Victimization
blak_intelkt
that have been caught with drugs from achieving anything. Did you know that
someone who has been convicted of drug possession is not eligible to receive
financial aid for college. I'm not talking about grants either. They cant
even qualify for student loans. How are they going to become productive
citizens if we don't offer them something better than the life they are
living?
The govt ought to make them eligible of student loans too. Why not make 7%
percent annually off of them. Its much better than PAYING $40,000/yr to
keep them in jail.
Erica <paris...@airmail.net> wrote in message
news:ZEcq5.87454$dC1.1...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
> You know what really pisses me off?
>
> If the guy who broke into my car and stole my purse got caught, he would
> be written a ticket. That's considered a misdemeanor.
>
> But some poor addict with a few lines of coke on him will go to jail,
> because that's a felony.
>
> Now... that pisses me off. You violate my feeling of safety by breaking
> into my car, and you hurt someone by stealing their private
> possessions... and it's considered a misdemeanor.
>
> You're addicted to cocaine, and not hurting anyone but your self (a
> vicim-less crime) and it's a felony.
>
> What the hell???
>
> I think the law should be based solely on victimization.
>
> Not wearing a seat belt? Doesn't hurt anyone but yourself. Not against
> the law. Not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle? Doesn't hurt
> anyone but yourself, not against the law.
>
> Drugs? If you commit a crime while on drugs, or to get drugs, then it's
> considered a crime... go to jail... do not pass go.... do not collect
> 200 dollars.
>
> Possession of drugs? (Well, I think marijuana should be legalized, but
> save that for another discussion.) How much drugs are we talking about?
> If it's just a small amount, such as for personal use, then you get sent
> to rehab. Doesn't go on your record, doesn't hurt you in any way. If
> we're talking about a pound of coke, then go to jail for intent to
> distribute.
>
> Prostitution? Doesn't hurt a person. Legalize it. Regulate it. Tax
> the hell out of it. Make it another profession just like being a
> waiter. Get the FDA involved or something. Make prostitutes take AIDS
> and other STD tests every couple of months, and legally HAVE to use a
> condom.
>
> I think everything should be on a basis, of "who did you hurt by doing
> that."
>
> And bring back capital punishment with a vengeance. An eye for an eye.
> Murder someone? Fry baby fry. Rape? Castration. Beat the hell out of
> someone? Caning.
>
> I think America is in serious need of having every law on the books
> rewritten.
>
>
> --
> Erica
>
>
Nnickee
<paris...@airmail.net> scribbled upon the bathroom wall in
dfw.singles:
>You know what really pisses me off?
everything? :)
<snip>
>I think the law should be based solely on victimization.
>Not wearing a seat belt? Doesn't hurt anyone but yourself. Not against
>the law. Not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle? Doesn't hurt
>anyone but yourself, not against the law.
I actually do agree with you there. With the addition of: if your
baby / toddler isn't strapped into an approved car seat (kids over the
toddler ageset: lap and shoulder belts), you go to jail. Not get a
ticket, but GO TO JAIL. I won't even start my car until my seat belt
is on, and if I have passengers, until their belts are on as well, but
if someone else wants to take chances with their own life, far be it
from me to tell them they *can't* take those chances.
>Drugs? If you commit a crime while on drugs, or to get drugs, then it's
>considered a crime... go to jail... do not pass go.... do not collect
>200 dollars.
Any crime at all, or just certain ones? What I mean is... there are
jail-less crimes now, such as running a red light -- that's illegal,
right? But you don't go to jail for it (at least, not right away
unless there are other extenuating circumstances). So what if someone
runs a red light on their way to get drugs? Or after snortin'?
>Possession of drugs? (Well, I think marijuana should be legalized, but
>save that for another discussion.) How much drugs are we talking about?
>If it's just a small amount, such as for personal use, then you get sent
>to rehab. Doesn't go on your record, doesn't hurt you in any way. If
>we're talking about a pound of coke, then go to jail for intent to
>distribute.
Other than the "marijuana should be legalized" bit, I agree with most
of the rest of the above paragraph. I assume that you *don't* mean it
would be legal to drive under its influence if using it does in fact
become legal?
