Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Printable Version +- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums) +-- Forum: The Lurker Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-4.html) +--- Forum: The Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-12.html) +--- Thread: Not now! The neighbors are watching! (/thread-4372.html) |
Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Vandiablo - 05-13-2006 As someone who currently prefers a good nap to good sex*, and who only gets to nap while in a car, I find this deeply disturbing. Quote:Caught in a Neighborhood Web -V Periodical Archivist The Forsaken Inn *They are both carefully regulated by my wife, as is my time. Since my napping wouldn't serve much purpose to her (and probably would only infuriate her) my nap allocation is just slightly above zero. So, once or twice a year or so, I leave work an hour early, park in a parking lot, and zzzZZZzzz... ah heaven ... zzzZZZzzz... Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Nystul - 05-13-2006 As far as I'm concerned, the guy got off easy! I took a nap in my car once, and woke up in a ditch. The good news was that I was still in the car. The bad news is that the bottom half of the car was not still in the car. Next time perhaps I'll try parking the car before the nap. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Alram - 05-13-2006 Quote:the sex offender registry listed only the house address, not room numbers.What about a large apartment building where thousands live? Quote:She said she feels sorry for Haskett -- but only a little. Vigilance is necessary, she said. She also thinks Haskett should examine the conduct that started the incident.Sounds like this could be a potential mother-in-law from hell. I'd advise him to get a new girlfriend. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Munkay - 05-13-2006 Alram,May 13 2006, 05:43 AM Wrote:Sounds like this could be a potential mother-in-law from hell. I'd advise him to get a new girlfriend. Agreed. After seeing her response, I can understand why he decided to stay in his car and take a nap. I wouldn't want to deal with her either. Cheers, Munk Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Vandiablo - 05-13-2006 Munkay,May 13 2006, 01:28 PM Wrote:Agreed. After seeing her response, I can understand why he decided to stay in his car and take a nap. I wouldn't want to deal with her either. Furthermore, I think she's wrong... I thought the guideline was that you should never be more than 5 minutes early. It's worse than being more than 5 minutes late. -V Reservations Clerk The Forsaken Inn Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Tal - 05-13-2006 hahahaha that was just down the road from where I live in Maryland. And I agree with Alram and Munkay - I can see why he would avoid the Mom in that case. I believe I would be inclined to drive around for a bit and come back when girlfriend is home. ;) Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Drasca - 05-13-2006 Tal,May 13 2006, 10:48 AM Wrote:I can see why he would avoid the Mom in that case. Well, if anyone needs it, I have proof that Mother in Law's are poison. Just scroll down, and you'll see your Mother in Law there listed undeniably as bad to keep around. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - --Pete - 05-13-2006 Hi, Drasca,May 13 2006, 10:24 AM Wrote:Well, if anyone needs it, I have proof that Mother in Law's are poison. Just scroll down, and you'll see your Mother in Law there listed undeniably as bad to keep around.Ah, the good old dieffenbachia. Actually, old diff is a good mother-in-law, :) just chop up couple of leaves and serve them in a salad to the other mother-in-law for a few hours of peace and quiet. Or, at least, that's what I've been told is the source of the name. :whistling: --Pete Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Mithrandir - 05-13-2006 Quote:She said she feels sorry for Haskett -- but only a little. Vigilance is necessary, she said. She also thinks Haskett should examine the conduct that started the incident. I like how she absolves herself of blame... "It's not my fault I overreacted and made this man's life miserable, he shouldn't have been napping." Bwah? Just another case of how the sex offender registery is a joke. You serve your time, you are released, you are free... oh wait, no. Either you are rehabilitated and ready to become a productive member of society or you aren't. I fail to see the gray area here. Plus, having sex with a 17 year old when you are 18 or peeing behind a building gets you thrown on a list with serial rapists and pedophiles? Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Guest - 05-13-2006 Yes and no. I agree the current implematation of the registry is a joke. I also agree that statutory rape of consenting teenager is wrong but should not be on any list. Being on a list for life should be part of the sentence delt to real pediphiles and rapists. But the list should be more carefully maintained. You point about about rehabilitaion is stupid or naive on your part. Real pediphiles are not rehabilitated they are controled. Its too expensive to keep them in jail for life. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Rinnhart - 05-14-2006 Ghostiger,May 13 2006, 11:26 AM Wrote:You point about about rehabilitaion is stupid or naive on your part. This- this is why we can't have nice things. