gravitate their anger to the logical focal point of their misery. The sort of answer to the problems that you propose here is what caussed many a monarch and government to be overthrown throughout history. As I said before, to implement somthing like this would reguire an almost one for one guard/inmate ratio. Another thing that seems like a bleeding heart progressive moron would say does ring true here. That is, that in such a situation, a person going in for say, fraud, shoplifting or whatever, would most certainly come out of this 'gulag' type of situation as a very hardened and determined individual. Rehabilitated or just angry? Whatever the case, they would be miles more dangerous than before, hope they would use that power for good, and not evil.

Nah, read about people that did though.

I said it before, just make them prisons in my town. We can always use property values going up and this porn star gig I have going is getting old hat. Need a new job that pays good.

I disagree. It has helped me keep track of my best caulking gun. Or shoud I say 'Gun' 'caulking' '2 - 15 mm' '1023857465' 'right hand corner of shed, hanging up beside #2 - 'gun' 'soldering gun' '02 - 05 mm' '2748374659' 'right hand corner of shed beside # 3 - 'gun' glue' .............

Ten years with an illegal firearm is too lenient? I think with the word out on that one that nobody in their right mind would be very non chalant about carrying to the bar or store in the first palce. not to mention be willing to cross a border smuggling it, not to mention trading a glock for a bag of cke etc. therefore, the item would be soon rare on the street save for those who intend on commiting an actual crime with it. Sorry to say but you can't do that. If you simply throw all people into the pit until their sentence is over with no priviliges, you get a bunch of people who have no reason to be managable. A very difficult situation to administrate when you consider that inmates outnumber guards four to one. Before the ratio gets to one for one, I, as a taxpayer would much rather see that the number of inmates goes down through detterence.

I disagree. The object is to recognize behavior, not have a victim count. - read on ......... With jails being over run with inmates it is highly unlikely that a judge would award a two time mugger a life sentence for jaywalking. There is a bit common sense n the justice system. And, it is highly unliekely that a person on his or her third parking ticket offence will suddenly find themselves swinging a spike maul in a quarry somewhere in Utah until they are old and grey. Or, how about a guy who mugged an old lady, then, beat a kid sensless, then, got stopped for drunk driving and a gun falls out of his pocket? See ya Tookie. How about ............. guy who mugs an old lady in his teens for coin. Later, gets involved in a drug deal and caught. Then, in a gang round up, is required to testify but refuses? The parking ticket he go the month before turns the tables and he testifies. What I'm getting at is that thes rules would be a weapon that may or may not have to be used but are available. We all know who is doing the crime, we all know who is and who is not a habitual. And, if we don't, the people who deal with them everyday know a loser from a hit man and would make their rulings accordingly. On the upside, every crook has a sentence over their heads. Is that bad?

Not me. I think we need more tobacco police to bust up nicotine addicts grabbing a puff within ten meters of any public (yet privately owned) business. Far greater threat. I am humbled dear Lonius. Tell me, were you in awe of this guy? And when he did this taking away stuff, he must have done it with a gift of speech rare to see.

Hope in my neighborhood! If so, my house doubles in value and I'm going to be a corrections officer!

You get caught with a gun in your car or jacket, you get soap watch for ten years automatic. Those kids would never have been carrying if that was in effect. Hence, would never have been having to make that on the spot deicison to be movie stars or victims of the law.

Point is that he wans't normal. And, was not a normal member of society but rather one who had a 'new' approach to many things that had been ingrained into society and - mankind. For example, travelling around into tribal areas in an age where only organized armies and guarded merchants would go is a rather suicical method of being a hippie so, he must have had something to offer and placate the suspicious people he met, not to mention the clergy whom he would have posed a threat to. The visions of right and wrong were new, as were how and who to worship. Certainly he would have made many enemies prior to becomming famous yet, came out unscathed until his end. I find it likely he would have had many mistresses but to have a wife, that's baggage and he travelled light, like an idea twinking at the back of your head. You know it's right, but, just so hard to put into words or actions.

History. Taliban rise and Al Queda accompanyment. Goals that have been publicly stated and admitted by conservative Wahhabists and admissions of guilt. A movement that hoped to inflict anger on 911 enogh to percipitate a massive attack on Muslims in the hopes it would unite them in defense and anger against the west. That is the reason. And the proof for it can be found in pretty much any form of media you wish, even in bloggers. It beats the 'mysterious' people who managed to set off explosives in four simultanious incidents without a shred of evidence being found save speculation.

I don't watch news. I get intelligence reports and analysis, blogs, forums and occasionally go to a newspaper. You mean the speculative plan to blame some minor mischeif on commuists? Yes I did and saw the reasons why they didn't do it. Your point is? I believe very little of what the government tells us. It is not in the government's interest nor ours to tell the entire truth. Try reading between the lines, opening your mind to rationale that is plausible, likely and has proof rather than chasing after crackpiot theories and diversify your sources instead of chasing after fiction.