>Prostitution? Doesn't hurt a person. Legalize it. Regulate it. Tax
>the hell out of it. Make it another profession just like being a
>waiter. Get the FDA involved or something. Make prostitutes take AIDS
>and other STD tests every couple of months, and legally HAVE to use a
>condom.
And who exactly is going to stand there and watch to make sure party
hats are used every single time? Will that person also inspect the
party hats both before and after use to make sure there are no holes?
What about blowjobs? Party hats then too?
>I think everything should be on a basis, of "who did you hurt by doing
>that."
>And bring back capital punishment with a vengeance. An eye for an eye.
>Murder someone? Fry baby fry. Rape? Castration. Beat the hell out of
>someone? Caning.
What about those people who have been convicted of the above but
actually ARE innocent? It *does* happen occasionally.
Nnickee
--
Anything less than mad, passionate, extraordinary
love is a waste of time. There are too many mediocre
things in life. Love shouldn't be one of them.
Jerry
>
> You know what really pisses me off?
>
>
> --
> Erica
Certainly not PCs used to post from behind a temporal shift, that's fer
sure!
:)) ahm jest teasin E...
--
jer
http://JerDun.airweb.net
http://www.seahoss.com
ICQ = 35253273
"WHAT? NO OCEAN? - Then we are NOT going!"
Divers do it deeper....
I'd rather be diving.
\~=~=~=~=~-----------------~=~=~=~~
O
<o((((((>{ o
O
o
0
[:])
�ØnGM姆er
charcoal stick and scratched on the wall:
>And who exactly is going to stand there and watch to make sure party
>hats are used every single time? Will that person also inspect the
>party hats both before and after use to make sure there are no holes?
>What about blowjobs? Party hats then too?
I had an interesting talk about this very subject with a co-worker last
week. It seems he was with this girl he knows, and she was giving him
head, when he decided to shift into intercourse phase and she stopped him
short saying, "Ummm do you have a condom?" He didn't and he told her so..
and so she decided to break off the encounter right then and there since
she didn't have one handy either. (I'm assuming she completed the oral act
first.)
If you had a man's exposed penis in your mouth mixing with your saliva, I
hate to tell you but using a rubber to let him in your coochie is pretty
much a waste of time apart from the birth-control angle. Anyone wanna
comment?
§ŘnGMĺ§ter
"One slip of your rules
and you walk all over me....
One head in the clouds
you won't let go you're too proud.
One light to the blind and they see...
One touch of your hand we believe..."
- Creed
http://www.dfwmetro.org/dana
http://www.angelfire.com/music/littlesisterkaraoke
Felton
wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:59:53 -0500, Nnickee <nni...@nnickee.com> honed a
>charcoal stick and scratched on the wall:
>
>>And who exactly is going to stand there and watch to make sure party
>>hats are used every single time? Will that person also inspect the
>>party hats both before and after use to make sure there are no holes?
>>What about blowjobs? Party hats then too?
>
>I had an interesting talk about this very subject with a co-worker last
>week. It seems he was with this girl he knows, and she was giving him
>head, when he decided to shift into intercourse phase and she stopped him
>short saying, "Ummm do you have a condom?" He didn't and he told her so..
>and so she decided to break off the encounter right then and there since
>she didn't have one handy either. (I'm assuming she completed the oral act
>first.)
>
>If you had a man's exposed penis in your mouth mixing with your saliva, I
>hate to tell you but using a rubber to let him in your coochie is pretty
>much a waste of time apart from the birth-control angle. Anyone wanna
>comment?
It probably was a birth control issue. If your observation was in
reference to STDs, then you are correct except that AIDS is not
generally considered to be transmitted through oral sex, absent some
sort of open cut or sore.
RDT
Felton <fel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>It probably was a birth control issue. If your observation was in
>reference to STDs, then you are correct except that AIDS is not
>generally considered to be transmitted through oral sex, absent some
>sort of open cut or sore.
There was a long debate about this on a sex newsgroup. While HIV is
very unlikely to be transmitted by oral sex, gonorrhea and herpes can be
transmitted by oral sex.
RDT
--
The only thing I'll ever ask of you
Gotta promise not to stop when I say when...
---Foo Fighters
Jason M. Fitzmaurice
wrote:
>You know what really pisses me off?
>
>If the guy who broke into my car and stole my purse got caught, he would
>be written a ticket. That's considered a misdemeanor.
