PDA

View Full Version : Registered Sex Offender!


Pages : 1 [2]

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:16 PM
Sperm whales and humans are both on the list of "mammals," but I don't think that makes us the same, do you?
No but I'd say thats like comparing apples and oranges, a sex offender list is just that a sex offender, each crime tells its own story and if I were you I'd get details of his offense, it should be public record.

When I lived in San Antonio, we rented a house from some people who ran a daycare, the law showed up wanting to know where the people moved who owned the house, I told them, they told me the man had been convicted of child molestation, I forget what court I called I beleive it was the attorney general and they told me he had 2 convictions, one was a two year old the other a 4 year old, I gave them his address in California where we were mailing his rent and they asked me not to mention anything if the landlords got in touch with me, about a month later he was in jail he had been put on a 10 year probation, and his probation officer also came by the house and didn't have any idea he had left state, I hope they keep his ass there every minute of it.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:20 PM
No but I'd say thats like comparing apples and oranges, a sex offender list is just that a sex offender, each crime tells its own story and if I were you I'd get details of his offense, it should be public record.


Why should *I* get details of his offense? I'm not the one who has a problem with the guy.

I've read that thing in post #234 over and over again. It's clear to me that this guy COULD have simply downloaded a video of a 17 year old. It COULD have been much worse. I don't know, you don't know, scorp doesn't know -- no one here knows.

If you don't believe that it COULD have been as innocent as viewing a 17 year old on cam, then YOU look it up. I'm comfortable enough with the knowledge I've found to be confident that I am correct. If you are not, then you deal with it.


When I lived in San Antonio, we rented a house from some people who ran a daycare, the law showed up wanting to know where the people moved who owned the house, I told them, they told me the man had been convicted of child molestation, I forget what court I called I beleive it was the attorney general and they told me he had 2 convictions, one was a two year old the other a 4 year old, I gave them his address in California where we were mailing his rent and they asked me not to mention anything if the landlords got in touch with me, about a month later he was in jail he had been put on a 10 year probation, and his probation officer also came by the house and didn't have any idea he had left state, I hope they keep his ass there every minute of it.

Neat story, but totally irrelevant to this thread.

Iowanian
04-18-2005, 04:21 PM
jcroft....

Do you even HAVE a Kid?

Iowanian
04-18-2005, 04:21 PM
Pinball machine just Tilted.

Brock
04-18-2005, 04:23 PM
jcroft....

Do you even HAVE a Kid?

He says he does. You're supposed to read 15 pages back for that information, you twit!

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:25 PM
jcroft....

Do you even HAVE a Kid?

Haha. Nice try. I should cut your dick off, but I don't think something that small is worth my time. :D

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:26 PM
Maby this will help,
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/justice/sentencing/sexualoffencesbill/mainprovisions.html

Read the Child Sex Offences and the age of consent part, I realize this is uk laws but ours are probably about the same.

hmmm for some reason it doesn't post the way I'm typing it in but if you go to this site dont put the .... put the / instead, it may work.

Ok if you just click on the link it will open.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:29 PM
Maby this will help,
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/justice/sentencing/sexualoffencesbill/mainprovisions.html

Read the Child Sex Offences and the age of consent part, I realize this is uk laws but ours are probably about the same.

I'll read it, I'm sure it's interesting -- but I don't know how similar various individual US state laws are going to be to the UK's national laws.

Iowanian
04-18-2005, 04:30 PM
Haha. Nice try. I should cut your dick off,

You're going to need a Chainsaw fit for a lumberjack, and some Tough friends.

I use my unit to crush barrels at the County fair for a 4H fundraiser.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:32 PM
You're going to need a Chainsaw fit for a lumberjack, and some Tough friends.

I use my unit to crush barrels at the County fair for a 4H fundraiser.

Haha. Nice. :D

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:33 PM
I'll read it, I'm sure it's interesting -- but I don't know how similar various individual US state laws are going to be to the UK's national laws.
Well I'm guessing the age part would go by the same guidelines. But I don't know for sure, but there are other places to go on the web like these links and find out something more certain.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:37 PM
what happened to my sig. pic? why did it leave does anyone know?

I still see it.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:39 PM
I still see it.
yea I had to click on the x and hit show picture and it came back, I don't know why it done that.

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 04:42 PM
Why should *I* get details of his offense? I'm not the one who has a problem with the guy.