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Taem - 05-14-2006 Rinnhart,May 14 2006, 01:15 AM Wrote:Ghostinger,May 14 2006, 01:15 AM Wrote:You point about about rehabilitaion is stupid or naive on your part.This- this is why we can't have nice things. Actually, I fully agree with Ghost here. It seems to me that your response, Rinnhart, is meant as a plea for leinency on Ghost's opinion of the other posters opinion. While harsh, it is too the point. You see, the "justice" system itself is confused on what the difference is between Punishment, and Rehabilitation. Why even bother "hiding" away those who can't or don't deserve rehabilitation? Why not bring them to "Justice"? What is justice? IMO, it's payback in full for whatever crime was commited, thus eye-for-an-eye. To be honest, this subject has been rolled over and over so many times recently, I feel I must bow out of the rest of this conversation. I just couldn't help but comment on your nit about Ghost's post. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Rinnhart - 05-15-2006 It's a "plea" for civility. And they're stating the same damn thing. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Vandiablo - 05-15-2006 Rinnhart,May 15 2006, 01:26 AM Wrote:This- this is why we can't have nice things. Thanks, Rinn. You gave me a good laugh (with the "nice things" line). I had the same feeling about civility, and the way you expressed it was funny. I applaud you. I'm sure I've heard that line before, but I can't remember where.... I empathize with the line. I'm the father of two 2-yr-old boys, and one of them is the Curious George type. Actually, he's not 2 for another month and a half, and he already carries around platforms to use to Get Into Things. (He uses chairs, scooters, sturdy toys, smaller twin brothers, tables, large stuffed animals, whatever he can stand on and move across the floor.) He is our current Reason We Can't Have Nice Things. (We have our Nice Things locked away ... but I'm sure when the boy is four he will be able to remove hinges...) -V Safety Officer The Forsaken Inn Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Mithrandir - 05-15-2006 Quote:Being on a list for life should be part of the sentence delt to real pediphiles and rapists. But the list should be more carefully maintained. It is "stupid or naive" to state that rehabilitation is possible for pedophiles? Apparently the ~20 studies I just googled disagree with you. Is rehabilitation 100% effective? Of course not, but nothing is. If someone is still a danger to society, then they should not be allowed back into society and still be undergoing treatment. Period. Some "magic list" isn't going to solve any problems. If someone is not a danger to society and is rehabilitated, then they need to be allowed to live as normal a life as possible once their debt to society has been paid. Quote:Why not bring them to "Justice"? What is justice? IMO, it's payback in full for whatever crime was commited, thus eye-for-an-eye. The current situation is the farthest thing possible from justice. Individuals who served their appointed sentence in full are placed on lists that allow them to be hunted down and murdered. Lists that catch innocents in the crossfire and ruin their lives. I fail to see how making it impossible for a rehabilitated individual to get a fresh start on life is "justice". I must say that I am quite impressed how much everyone loves Hammurabi around here. I thought that human beings had pretty much decided that his Code didn't actually work all that well a couple thousand years ago, but whatever. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Occhidiangela - 05-15-2006 Mithrandir,May 14 2006, 10:32 PM Wrote:It is "stupid or naive" to state that rehabilitation is possible for pedophiles? Apparently the ~20 studies I just googled disagree with you. Is rehabilitation 100% effective? Of course not, but nothing is.On your first point, amen. Sentence served, leave them alone. Or, execute them as a sentence. (That was not meant as a deraliment into death penalty discussion. Let's please not go there.) At root, this is not equal protection under the law, as some criminals' service of sentence is now significantly more unequal than others. It is as stupid as mandatory sentencing guidelines and "Three strikes you are out" foolishness. On your second point, you might want to wander away from the confines of the Tower of Pachyderm Tusks. Most human beings still consider "justice" to include payback. A small portion do not. They have gotten their idea out rather widely. That doesn't mean most human beings buy it, all it means is that someone is selling it. ;) The Bob Dylan lyric about Justice being a game fits here, albeit completely out of context regarding the song's topic. Occhi Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Guest - 05-15-2006 You contridict yourself(and misrepresent me.) The misrepresentaion is you make it appear I championed Hammurabi's code - which is not the case. But enough on that, lets focus on your mistake.. You say- "...then they need to be allowed to live as normal a life as possible once their debt to society has been paid." and "You serve your time, you are released, you are free... " You feel that by serving your sentence you are esentially even again with society and your past crimes