>
>But some poor addict with a few lines of coke on him will go to jail,
>because that's a felony.
Ah The American Justic System. As far as self destructive behavior
such as drug use, when will society realize legislation doesn't work.
I want to end drug use as much as anyone, but I don't seem to have
that normal attitude of wantin gto control someones life. I'll do all
I can to help them, but I cannot, and should not regulate their
behavior until it has a direct negative impact on someone else.
>
>Now... that pisses me off. You violate my feeling of safety by breaking
>into my car, and you hurt someone by stealing their private
>possessions... and it's considered a misdemeanor.
>
>You're addicted to cocaine, and not hurting anyone but your self (a
>vicim-less crime) and it's a felony.
>
>What the hell???
Of course, theft jaywalking, double parking, alll seems about the sam
e levl right.
Not serious stuff that shoulde be felonys like certain types of sex
between consenting adults.
Texas law gotta love it.
>
>I think the law should be based solely on victimization.
Now now don't go applying logic to the llaw. Politicians don't like
it.
>
>Not wearing a seat belt? Doesn't hurt anyone but yourself. Not against
>the law. Not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle? Doesn't hurt
>anyone but yourself, not against the law.
>
Far too logical, and doesn't give people nearly enough power to
control others.
>Drugs? If you commit a crime while on drugs, or to get drugs, then it's
>considered a crime... go to jail... do not pass go.... do not collect
>200 dollars.
>
Exactly.
>Possession of drugs? (Well, I think marijuana should be legalized, but
>save that for another discussion.) How much drugs are we talking about?
>If it's just a small amount, such as for personal use, then you get sent
>to rehab. Doesn't go on your record, doesn't hurt you in any way. If
>we're talking about a pound of coke, then go to jail for intent to
>distribute.
>
A good compromise between total legalization, and outright ban. You
might even get some elected officials to consider this one.
>Prostitution? Doesn't hurt a person. Legalize it. Regulate it. Tax
>the hell out of it. Make it another profession just like being a
>waiter. Get the FDA involved or something. Make prostitutes take AIDS
>and other STD tests every couple of months, and legally HAVE to use a
>condom.
>
Bing, we've all seen how Australia has fallrn apart since opening the
first stockholder owned brothel a few years ago. Clearly this would
cause the end of civilization.
>I think everything should be on a basis, of "who did you hurt by doing
>that."
>
>And bring back capital punishment with a vengeance. An eye for an eye.
>Murder someone? Fry baby fry. Rape? Castration. Beat the hell out of
>someone? Caning.
Except Castration is held to be ineffective, how about just applying
the death penalty to rapists, or failing that put 'em in a cell with
the bigest toughest rapist in the joint.
>I think America is in serious need of having every law on the books
>rewritten.
THomas Jefferson once proposed the constitution being rewritten every
20 years for tjust that reason.
We don't need more laws, we need a lot less, and then we need those
few laws actually enforced.
Oh well It's been nnice visiting a sane fantasy world, now bacxk to
reality
JMF
Jason M. Fitzmaurice
>In article <40070C27C5D0957D.8AAE752B...@lp.airnews.net>,
>Felton <fel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>It probably was a birth control issue. If your observation was in
>>reference to STDs, then you are correct except that AIDS is not
>>generally considered to be transmitted through oral sex, absent some
>>sort of open cut or sore.
>
> There was a long debate about this on a sex newsgroup. While HIV is
>very unlikely to be transmitted by oral sex, gonorrhea and herpes can be
>transmitted by oral sex.
>
>RDT
The really scary thing is how ineffective condoms can be for
preventing STD's. I had a friend who used to run the PArkland Aids
clinic who once said.
1. "Condoms have a 20 percent failure rate under lab conditions, how
often do you have sex under lab conditions?" Althouhg it might be fuin
:)
2. "That's observable tears. Now since wer're dealing with microscopic
things here, how can you do a decent inspection tin your bedroom o see
if the condom actually is broken or not?
That being said PLEASE don't anyone take this to mean don't use a
condom. His point was just that the failure rate is MUCH higher than
advertised.
I swear knowing Dr. Steve Nightingale gave me information to all the
best info on sex back when the attitude in schoold was still"Sex, ummm
don't do it it's bad"
I hope things have gotten some better in thatregard since i left
school in 94, but probably not.
