National Sex Offender Registry should be public

[Shady]

I believe he's just become "Mr.Falange...Part Deux!"

There is only one Mr.Falange....

Yep. Isn't that you Jack?

[Jack Weber]

Yep. Isn't that you Jack?

Unless I was the one who advocated for a Fascist revolution in this country,then the answer would be a resounding "Yes!"...

Seeing as I'm not,the sobriquet does'nt really apply,Professor Kitzel....

Seeing as your the history expert around these parts,could you (no doubt hillariously) expound for us all your knowledge of The Falange....Without looking it up,of course...

[charter.rights]

I believe he's just become "Mr.Falange...Part Deux!"

There is only one Mr.Falange....

He is one and the same. That is why he took such exception to the name.

[Bob]

He is one and the same. That is why he took such exception to the name.

I have no idea who or what you are talking about. I seems to me that it is some infantile inside joke, as you called me "Gary" in another thread. Many of your posts clearly violate the forum rules and qualify as blatant trolling and/or flamebaiting. Other posts of yours are simply devoid of content and contribute nothing to the discussion(s). Do you really think it'd be difficult for me to clearly demonstrate this to the forum's administration/moderation team? You need to grow up.

Edited November 14, 2010 by Bob

[charter.rights]

Most intelligent thing you have said all day.

Edited November 14, 2010 by charter.rights

[charter.rights]

@Jack Weber:

I have no idea who or what you are talking about. I seems to me that it is some infantile inside joke, as you called me "Gary" in another thread. Many of your posts clearly violate the forum rules and qualify as blatant trolling and/or flamebaiting. Other posts of yours are simply devoid of content and contribute nothing to the discussion(s). Do you really think it'd be difficult for me to clearly demonstrate this to the forum's administration/moderation team? You need to grow up.

See? Mr. Falange Part Deux or the Original. First he posts a pile of nonsense baiting and obtuse comments and then makes a threat. Who esle could that be but our old pal Mr. Falange?

Kinda makes one wonder where that gay porn collection went to, huh?

Edited November 14, 2010 by charter.rights

[capricorn]

See? Mr. Falange Part Deux or the Original.

No, I don't believe they're the same person. Look up a couple of Mr. Canada's posts and compare them to Bob's. Bob has a much better command of the English language, i.e. vocabulary, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure. Perhaps because I'm a French speaking Canadian and strive to use the English language correctly, I tend to notice the writing skills of posters more so than other posters.

[bloodyminded]

@Jack Weber:

See? Mr. Falange Part Deux or the Original. First he posts a pile of nonsense baiting and obtuse comments and then makes a threat. Who esle could that be but our old pal Mr. Falange?

Kinda makes one wonder where that gay porn collection went to, huh?

They are not the same poster. The one dubbed "Mr. Falange" has a different (actually, inferior) writing style; also, I can say with some confidence that Bob is opposed to fascism, for reasons personal as well as principled, whereas the other poster advocated for it.

[Saipan]

National Sex Offender Registry should be public

Why just sex offenders?

Why not all offenders?

[guyser]

When we walk in, in the foyer, we saw a medium-sized print-out of some pervert that had recently been released in the area, with his full name, photograph, and neighbourhood (

Let me guess.....it was Father David at the Catholic Church next door?

Probably should have been.

Right above it I saw a massive painting of Jesus Christ and other religious Catholic paraphernalia. I thought to myself, and I mean this sincerely, God-bless these people.

Why yes, ....Buggering the children under the guise of religion. Why yeah, god bless Catholic chirch for caring so much....for their own and fuck what damage it does to kids !

As far as I'm concerned, if you violate a child in such a manner you are an extremely dangerous person who deserves to have his (and rarely her) privacy reasonably compromised for the protection of others from your despicable compulsions and urges.

Tell the Pope that.

[Robart]

I believe everyone should have access to sex offender lists, but there should be some set criteria that eliminates the poor shit who is on there because he fucked his 14 year old girlfriend when he was 16 and her parents decided to drag his poor ass to court. The same thing happens when an amber alert is issued because a divorced father takes his daughter out of town without the ex-wife's permission. Both instances cheapen the validity of such issues and makes most intelligent observers cringe at the "abuse".

[bloodyminded]

I believe everyone should have access to sex offender lists, but there should be some set criteria that eliminates the poor shit who is on there because he fucked his 14 year old girlfriend when he was 16 and her parents decided to drag his poor ass to court. The same thing happens when an amber alert is issued because a divorced father takes his daughter out of town without the ex-wife's permission. Both instances cheapen the validity of such issues and makes most intelligent observers cringe at the "abuse".

Agreed.

[guyser]

I believe everyone should have access to sex offender lists, but there should be some set criteria that eliminates the poor shit who is on there because he fucked his 14 year old girlfriend when he was 16 and her parents decided to drag his poor ass to court.

The rule has to apply to all or none.

Thus I think no public disclosure as put forth.

Why stop at some 14 yr old, how about a person peeing in an alleyway?

The same thing happens when an amber alert is issued because a divorced father takes his daughter out of town without the ex-wife's permission. Both instances cheapen the validity of such issues and makes most intelligent observers cringe at the "abuse".

No sex offender charges would result. At worst, kidnapping but i highly doubt it.

[Saipan]

Buggering the children under the guise of religion.