I've read that thing in post #234 over and over again. It's clear to me that this guy COULD have simply downloaded a video of a 17 year old. It COULD have been much worse. I don't know, you don't know, scorp doesn't know -- no one here knows.

If you don't believe that it COULD have been as innocent as viewing a 17 year old on cam, then YOU look it up. I'm comfortable enough with the knowledge I've found to be confident that I am correct. If you are not, then you deal with it.



Neat story, but totally irrelevant to this thread.







Well I think that's the problem...that you don't have a problem with this guy.......:rolleyes:


Do us all a favor and move them into your neighborhood...:harumph:

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:45 PM
Well I think that's the problem...that you don't have a problem with this guy.......:rolleyes:


Do us all a favor and move them into your neighborhood...:harumph:

Look, we don't know what the guy DID. Until i know that, I can't have much of a problem with him.

Move into my neighborhood? He's free to. I couldn't stop him. If he did move into my neighborhood, what would I do? I'd keep a close eye on him and inform everyone I knew they ought to do the same. I'd tell my daughter not to have anything to do with him.

He would concern me. But, unlike you, I'm not prepared to murder someone just because they once committed a felony.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:45 PM
Well I think that's the problem...that you don't have a problem with this guy.......:rolleyes:


Do us all a favor and move them into your neighborhood...:harumph:
The guy does live right behind him, thats what the opening thread was talking about.

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 04:45 PM
Please tell me where I said molestation of a 13 year old is okay.

AND READ THE ****ING THREAD. I swear, if one more person asks me if I have kids, I'm cutting their dick off and feeding it to the guy in scorp's neighborhood.

Yes, I have a 10 year old daughter.



Badgirl and I could probably care less about your threat.....ROFL

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 04:48 PM
The guy does live right behind him, thats what the opening thread was talking about.


he doesn't live behind croft......:)

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:49 PM
he doesn't live behind croft......:)
oh sorry I forgot who started the thread, he has been so involved I was thinking it was him....my bad.

MOhillbilly
04-18-2005, 04:50 PM
if i were King of America all sexual deviants would have there dicks nailed to chairs and be given dull knives.
simple.

KingPriest2
04-18-2005, 04:50 PM
Sting Arrest
Friday, April 01, 2005


A Joplin man is arrested for allegedly trying to solicit sex from a
teenage girl on the internet. 37 year old was arrested
on Wednesday. He was charged with seven counts of trying to entice a
child, and two counts of promoting a sexual performance by a child.
If convicted of all counts hall could face up to forty-two years in
prison.

was caught when he allegedly attempted to proposition a
thirteen year old girl being played by retired Diamond Police
Detective Jim Murray. is being held tonight in the Newton
County jail on 100 thousand dollars bond.

He was a friend of mine. He was my roommate for about 6 months Had no idea at the time but after I moved out I heard things. One of my friends works with Murray and he was out of town when he was arrested. He was arrested at his house. The bail got reduced to 25k. He was supposedly doing this at work.

Farlow Convicted
Friday, September 12, 2003


A Joplin man will turn himself over to federal authorities for trading child pornography over the internet. 32 year old John Farlow will serve a 10 year prision term for the crime. He was charged last year when police in Germany informed U.S. Customs Services about a child porn chat room farlow was maintaining. A search warrent was issued for his house at 2529 South Minnesota and for his computer. Once Farlow is done with his 10 year term, he has to install hardware and software to moniter his computer use and also register on the sex offenders list.

Reported By: Brad Douglas

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/mow/news/farlow.ple.pdf


This was my fraternity son. I was surprised when I heard about him being involved in this.


It is sad to say that I know both of these people. ONe I was surprised the other I am not.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 04:50 PM
Badgirl and I could probably care less about your threat.....ROFL
ROFL ROFL :thumb:

tk13
04-18-2005, 04:50 PM
[deep National Geographic voice, uncomfortably close camera shots] jcroft, unfamiliar with his surroundings, foolishly tries to approach and is eaten alive by the common female dingbat. The vicious cycle of nature has taken its course once again. [/national geographic voice]

CosmicPal
04-18-2005, 04:51 PM
Do us all a favor and move them into your neighborhood...:harumph:

I can assure you, you have one or two or more in your neighborhood.

Don't like it? Then move to another neighborhood where you'll be likely living near another one. They don't have to be your next door neighbor to be a problem, they just have to live somewhere near your home or your child's school, or even somewhere in between. They're all over.

