|
Post by bernard on Apr 28, 2015 17:44:19 GMT -6
It seems California doesn't agree with you, Joe. Have you thought about leaving? The electorate is fickle. A liberal is just a conservative who hasn't had his car stolen yet. Better times are ahead. Do you predict that, in future, better, times, Californians will again impose jail time for the crime of smoking a joint?
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Apr 29, 2015 8:16:44 GMT -6
Do you predict that, in future, better, times, Californians will again impose jail time for the crime of smoking a joint? I don't know. I hope so.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 29, 2015 10:41:12 GMT -6
Do you predict that, in future, better, times, Californians will again impose jail time for the crime of smoking a joint? I don't know. I hope so. Jesus !!!! Hope you pay high taxation there to support keeping someone in jail for smoking a joint, which some guards bring into the jails & smoke it themselves. By the way no I do not smoke marijuana or drink, or take medication ( like pain pills)......for example.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Apr 29, 2015 11:25:13 GMT -6
Hope you pay high taxation there to support keeping someone in jail for smoking a joint, which some guards bring into the jails & smoke it themselves. Just answering the question, and I'm prepared to pay higher taxes for as many new prisons as it takes. The way I see it, we all pay for the social costs of drug addiction, one way or the other. At least in prison, people are being punished for their bad choices. I can live with that. I'm not that hard-nosed about pot, but a society that stigmatizes potheads, and those who take other drugs, is the one for me.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 29, 2015 11:43:48 GMT -6
Hope you pay high taxation there to support keeping someone in jail for smoking a joint, which some guards bring into the jails & smoke it themselves. Just answering the question, and I'm prepared to pay higher taxes for as many new prisons as it takes. I'm not that hard-nosed about pot, but a society that stigmatizes potheads, and those who take other drugs, is the one for me. It should not & would not take the cost of "more prisons" added to begin with,, if we did not jail or place in prison the non violent. Or those who only got caught smoking pot. Money better spent for rehab, fine or community service is better all the way around for society for the above.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Apr 29, 2015 11:46:29 GMT -6
It should not & would not take the cost of "more prisons" added to begin with,, if we did not jail or place in prison the non violent. Or those who only got caught smoking pot. Money better spent for rehab, fine or community service is better all the way around for society for the above. So you would do the same for pedophiles? They're non-violent, by definition, as are other sex criminals. Tax evasion? Theft? Tagging? Send them all to "rehab," right? Sorry, no can do. Criminals are criminals, whether or not they're "violent."
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 29, 2015 12:04:03 GMT -6
It should not & would not take the cost of "more prisons" added to begin with,, if we did not jail or place in prison the non violent. Or those who only got caught smoking pot. Money better spent for rehab, fine or community service is better all the way around for society for the above. So you would do the same for pedophiles? They're non-violent, by definition, as are other sex criminals. Tax evasion? Theft? Tagging? Send them all to "rehab," right? Sorry, no can do. Criminals are criminals, whether or not they're "violent." Tax evasion, hell they can take your home etc etc they can take it all is that not enough? zzzzz now back to peds, "are not" violent since when?
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Apr 29, 2015 12:13:45 GMT -6
Tax evasion, hell they can take your home etc etc they can take it all is that not enough? zzzzz now back to peds, "are not" violent since when? No, that's certainly not enough. Take their property AND their liberty. Sex crimes where there is consent are not violent, by definition.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 29, 2015 12:13:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 29, 2015 12:16:48 GMT -6
Tax evasion, hell they can take your home etc etc they can take it all is that not enough? zzzzz now back to peds, "are not" violent since when? No, that's certainly not enough. Take their property AND their liberty. Sex crimes where there is consent are not violent, by definition. I never stated sex crimes where there is mutual consent are violent, it is not violence.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on May 1, 2015 2:43:15 GMT -6
The way I see it, we all pay for the social costs of drug addiction, one way or the other. We all pay the price for alcohol addiction too. Does that mean you want to bring back prohibition?