When they are in the car and driving maybe. Child molestors are a threat in the house, in the car, out of the car, in the yard, in the street, in the shopping mall, in the pool, in the school, at work, driving, not driving, at the ball park. Hope this helps you make the differenciation.

The government can make these people disappear if they wanted. However, to arrest them alerts those connected that the gig is up with whomever and whatever plans were laid. Hence, the ability to learn more and who is invilved is lost. Taking out one is meaningless, it is the larger plan and the operatives you wish so you maximize the intelligence. In fact, the person being targeted initially may only be a lower teir person with no knowledge of anything other than to simply stand by and wait for instructions or, a person or thing to arrive.

Endgame is here and cannot be stopped. The past four years have been a long time but now, with Rice and Rumsfeld arriving in Iraq, the purpose of which can be none other than to lay the cards on the table that the US is leaving soon and for them to pick it up or lose it. The situation is the best that has been there for four years. Shiite led government sucking up to the Sunnis and the Sunnis seeing they have a place in the government that guarantees their rights and positions. To allow the Jihadists to come in can only make their situation less powerful and, as a secondary problem for the Jihadists, the Sunni leadership on the local levels only needed them to do one thing - place pressure on the Shiites and not replace them as tribal leaders. hence, onece they have what they want on the political feild, the Jihadists will find a rough road ahead getting in and freely moving through Sunni communtities. The Iranians on the other hand have and still can place pressure on the US by ratcheting up pressure through alligned factions within the Shiite communties. This influence is short lived though as Iraqs are not Iranians and while similar in religion, are very different in ultimate nationalistic goals. hence, once the Iranians are sure that a pro (or at the very least) a non Sunni leadership will take place then they have what they want. What is further interesting here is that earlier this month with the talk of who was going to replace the outgoing PM in Iraq, they were all over the US to talk but since the candiate has been decided and they approve, the talks are now suddenly not on, and, no pressure being placed anywhere. Seems they are happy too. So, it seems that as of late, all sides have it - for now. The Kurds virtual autonomy, the Iranians, a non Sunni leadership albeit with a Sunnin minority (countered with a strong Shiite majority) and the US sure to pullout within the year or two. The only losers here are the Jihadists who will, if I am correct, find it harder and harder to operate. Rumsfeld and Rice have gone to Iraq to lay it out that they will not babysit forever and, with Bush's popularity declining to 32% and an ever increasingly hostile congress, he can't help them for much longer. Hence, one way or another, it is their game now. This should prove to be very interesting as the Iraqi security forces will now have to use it or lose it in their crackdowns on militents and Jihadists. Another interesting couple of points is the two recent films of Osama Bin laden and Al Zarkowi. Bin Laden, the scourge of the Western world has now forgotten his previous threats to topple and strike fear into the the US and now is focusing on Sudan. Hardly the center of the world in any way shape or form. This shift in focus for him shows that he is lowering his sights to allow for a target to shoot for that he can hit. The next video is interesting as a followup and is Zarkowi trapping off the usual kill the infidel crap. However, what is interesting is that he is making his own vid and makes no reference to Osama as leader and, even more interesting is that he has taken much care to show his face and display himself as a common soldier. leading from the front. This I believe is his play for the leadership of Al Queda. Interesting times indeed.

But why? The kid probably was dressed or acted provocatively. You know, 'asked for it' Hey, was reflecting on the argument about how we should be equally carefull around all people and strangers. Then a good analogy came to me. See, we are careful whenever we drive right. Cruising along at say thirty miles per hour in a residential area. So why would we need to observe or even have school signs posted that tell us to lower our speeds when we are careful anyhow? Why would we even need to lower our speeds abround kids? They all have been told to look both ways so there should be no problems with them dealing with traffic and, no need to have school zones as both the kids and the drivers are always careful. Unless of course, some things are at a higher risk to harm. Then again, we are always careful. Therefore, why use safety belts, issue police alerts for dangerous criminals, publicize high impact areas, put falmable signs on gas cans. I mean, we are always careful around everything anyhow. Why mark containers poison when we all know not to drink things from strange containers? So, why would we not be more careful around a person who is probably somewhere around fifty to three hundred times more likely to harm your child than an average person picked at random?

Don't be fatuous. When I read that Iran is violating UN resolutions (despite the fact that the matter hasn't even been referred to the UNSC as yet) it makes me think that people are copying sentences from early 2003 and replacing a "q" with an "n", if you know what I mean. And even the Euros are cooperating once again talking about sanctions and such. Heck, the Iranians are even helping out saying they have the stuff and will keep doing it despite what anybody says. Quite unlike Saddam's denials which makes this a totally different situation than a few years back.

That's it. I'm going back to 24/7 Werewolfing. This debate forum is not supposed to be like this for crying out loud. :angry: Anyhow, I suppose that I should clarify when I mean 'left.' I didn't mean it as the normal party type of person who has a shmick but rahter the fringe type where the only cop they liked was the one in the Village People. I must be beating you extremely in another thread or something but just can't figure out which one. I mean, you are sucking up to me to no end here and there has to be a reason. Hmmmm, which one .........can't sleep now.

