Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I'd say Sanduskey's, but I'm curious as to what others think. Is there anyone who thinks theGraham James sentence is fair?
Many people criticized the Tory crime bill. Will any of them attempt to explain why a 2 year sentence for a serial rapist is a just punishment for the crime?
Posted

Two years and fifty lashes might be more apropos, but just two years for such a crime(s) is not justice.

Re Sanduskey... He STILL claims 'it' didn't happen??? He must have delusions of some sort.

Posted

I'd say Sanduskey's, but I'm curious as to what others think. Is there anyone who thinks the Graham James sentence is fair?

http://news.national...canada-critics/

Sordid story so I haven't followed it closely. What was it Jones did? He seduced teenage boys, didn't he? I don't recall that he ever actually used force on any of them...

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

The problem I have with the news article linked to is that it conflates too many things like specific court cases, spanning and different time periods, different (but similar) legal jurisdictions, quality of evidence, etc for anyone to provide a reasonable opinion on this.

If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist)

My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx

Posted

The problem I have with the news article linked to is that it conflates too many things like specific court cases, spanning and different time periods, different (but similar) legal jurisdictions, quality of evidence, etc for anyone to provide a reasonable opinion on this.

Exactly.

Guest American Woman
Posted

Sordid story so I haven't followed it closely. What was it Jones did? He seduced teenage boys, didn't he? I don't recall that he ever actually used force on any of them...

One usually doesn't have to use a lot of force when the victim is sleeping....

The assaults began as fondling or groping while Fleury or Holt slept http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/03/19/graham-james-sentence.html

Posted

One usually doesn't have to use a lot of force when the victim is sleeping....

The assaults began as fondling or groping while Fleury or Holt slept http://www.cbc.ca/ne...s-sentence.html

Are you a very sound sleeper? I think I'd tend to wake up if someone was groping me...

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

The problem I have with the news article linked to is that it conflates too many things like specific court cases, spanning and different time periods, different (but similar) legal jurisdictions, quality of evidence, etc for anyone to provide a reasonable opinion on this.

Really? I have a perfectly reasonable opinion on this.

Posted

Are you a very sound sleeper? I think I'd tend to wake up if someone was groping me...

And then what would you do?

Posted

Are you a very sound sleeper? I think I'd tend to wake up if someone was groping me...

WTF does it matter?

You think it's ok to sexually assault a child as long as there's no physical injury?

That's just creepy, Argus.

Guest American Woman
Posted (edited)
Don't be ridiculous. It doesn't help the conversation.

Considering Argus seems to be implying that there's nothing much wrong with sexual engagement with a young teen as long as it isn't physically forced, I'm not so sure jacee's comment was all that 'ridiculous.' Not that your policing of the board isn't appreciated, given your impeccable posting record. wink.png

Edited by American Woman
Posted (edited)

Considering Argus seems to be implying that there's nothing much wrong with sexual engagement with a young teen as long as it isn't physically forced, I'm not so sure jacee's comment was all that 'ridiculous.' Not that your policing of the board isn't appreciated, given your impeccable posting record. wink.png

You just worry about policing the forum for comments about America that you can get your panties in a bunch over.

Edited by cybercoma
Guest American Woman
Posted

You just worry about policing the forum for comments about America that you can get your panties in a bunch over.

No thanks; I'll leave the policing to you. Hopefully it'll keep you too busy to think about my panties.

Posted (edited)

Considering Argus seems to be implying that there's nothing much wrong with sexual engagement with a young teen as long as it isn't physically forced, I'm not so sure jacee's comment was all that 'ridiculous.'

I don't think Argus is arguing that at all. The way I interpret it, he is just saying that, while both are wrong, doing it through physical force is MORE wrong. All else being equal, rape through physical force should warrant a much harsher sentence than seducing someone that is underage.

Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Edited by Bonam
Posted

I don't think Argus is arguing that at all. The way I interpret it, he is just saying that, while both are wrong, doing it through physical force is MORE wrong. All else being equal, rape through physical force should warrant a much harsher sentence than seducing someone that is underage.

Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

If James had a sentence of say, fifteen years, it might be a little closer to what it should be. The force applied by a person in a position of power doesn't have to be physical.

Posted

If James had a sentence of say, fifteen years, it might be a little closer to what it should be. The force applied by a person in a position of power doesn't have to be physical.

Oh I in no way agree with the short sentence for this case or seek to defend/justify it. In fact, I haven't bothered to read up on the case enough to have a valid opinion either way (my only knowledge of it is a quick skim through this thread). But in regards to Argus comment, which was more general, and the responses to it, I think my point stands.

Guest American Woman
Posted (edited)

I don't think Argus is arguing that at all. The way I interpret it, he is just saying that, while both are wrong, doing it through physical force is MORE wrong. All else being equal, rape through physical force should warrant a much harsher sentence than seducing someone that is underage.

Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

"Seducing" implies that it was 'consensual.'. It wasn't. It was coerced through psychological and emotional blackmail. He was in a position of power, in control of their future. I don't see that as "less wrong" than physical force. Force is force, and it puts the minor in the same emotional state.

From what I've read of Argus' posts in the past, and I can't find a search function for the forum to back this up, I think I interpreted his post fairly. He can let me know differently if I was wrong, but his "He seduced teenage boys, didn't he?" implies that I am right.

Edited by American Woman
Posted
I don't see that as "less wrong" than physical force.

It doesn't matter what you see. The courts do see it that way in our country and in most jurisdictions in your country.

Guest American Woman
Posted

It doesn't matter what you see. The courts do see it that way in our country and in most jurisdictions in your country.

And I'm sure you're prepared to back that up, right? :)

Guest American Woman
Posted (edited)

There's a variety of different charges relating to sexual abuse. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that.

Ummm. Yeah. Doesn't mean one charge means the allegations were "less wrong" than the others.

Edited by American Woman
Posted

Ummm. Yeah. Doesn't mean one charge means the allegations were "less wrong" than the others.

It implies that in the consequences, in cases where offenders are found guilty of aggravated sexual assault, for example.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted

No it isn't fair which is the why I'd like to see judges elected in this country. Then they'd be accountable to the public they are mean't to protect. Right now judges in Canada are accountable to no one. This is wrong.

"You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley

Canadian Immigration Reform Blog

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,929
    • Most Online
      1,878

    Newest Member
    BTDT
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...