|
|
|
Post by parmenion on May 1, 2015 5:06:20 GMT -6
Tax evasion, hell they can take your home etc etc they can take it all is that not enough? zzzzz now back to peds, "are not" violent since when? No, that's certainly not enough. Take their property AND their liberty. Sex crimes where there is consent are not violent, by definition. Children who are under the age of consent are, by definition, unable to give consent. Paedophiles abuse children who are under the age of consent and their actions are the most vile and violent of crimes.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 1, 2015 7:44:15 GMT -6
Children who are under the age of consent are, by definition, unable to give consent. Paedophiles abuse children who are under the age of consent and their actions are the most vile and violent of crimes. Illegal consent is still consent, and where there is consent, there is no violence. Violent: using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 1, 2015 7:44:45 GMT -6
We all pay the price for alcohol addiction too. Does that mean you want to bring back prohibition? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on May 1, 2015 8:41:33 GMT -6
The way I see it, we all pay for the social costs of drug addiction, one way or the other. We all pay the price for alcohol addiction too. Does that mean you want to bring back prohibition? No, alcohol its self is not a killer. Anything used wrong can kill though.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on May 1, 2015 8:54:32 GMT -6
Children who are under the age of consent are, by definition, unable to give consent. Paedophiles abuse children who are under the age of consent and their actions are the most vile and violent of crimes. Illegal consent is still consent, and where there is consent, there is no violence. Violent: using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.Peds can over power chlldren, they do hurt & damage them in every way & some child may end up dead. if even by suicide caused by the damage done by the ped. That is clearly violence.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on May 2, 2015 2:48:04 GMT -6
We all pay the price for alcohol addiction too. Does that mean you want to bring back prohibition? Yes. Some people misuse marijuana and society pays the price. Your solution is to make marijuana illegal and punish smokers with jail time. Some people misuse alcohol and society pays the price. Your solution is to make alcohol illegal and put drinkers in jail. Some people misuse guns and society pays the price. What's your solution?
|
|
|
Post by parmenion on May 3, 2015 4:39:33 GMT -6
Children who are under the age of consent are, by definition, unable to give consent. Paedophiles abuse children who are under the age of consent and their actions are the most vile and violent of crimes. Illegal consent is still consent, and where there is consent, there is no violence. Violent: using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.That sort of nonsense is what is spouted as a defence by paedophiles or their apologists, which one are you. Either way you are one sick puppy.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on May 3, 2015 18:33:01 GMT -6
Illegal consent is still consent, and where there is consent, there is no violence. Violent: using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.That sort of nonsense is what is spouted as a defence by paedophiles or their apologists, which one are you. Either way you are one sick puppy. Guess that pretty much sums things up.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 4, 2015 7:49:07 GMT -6
Either way you are one sick puppy. You fail to refute the argument. Ad hominem doesn't change the non-violent nature of sex crimes involving consent.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 4, 2015 8:36:26 GMT -6
Some people misuse marijuana and society pays the price. Your solution is to make marijuana illegal and punish smokers with jail time. Some people misuse alcohol and society pays the price. Your solution is to make alcohol illegal and put drinkers in jail. Some people misuse guns and society pays the price. What's your solution? I said nothing about banning alcohol and marijuana. I was simply answering your questions. You cannot infer from my answers a desire to change the law. You were asking about how I felt and what kind of society I thought best. As for guns ownership, that is an immutable, Constitutional right, more important than the life of any one person.