JMF
Terence A. Russell
several years now. Over the years, through court packing activity, the
agendas of many sects have bastardized the intent of the original
framers. In addition, there are events and occurrences in today's
world that were unforeseen by those same framers. There is a lot that
makes no sense, there is a general sentiment of loss of freedom by
many, and the central government has seized much more power than they
were ever intended to possess.
Tiger
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:00:53 -0500, "Erica" <paris...@airmail.net>
wrote:
|I think America is in serious need of having every law on the books
|rewritten.
Jason M. Fitzmaurice
On the other hand could you imagine the constitution we'd get if it
was written by today's politicians?
Shudder
The government shall make no ;law infringing the rights of.. aw screw
it we can if it saves a kid, or a tree, or makes us feel like we care,
or .......
I can see it now.
JMF
F-Bomb
Hell yeah !
F-Bomb
have to say...
Erica
If the guy who broke into my car and stole my purse got caught, he would
be written a ticket. That's considered a misdemeanor.
But some poor addict with a few lines of coke on him will go to jail,
because that's a felony.
Now... that pisses me off. You violate my feeling of safety by breaking
into my car, and you hurt someone by stealing their private
possessions... and it's considered a misdemeanor.
You're addicted to cocaine, and not hurting anyone but your self (a
vicim-less crime) and it's a felony.
What the hell???
I think the law should be based solely on victimization.
Not wearing a seat belt? Doesn't hurt anyone but yourself. Not against
the law. Not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle? Doesn't hurt
anyone but yourself, not against the law.
Drugs? If you commit a crime while on drugs, or to get drugs, then it's
considered a crime... go to jail... do not pass go.... do not collect
200 dollars.
Possession of drugs? (Well, I think marijuana should be legalized, but
save that for another discussion.) How much drugs are we talking about?
If it's just a small amount, such as for personal use, then you get sent
to rehab. Doesn't go on your record, doesn't hurt you in any way. If
we're talking about a pound of coke, then go to jail for intent to
distribute.
Prostitution? Doesn't hurt a person. Legalize it. Regulate it. Tax
the hell out of it. Make it another profession just like being a
waiter. Get the FDA involved or something. Make prostitutes take AIDS
and other STD tests every couple of months, and legally HAVE to use a
condom.
I think everything should be on a basis, of "who did you hurt by doing
that."
And bring back capital punishment with a vengeance. An eye for an eye.
Murder someone? Fry baby fry. Rape? Castration. Beat the hell out of
someone? Caning.
I think America is in serious need of having every law on the books
rewritten.
--
Erica
Erica
>Certainly not PCs used to post from behind a temporal shift, that's fer
>sure!
>
>:)) ahm jest teasin E...
I didn't get it. =0
Mark
who are for gov't condom handouts better think twice. What does the
gov't buy? The low bid!!!!!
Cheers!
Mark
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:20:13 GMT, Jason M. Fitzmaurice
<johnsh...@babylon5fan.com> followed up with:
sickobo...@gmail.com
> You wanna know what makes me mad? The system is designed to keep people
> that have been caught with drugs from achieving anything. Did you know that
> someone who has been convicted of drug possession is not eligible to receive
> financial aid for college. I'm not talking about grants either. They cant
> even qualify for student loans. How are they going to become productive
> citizens if we don't offer them something better than the life they are
> living?
>
> The govt ought to make them eligible of student loans too. Why not make 7%
> percent annually off of them. Its much better than PAYING $40,000/yr to
> keep them in jail.
>
>
> Erica <paris...@airmail.net> wrote in message
> news:ZEcq5.87454$dC1.1...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
sickobo...@gmail.com
> You wanna know what makes me mad? The system is designed to keep people
> that have been caught with drugs from achieving anything. Did you know that
> someone who has been convicted of drug possession is not eligible to receive
> financial aid for college. I'm not talking about grants either. They cant
> even qualify for student loans. How are they going to become productive
> citizens if we don't offer them something better than the life they are
> living?
>
> The govt ought to make them eligible of student loans too. Why not make 7%
> percent annually off of them. Its much better than PAYING $40,000/yr to
> keep them in jail.
>
>
> Erica <paris...@airmail.net> wrote in message
> news:ZEcq5.87454$dC1.1...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...