dont matter. This directly implies a finallity and aceptance of the legal sentence by society. A legitmate position, whether or not its correct. But then you say- "Either you are rehabilitated and ready to become a productive member of society or you aren't." and "If someone is still a danger to society, then they should not be allowed back into society and still be undergoing treatment." Both of these statments contridict your first sentence because they mean ignoring the sentence and focusing on the condition of the idividual. The basis of your argument refuttes itself - that sounds STUPID to me. And a word on the legal system. It can serve 4 possible purposes. -revenge(a bad purpose IMO) -deterant(a great purpose IMO, as long as people are not disenfranchised before they enter into crime) -rehabilitaion(a nice idea, but impossible to determine IMO) -removal(effective but exspensive and maybe not "fair" IMO) It seems havent seperated these in your mind - you should. You seems NAIVE because you feel that people can reasonably tell who is and isnt rehailitaed. You are even more NAIVE because you dont realize that subjective questions like that the easiest way for criminals to punished far beyond the law. There is no way to tell if a pediphile is rehabilitaed or not. Released pediphiles given the oppertunity have a large "relapse" rate. Even if it was just 5% is would be huge. I consider it NAIVE to leave this to chance. I consider the "list" to be a life sentence and a fair sentence. But I would also consider laser etching a "P" on their forhead to be fair. There are some compacts with society that if broken you you should accept dire marking because society cant afford to trust you. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Mithrandir - 05-15-2006 Ghostiger,May 15 2006, 09:13 AM Wrote:You contridict yourself(and misrepresent me.) Erm, I quoted MEAT and then responded to him Ghost... that part of my reply was not directed towards you at all. Quote:You say- I fail to see how they contradict. You are removed society (i.e. imprisoned or placed in some type of mental health facility), undergo treatment, and then are released when you have completed said treatment and are adequately rehabilitated. Once you are released (i.e. paid your debt to society) you deserve to be left alone and be free. The whole point is that the "sentence" is a function of the individual's treatment. Quote:The basis of your argument refuttes itself - that sounds STUPID to me. Rehabilitation is certainly difficult to determine, but not impossible... these medical health professionals are trained to figure such things out. Your assertion that rehabilitation is impossible to determine or absolutely ineffective seems to be not grounded in fact. Quote:There are some compacts with society that if broken you you should accept dire marking because society cant aford to have you repeat. The "dire marking" has little effect on the pedophile's ability to repeat his actions, though... the relapse rate for pedophiles is 20-25% untreated (depending upon which source you read) even with this "dire marking" penalty in place. Even preliminary tests have shown that treatment regimens (whther chemical or psychological) have proven quite effective. We need to stop hoping that a couple years in prison and a list that damns both the rehabilitated and unrehabilitated is enough to magically fix this problem. Pedophiles need treatment. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Rinnhart - 05-15-2006 Ghostiger,May 15 2006, 06:13 AM Wrote:You contridict yourself(and misrepresent me.) All law that is defined by it's consequences is fundamentally Hammurabian in nature. The Code was not "An Eye for an Eye" it was: The punishment should fit the crime contingent on the circumstances of the events in question and the nature of the involved individuals. The punishment should result in the social absolution of the perpetrator. There is no contradiction in Mithandir's statements, there is only the convoluted reality of our world. Quote:And a word on the legal system. It can serve 4 possible purposes. And you are naively oversimplifying. I won't even begin to touch your "PURPOSES OF DA LEGAL SYSTEM." The murderer's brand or the theive's lost hand may have once been acceptable punishments, but this is a society where harassment, slander, and libel are themselves crimes. To provide the means to persue criminal activity is to condone criminal activity; these lists aren't being used for some greater good, they're being used to single out individuals who have paid their debts to society. The laws that govern punishment regarding specific offenses are often dated by old beliefs and ideals, but that means the Law must be changed and updated, not that the system should be circumvented by additional transgressions, or worse, vigilantism. Not now! The neighbors are watching! - Guest - 05-15-2006 You arent even making sense. My major problem with Mith is that hes confusing rehabilitaion with punishment. And I clearly pointed out him doing just that. That was the contridiction. Both are valid concepts(irregardless of effectivness.) Both might even be effectively used in conjunction. But they are not the same. Im really not even going to address what you said beyond the first "paragraph because your rejoined was to flawed to worry about anything built on it. |