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 04:52 PM
Look, we don't know what the guy DID. Until i know that, I can't have much of a problem with him.

Move into my neighborhood? He's free to. I couldn't stop him. If he did move into my neighborhood, what would I do? I'd keep a close eye on him and inform everyone I knew they ought to do the same. I'd tell my daughter not to have anything to do with him.

He would concern me. But, unlike you, I'm not prepared to murder someone just because they once committed a felony.





Another man putting words in my mouth.....:rolleyes: I called him a sick mother****** and said I would make his life a living hell so he would be the one moving...no where did I say anything about killing. :harumph:

Now who needs to reread the thread...ROFL

Honey I can hold my own with Killer, Saul and Delt...you are no competition......:)

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 04:54 PM
if i were King of America all sexual deviants would have there dicks nailed to chairs and be given dull knives.
simple.




Can it be a plastic knife.....ROFL

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 04:55 PM
ROFL ROFL :thumb:






Although I wouldn't mind seeing him try it on a few of the planet members....;)

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:57 PM
The guy does live right behind him, thats what the opening thread was talking about.

Except that it wasn't me who started this thread, it was scorp.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 04:59 PM
if i were King of America all sexual deviants would have there dicks nailed to chairs and be given dull knives.
simple.

Actually, I would go right along with that. But, only for sexual deviants. I'm not sure that an 18 year old guy who downloads a video of a 17 year old qualifies as a sexual deviant.

To me, he's just a horny stupid kid.

If he raped or molested anyone, then by all means, nail his dick to a chair.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:00 PM
I'm a registered sex defender.

Brock
04-18-2005, 05:00 PM
Actually, I would go right along with that. But, only for sexual deviants. I'm not sure that an 18 year old guy who downloads a video of a 17 year old qualifies as a sexual deviant.

To me, he's just a horny stupid kid.

If he raped or molested anyone, then by all means, nail his dick to a chair.

What if she was 14?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:01 PM
[deep National Geographic voice, uncomfortably close camera shots] jcroft, unfamiliar with his surroundings, foolishly tries to approach and is eaten alive by the common female dingbat. The vicious cycle of nature has taken its course once again. [/national geographic voice]

I have no idea what you meant by that, but it sure made me laugh. :D

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:02 PM
What if she was 14?

How does one even determine that anyway? I've never seen porn labeled "14 YEAR OLD TAKES IT ALL!"

Brock
04-18-2005, 05:02 PM
I'm a registered sex defender.

And will be for a long, long, long, long time.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:02 PM
Actually, I would go right along with that. But, only for sexual deviants. I'm not sure that an 18 year old guy who downloads a video of a 17 year old qualifies as a sexual deviant.

To me, he's just a horny stupid kid.

If he raped or molested anyone, then by all means, nail his dick to a chair.
Your the one talking like you know exactly what he did, you don't know that no more than we know it could be a 13 year old or even younger, you should think the worse, until proven otherwise, not act like it was nothing.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:02 PM
Another man putting words in my mouth.....:rolleyes: I called him a sick mother****** and said I would make his life a living hell so he would be the one moving...no where did I say anything about killing. :harumph:


Fine. And he'd get a restraining order against you, if he's smart. It's pretty tough to make someone's life a living hell and stay within the confines of the law, especially after the restraining order.

Look, my point is, you are determined that the guy is a sick mother****er, even though you have no clue what exactly he did. That bugs me. That's all.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:03 PM
What if she was 14?

If he downloaded a video of a 14 year old?

Well, I wouldn't nail his dick to a chair for that, but it's certainly a little off...

Brock
04-18-2005, 05:03 PM
How does one even determine that anyway? I've never seen porn labeled "14 YEAR OLD TAKES IT ALL!"

It's usually determined when the FBI comes in and takes you and your computer out for a ride.

Brock
04-18-2005, 05:04 PM
Nail his dick to a chair. Are you going to ask me 15 next?

Uh, why? 16 is okay, but 14 is not? You are doing some serious rationalizing.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:04 PM
It's usually determined when the FBI comes in and takes you and your computer out for a ride.

So the FBI can magically tell how old a girl is in a given porno?

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:04 PM
How does one even determine that anyway? I've never seen porn labeled "14 YEAR OLD TAKES IT ALL!"
Thats because its illegal to have anyone under 18 in porn movies, and as far as you being a sex offender, driving around someones house doesn't count thats called stalking a different crime. :p

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:05 PM
Uh, why? 16 is okay, but 14 is not? You are doing some serious rationalizing.