|
|
|
Post by parmenion on May 5, 2015 3:05:56 GMT -6
Either way you are one sick puppy. You fail to refute the argument. Ad hominem doesn't change the non-violent nature of sex crimes involving consent. A grown man sexually abusing a child is non-violent? A child, of say five years old, can give consent? A man sodomizing a young boy is not abuse, even if the boy is so terrified of the person that he appears to give consent?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on May 6, 2015 0:38:54 GMT -6
Some people misuse marijuana and society pays the price. Your solution is to make marijuana illegal and punish smokers with jail time. Some people misuse alcohol and society pays the price. Your solution is to make alcohol illegal and put drinkers in jail. Some people misuse guns and society pays the price. What's your solution? I said nothing about banning alcohol and marijuana. I was simply answering your questions. You cannot infer from my answers a desire to change the law. You were asking about how I felt and what kind of society I thought best. As for guns ownership, that is an immutable, Constitutional right, more important than the life of any one person. Prohibition was enshrined in the constitution too. The constitution can be changed, and you seem to favor doing so. Your double-talk notwithstanding.
|
|
|
Post by brittney on May 24, 2015 10:11:33 GMT -6
Joseph, you have your priorities really mixed up. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on May 25, 2015 16:49:09 GMT -6
A child, of say five years old, can give consent? This is the kind of logic used by NAMBLA on behalf of pedophile and pimp parents. The logic is that since (you claim) a child cannot consent, it is the right of the parent to consent on the child's behalf, just as the parent consents (e.g.) to the child going on a camping trip or being vaccinated. I'm frankly surprised you would repeat this kind of pedo-logic after the grief you gave to Phillips. Of course children can consent. There is a clear difference between kids having consensual exploratory sexual experiences versus one kid forcing it on another.
|
|
|
Post by parmenion on May 26, 2015 6:10:34 GMT -6
A child, of say five years old, can give consent? This is the kind of logic used by NAMBLA on behalf of pedophile and pimp parents. The logic is that since (you claim) a child cannot consent, it is the right of the parent to consent on the child's behalf, just as the parent consents (e.g.) to the child going on a camping trip or being vaccinated. I'm frankly surprised you would repeat this kind of pedo-logic after the grief you gave to Phillips. Of course children can consent. There is a clear difference between kids having consensual exploratory sexual experiences versus one kid forcing it on another. Are you claiming that a child of five can give consent to being violated by an adult? I can't believe you are, so I must have misread your post. You must have misread mine too.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on May 27, 2015 18:34:16 GMT -6
This is the kind of logic used by NAMBLA on behalf of pedophile and pimp parents. The logic is that since (you claim) a child canthnot consent, it is the right of the parent to consent on the child's behalf, just as the parent consents (e.g.) to the child going on a camping trip or being vaccinated. I'm frankly surprised you would repeat this kind of pedo-logic after the grief you gave to Phillips. Of course children can consent. There is a clear difference between kids having consensual exploratory sexual experiences versus one kid forcing it on another. Are you claiming that a child of five can give consent to being violated by an adult? I can't believe you are, so I must have misread your post. You must have misread mine too. I read it just fine. Denying that they can give consent = denying that they can withhold consent. I guess that makes your agenda pretty clear.
|
|
|
Post by parmenion on May 29, 2015 1:41:32 GMT -6
Are you claiming that a child of five can give consent to being violated by an adult? I can't believe you are, so I must have misread your post. You must have misread mine too. I read it just fine. Denying that they can give consent = denying that they can withhold consent. I guess that makes your agenda pretty clear. "Denying that they can give consent = denying that they can withhold consent." That is just the sort of nonsense that sad 14 year old trolls with no life or friends post to try and get a reaction. I suggest you stay out of adult discussions until you get through puberty and attain a basic level of intelligence and common sense.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on May 29, 2015 18:44:20 GMT -6
I read it just fine. Denying that they can give consent = denying that they can withhold consent. I guess that makes your agenda pretty clear. "Denying that they can give consent = denying that they can withhold consent." That is just the sort of nonsense that sad 14 year old trolls with no life or friends post to try and get a reaction. Looks like I got it. Your suggestion is noted.
|
|
|
Post by spinaltap on May 31, 2015 1:19:30 GMT -6
|
|