|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:18 PM July 15th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
"If the program is taken statewide, it could include other types of offenders such as those convicted of domestic violence or behind in child support payments."
A subsequent step will probably be that a woman can get one of those false accusation restraining orders on her word alone, and a man will have to wear one of these as a result. The erosion of men's rights slips away as the radical/gender feminist agenda marches inexorably onward.
As Daphne Patai points out in her book Heterophobia, one big goal of the radical feminist agenda is to destroy heterosexual relationships. They are certainly succeeding at that. I wouldn't share an elevator ride alone with a woman, just too dangerous. When a woman can lie about anything at any time and be believed, a man cannot be too cautious. Thanks to radical feminist influence, our own government is rapidly becoming "The New Evil Empire." The war on men marches on as new recruits are indoctrinated daily in the feminist boot camps across America.
Ray
(click) Welcome to the New Evil Empire
(click) America's War on Men is a Gender Feminist Human Rights Atrocity
Please do not scroll up the page of the linked item(s). All the information I am trying to convey is as the page comes up initially
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read the linked A.P. article at --
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology /gps_sexoffenders_040713.html
I could not find any reference to using the GPS tracking system for any criminals other than felony-convicted pedophiles, i.e. sex offenders.
Where is the text suggesting this pilot project in Tennessee will be expanded to DV offenders?
Can't make a reasoned judgment without the corroborating facts....
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe what you are looking for is in the second-to-last paragraph.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reference to DV offenders was in the second to last paragraph:
"The probation board will collect data on the program for a year before reporting to Gov. Phil Bredesen and the Legislature. If the program is taken statewide, it could include other types of offenders such as those convicted of domestic violence or behind in child support payments."
Much of the article concerned sex offenders (and I won't defend GENUINE ones), but expanding this to DV and even those behind in child support seems to go too far. Not to mention that a fair proportion of the "sex offenders" may be innocent.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean, sex offenders and pedophiles ... that I get.
But DV'ers? Hmmm let me guess, because of retraining orders. Ok ,, I can kinda buy that.
But people (read: MEN!) behind in CHILD SUPPORT!? Ummmm, why, exactly would they need to monitor the LOCATION of people (read: MEN!) who are in DEBT!?
Oh, and notice habitual drug users are not included. Now, that would be a logical extension ... so that they didn't go to their old corners to score.
IF the intention was to monitor parolees. But, let's get real: This is about monitoring men, and humiliation.
I mean, think about it, if you are wearing one, and it's public knowledge what "class" of criminal (men who have offended the aristocracy - read: women) then it's a way to publically mark men.
And c'mon ... you know what's next: the ACCUSED who are out on bail. Yep, she can not only shut down your life, but put a device on you to publically mark you as one who has angered the ruling aristocracy.
WTF ... I mean, how come NO ONE in the media ever prints THAT?!
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...sex offenders and pedophiles..."
Just let me point out to you that the term "sex offender" has taken on a pretty broad definition, at the behest of the feminists, and that too dam few women, including those who have been convicted of "having sex with" minor children are finding themselves on things like the Megan's Law lists. So the likelihood of any judge putting one of these things on a woman is pretty small.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I totally agree.
I was just trying to be logical and make a point about the DV and "Deadbeat" issue.
I mean, just yesterday I was telling a guy at work about the landmark case (that was posted here a few months ago) where a college student was convicted (and ultimately it was UPHELD by the state Supreme Court) where a guy was convicted of rape because of this: (totally from memory, stupid me I didn't archive it - kicks self!)
Two people having sex, during the sex the girl said something akin to: "I really should be at home studying", and later she decided that THAT meant "stop" and that since the guy didn't stop she had been raped. The cops arrested him, he was convicted, and, again, the state Supreme Court upheld the conviction as that statement was enough to prove an indication of "stop".
How fucked it that?!
I can think of a dozen ways to reverse that (hell, some from my personal life) where I have said something similar for a woman and we all KNOW that a woman would not be in jail as a "sex offender".
But, you point is well taken Frank.
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
