[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Sex Predator Sentencing Law Now Applies To More Crimes
posted by Nightmist on Friday December 28, @03:30PM
from the inequality dept.
Inequality Some time ago, MANN posted an article about a new sexual predator law which intended to keep people convicted of sexual crimes locked up longer than their actual sentences. According to this story in the Des Moines Register, this law is now being used to keep people who have been convicted of other crimes behind bars beyond their sentences. The following problems now arise: if we're going to ingore sentencing, why have it at all? Does this mean that anyone can now be locked up indefinitely for any offense? What happened to "he paid his debt to society?"

Point/Counterpoint on DV Against Men | Eve's Seed  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Incarcerated (Score:1)
by Thomas on Friday December 28, @05:18PM EST (#1)
(User #280 Info)
What happened to "he paid his debt to society?"

It's sharing a cell with "innocent until proven guilty."
Re:Incarcerated (Score:1)
by Philalethes on Friday December 28, @07:53PM EST (#2)
(User #186 Info)
You got it. And it's a crowded cell, whose population also includes "the right of the people to be secure in their persons...," "nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself," "a speedy and public trial," "to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation," "to keep and bear arms," "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted," etc. etc.

See "Debtor's Prison Is Alive And Well" for some background. This is how they do it: get everyone to agree to suspend constitutional rights in cases involving people nobody likes ("sex predators," "deadbeat dads"), then extend the circle gradually until it includes everyone.

Who was it wrote that famous quote about " When they came for the xxx, I didn't protest ... When they came for me, there was nobody left to protest"?
Re:Incarcerated (Score:1)
by Thomas on Friday December 28, @08:21PM EST (#3)
(User #280 Info)
Who was it wrote that famous quote about " When they came for the xxx, I didn't protest ... When they came for me, there was nobody left to protest"?

I think it was Pastor Niemoller who wrote, "When Hitler attacked the Jews I was not a Jew, therefore I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church — and there was nobody left to be concerned."

There do seem to be several versions of this statement though. Also, I'd say your concern here is spot on. The radfem hope is that this violation of rights will only ensnare males. They may have a sad awakening coming their way.
Re:When they came... (Score:1)
by Philalethes on Saturday December 29, @10:41AM EST (#5)
(User #186 Info)
Thanks for the hint. It was Martin Niemöller, who wrote:

"First they came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me."

It can be found here.
Re:Incarcerated (Score:2)
by Nightmist (nightmist@mensactivism.org) on Friday December 28, @10:28PM EST (#4)
(User #187 Info) http://www.jameshanbackjr.com
This is how they do it: get everyone to agree to suspend constitutional rights in cases involving people nobody likes ("sex predators," "deadbeat dads"), then extend the circle gradually until it includes everyone.

Exactly. It's also the same way political correctness crept into the culture, along with affirmative action.

Who was it wrote that famous quote about " When they came for the xxx, I didn't protest ... When they came for me, there was nobody left to protest"?

I have a quotation dictionary. I'll try to find that one for you.

huh? (Score:1)
by Smoking Drive (homoascendens@ivillage.com) on Sunday December 30, @01:55AM EST (#6)
(User #565 Info)
So the US has indefinite preventive detention without criminal trial? I thought jailing people for what they *might* do in the future was strictly a no-no according to due process.

What happened to the land of the free?

Of course you've had the lovely "civil" asset forfeiture laws for decades (lose your property on suspicion, onus of proof reversed) and noone seems to mind.

Can preventive civil execution be far away?

glad he's downunder,
sd

Those who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like.
Re:huh? (Score:1)
by Philalethes on Sunday December 30, @10:09AM EST (#7)
(User #186 Info)
What happened to the land of the free?

What's happened is that it's been reincorporated, more or less secretly and very cleverly, into the Empire our ancestors (mine, anyway) fought and died to escape. At that time (and for more than a century thereafter) that empire was called "British," but it's actually much older, owned and ruled by a small group of very wealthy, very powerful families whose headquarters move about the planet at various times. Since the 1940s they've found the U.S. a convenient venue for their activities, though the independent spirit that still somehow survives here, however unconscious and unfocused, is sometimes troublesome, and from recent rumors it may be that current plans are to finally crush this nation, by finishing the job started in 1929 thru the 1930s, and return the headquarters to Europe, whose inhabitants, from millennia of conditioning, are much more docile than Americans.

Again, see See "Debtor's Prison Is Alive And Well" for some background on how the system works here.

As for the comfort of being "down under" (Australia, I assume) that may be fine for a while -- so long as one is part of the domesticated herd -- but when the final plan for a New World Order (the Nazis, fully funded by the same international bankers who now run the IMF, called it "Neues Ordnung der Welt") is unveiled and imposed, you may come to regret how easily you gave up your only means of self-defense. At least in America we have a Second Amendment to reclaim, should the people ever develop the will.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
by Nightmist (nightmist@mensactivism.org) on Sunday December 30, @10:40AM EST (#8)
(User #187 Info) http://www.jameshanbackjr.com
same international bankers who now run the IMF

What's the "IMF?"

Re: "IMF" (Score:1)
by Philalethes on Sunday December 30, @11:25AM EST (#9)
(User #186 Info)
What's the "IMF?"

Sorry, that's the International Monetary Fund, along with the World Bank (and "national banks" such as the "Federal Reserve") comprising the global financial system which runs the world economy for the benefit of those, such as the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Warburgs et al. (and their clients, Kennedys, Bushes and so on) who own it. See "Who Really Rules the World?" by David Icke for some "deep background" on this subject. (Note: some of what this writer says may seem pretty wild. Is it all true? I don't know, but from twenty years and more of my own study, I'm sure that most of the picture he paints is accurate.)
[an error occurred while processing this directive]