Here, try it again with my help. "As for singling them out and such, hell, probably a Leafs fan so good to go." Means he is probably a good guy on the surface, probably enjoys sports the same as the next guy. " Just keep your hands off my kids ass." I will treat you fair and square, just keep your hands off my kids ass. " And, the anti list guy down the road just loves them as a left wing poster child so I imagine it would all work out pretty even what, with weirdo chicks wanting to bed a sex offender and all so enough of the feel sorry aspect." You will have some fans in people like Geoffery who think you are getting a raw deal and he will more than likely over correct and go out of his way to be your friend. As well, lots of girls like to bed sexual offenders so he will stand a good chance of getting lucky to boot. Hope this helps. I think the grammer is quite readable. In short, they are more than likely normal people and would be treated as such by myself and others. However, stay the hell away from my children and thanks to the list, my children would stay away from them. Good for you. Is the new scoutmaster dangerous? How about the new pastor at the church? Both I'm sure will become trusted and familiar faces to your children and, may even be trusted alone with your kids Do you tell them that all things are dangerous or that some more than others? For example, gasoline is very combustable and they should take praticular care when around it or, do you just put that in the same catagory as a rock or a peice of pipe? I mean, they don't need to be extra careful around explosives because they are supposed to be careful everywhere right? Stepping out of the bathtub = the same danger as diffusing a nuclear weapon in your world I suppose. The point is that some things need to get extra care when around them and people who have a proven track record of molesting children are one of those situations. And, some things can never be trusted alone with your kids - a convicted pedophile at a 6.2% reisk of reoffending. The pastor and the scoutmaster are not convicted and while they may have a secret yearning, they have never acted on that and, are very unlikely to in comparisson. Tell me Geoffrey, would you send you kid away on a wekend outing with a convicted molestor who is your son's scoutmaster? Comon, tell me yes that you would. And I'll bet that you wouldn't require any precautions other than what you normally would take with your run of the mill scout master right? I make sure that my daughter does not pass by his house without an escort and inform the other parents that they should do the same as this person has a history of molesting children. If he or she speaks to her then she is to run away and inform one of the other trusted neighbors. If she or her frineds must go near the house for any reason they are to inform myselof or one of the other parents so that there is no opportunity for anythng to happen. If he is seen loitering or acting strangely or speaking to children he will be asked politiely not to. If he continues, a restraining order can be procured I'm sure as he has no business talking to our kids. If he continues to stop, speak or adress children after he has been warned then I am sure further legal recourses are available given that he has no business doing so and has a history of violence towards children. Fine by me. Can't help that, if not in my neighborhood then in somebody elses. Stay away from my kids as they cannot ever be trusted. A perfect strnager whom your children should never talk to can someday become a familiar friend. A child molestor however can never reach that status. Maybe but really, there is no rehabilitating evil. And that is what these people are. They didn't rob a bank becuase they were greedy, they took a life that was powerless to stop it. Betrayed a humans position of trust in order to get sexual gratification for a brief moment. Took away the lives of all those who know the child and didn't give a damm about the repercussions. These are not drunk drivers or speeders, they are people that while permitted by law to re enter the human race still have the same evil inside their concsience and are a maybe or maybe not walking situation. Agreed. However those people that live in a supposedly safe neighborhood have the right to know if there is an increased threat moving in next door. That's hardly being a thug or a vigilante. You should consider joining the left as you certainly have some views that are typical of them. Police are not guards, they are enforcers of public law. They cannot act until a crime has been commited. I do not wish any child in my neighborhood to be the victim of a person who statisticly is at a 6.2% chance to become a molestor, and then call a cop after the fact. People who are at an increased risk to offend should be considered at greater risk than one who has never commited an offence. While you view people all equally, I view them equally until proven different. A guy who has molested a child and has been convicted has certainly proven himself different.

They got mega milage out of being the head of the political play to turn the EU into an Anti US entity headed by themselves. A risk that ultimately backfired. For that reason, they could not send troops to help or hinder as their position was that of 'peace' at all costs. Far less risky than a Soviet expansion. And, at the time, there was no organized religious movement. There was individuals from all parts of the Muslim world. If you're going to tell me that in 1979 anybody could predict they would not only expell the Soviets, but become part of a civil war AND WIN I'll have to call it a lie.

Great review BHS! Maybe they used those so that we would get a feel for the movement of the aircraft the hijackers used to keep the passengers at bay? Just wondering. Now I realy want to see it. Thanks!

I would say for sure. They have proven they will not use their weapons whenever the blood boils and, all are relatively stable and run by non religious fanatics. As well, none of them are on the front page of every newspaper n the world for nuclear brinkmanship as iran is. A last point, all of them are commited to overall world stability rather than chaos as an extension of their foreign policy.

I voted independent as there was a candidate running here who was closer to my views than the Conservative party was. And, the fact that my 'Lib Lite' MP had made her first conservative vote to be in keeping with a Liberal bill - her own pay raise.