Same as doing it under the guise of hockey.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Saipan

[guyser]

Same as doing it under the guise of hockey.

The moment you can show me that Hockey Canada (or any other controlling interest) knew they had pedophiles coaching and only moved them around , you might have a point.

But you dont.

[Saipan]

The moment you can show me that Hockey Canada (or any other controlling interest) knew they had pedophiles coaching and only moved them around , you might have a point.

Yes, they do. For decades.

[Robart]

The rule has to apply to all or none.

Thus I think no public disclosure as put forth.

Why stop at some 14 yr old, how about a person peeing in an alleyway?

No sex offender charges would result. At worst, kidnapping but i highly doubt it.

The rule can be applied to all. A 16 year old fucking his 14 year old girlfriend is NOT a sex offender. I wasn't saying a divorced father taking his kid without the mother's permission is a sex offender; just that treating it as needing an amber alert is the same as making a teenager having sex with his girlfriend register as a sex offender. Fuck, do I have to spell everything out!!!!

[Smallc]

The rule can be applied to all. A 16 year old fucking his 14 year old girlfriend is NOT a sex offender.

That's right, and under the law he isn't either, given the difference in age rule.

[Robart]

That's right, and under the law he isn't either, given the difference in age rule.

I don't know about canada's sex offender list but I have seen american ones on the net and they have kids who fucked their girlfriends on them.

[Smallc]

I don't know about canada's sex offender list but I have seen american ones on the net and they have kids who fucked their girlfriends on them.

Well, in Canada, from what I understand, people 14 years old can have sex with people up to five years older.

[nicky10013]

Incredibly interesting issue brought up by the Economist on the complete unjust nature of American Sex offence registry.

http://www.economist.com/node/14164614?story_id=14164614

[bloodyminded]

The rule can be applied to all. A 16 year old fucking his 14 year old girlfriend is NOT a sex offender. I wasn't saying a divorced father taking his kid without the mother's permission is a sex offender; just that treating it as needing an amber alert is the same as making a teenager having sex with his girlfriend register as a sex offender. Fuck, do I have to spell everything out!!!!

Your points were good ones. Saipan is argumentative for its own sake. He doesn't quite know what he's talking about at any given time, anyway.

[Bob]

If this is how you think the legal system should work, then why stop at sex offenders? Why not other violent criminals? Why not thieves, drunk drivers... hell why not white collar criminals?

Why do people like yourself always have such difficulty making distinctions that can't exactly be quantified? Do you not see how knowledge of a convicted child predator's whereabouts are particularly more important towards the protection of children than the whereabouts of thieves, drunk drivers, and white-collar criminals? Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

Thieves, drunk drivers, and white-collar criminals don't directly prey on the least vulnerable among us, and violate them in reprehensible ways. This is why their whereabouts are more important towards public safety than thieves, drunk drivers, and white-collar criminals. The knowledge of where a thief, drunk driver, or white-collar criminal lives isn't a particularly essential piece of information towards preventing him (or sometimes her) from reoffending. Moreover, and this should be obvious to anyone with sense and a heart, child predators are particularly reprehensible when compared to other types of criminals. Why is anything with some element of subjectivity and arbitrariness so incomprehensible to leftists like yourself? Everything subjective immediately becomes a dramatic exaggeration of the "slippery slope" argument from people like you, with leftists like you leading the way and running for the hills. Sometimes I get the impression that you're smarter than your arguments would lead us to believe, and that you simply like to argue with people you dislike, all the while advancing vapid arguments. Perhaps you just like to play devil's advocate even when supporting untenable positions and perspectives. Who knows?

[Bob]

Let me guess.....it was Father David at the Catholic Church next door?

Probably should have been.

Why yes, ....Buggering the children under the guise of religion. Why yeah, god bless Catholic chirch for caring so much....for their own and fuck what damage it does to kids !

Tell the Pope that.

Your whole post boils down to prejudiced generalizations against Sicilians, or Catholics, or both. I made a clear post about a visit I made to a restaurant owned by apparently religious Sicilian Catholics. They took part in the sex-offender registry program by posting information about a released convicted sex-offender in the lobby/foyer of their restaurant. I stated my support for people like that who go out of their way to do their part towards protecting children, which certainly only took a few moments of their time. You, in a disturbing revelation of your own prejudice and bigotry, then went off on a tangent by alleging that these people are complicit in child predation because of their religious affiliation. The irony being, of course, that I'm quite certain someone like yourself (correct me if I'm wrong) would instantly lash out at someone making a similarly prejudicial and generalized statements about Muslims being terrorists-by-association simply because of their religion.

It's sad that you don't even realize you indicted all Catholics (and perhaps by extension other Christians) with your own bigoted statements. You are unable to separate between the Catholic Church and smalltown American Catholic business-owners, as the praise I shared was specifically at the business-owners and other people like themselves to do small things to enhance the safety of their communities. While people like that volunteer their time with organizations like a neighbourhood watch, you snicker and sneer at them while accusing them of being too zealous because they asked a group of teenager a few questions.

[Bob]

I'm not sure if I should thank anyone for "defending" me against what seem to be inside-joke and infantile insults from charter.rights, but should I? I mean, I am who I am and I am not anyone else (to the best of my knowledge). I will report charter.rights' childish and immature insults and trolling to the administration of this website.