16 is legal in Britain.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:05 PM
Fine. And he'd get a restraining order against you, if he's smart. It's pretty tough to make someone's life a living hell and stay within the confines of the law, especially after the restraining order.

Look, my point is, you are determined that the guy is a sick mother****er, even though you have no clue what exactly he did. That bugs me. That's all.
Well it bugs me that your practically defending this guy. :mad:

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:06 PM
Thats because its illegal to have anyone under 18 in porn movies, and as far as you being a sex offender, driving around someones house doesn't count thats called stalking a different crime. :p

No shit. I still don't see how they determine it.

As far as me being a sex offender, I wasn't ASKING. :shake:

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:06 PM
Uh, why? 16 is okay, but 14 is not? You are doing some serious rationalizing.

Well, I changed my answer, but you beat me to it.

I wouldn't nail anyone's dick to a chair for downloading a video. I'd like to nail the dick of the guy who made the video of a 14 year old, though.

As for sex, 16 is the age of consent in Kansas. In my mind, if someone who is, say, 18-21 has consensual sex with a 16 year old they are not necessarily a "deviant."

But that's all irrelevant since we're not talking about people who are having sex. We're talking about possessing a video.

Brock
04-18-2005, 05:07 PM
16 is legal in Britain.

And that's relevant because ___________________.

CosmicPal
04-18-2005, 05:07 PM
I bet you all wouldn't have a problem with an 17 year old female porn star moving next door to you.

:D

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:08 PM
Well it bugs me that your practically defending this guy. :mad:

I have NEVER defended him. I've only pointed out that we don't know what he did. Obviously, he did something wrong. But it could have been as innocent as downloading a video of a girl who make have appeared to have been of age.

It could have been much, much worse. I recognize that. Either way, he did something wrong. But in one case, he's not a deviant or a "sick mother****er" and in the other case he is.

But we don't know which is the truth.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:09 PM
I bet you all wouldn't have a problem with an 17 year old female porn star moving next door to you.

:D

17 is legal in Texas. :D

Brock
04-18-2005, 05:09 PM
But that's all irrelevant since we're not talking about people who are having sex. We're talking about possessing a video.

Well, you're only talking about possessing a video, because it is the least offensive thing an offender could be convicted of. Let's be clear about that.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:10 PM
I have NEVER defended him. I've only pointed out that we don't know what he did. Obviously, he did something wrong. But it could have been as innocent as downloading a video of a girl who make have appeared to have been of age.

It could have been much, much worse. I recognize that. Either way, he did something wrong. But in one case, he's not a deviant or a "sick mother****er" and in the other case he is.

But we don't know which is the truth.
I don't think the law would arrest and convict someone for downloading a video, but they would if you were the one doing it, hell if they arrested everyone who downloaded a porn video, and put them on a list, half of america would be locked up.

vailpass
04-18-2005, 05:16 PM
http://www.sfweekly.com/issues/2004-09-22/calendar/seebeseen_1.gif


Oh no you did not.
ROFL

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:16 PM
Well, you're only talking about possessing a video, because it is the least offensive thing an offender could be convicted of. Let's be clear about that.

True, but it is NOT POSSIBLE that this person had sex with a minor for this offense.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:17 PM
I don't think the law would arrest and convict someone for downloading a video, but they would if you were the one doing it, hell if they arrested everyone who downloaded a porn video, and put them on a list, half of america would be locked up.

It is clear from the definition of his offense that downloading a video is a possibility. I have no idea if that's what he did, but it's on the list of possibilities.

Sex, however, is not.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:24 PM
True, but it is NOT POSSIBLE that this person had sex with a minor for this offense.
no, but maybe he just hasn't been caught, IF he did make child porn with children, I beleive he could be a molester, what other kind of mind would have children performing sex acts on each other or posting nude for someone filming them then turn around and put it on the web for all the other perverts out there, if they could do that, I'd say if he hasn't already molested a child, he just got caught before it happened.

BIG_DADDY
04-18-2005, 05:27 PM
Sheesus people I got 594 offenders just in my county alone. They need to streamline this so you can see who the bads ones are around you. Frankly I could give a shit if somebody had sex with 16 year old.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:28 PM
no, but maybe he just hasn't been caught, IF he did make child porn with children, I beleive he could be a molester, what other kind of mind would have children performing sex acts on each other or posting nude for someone filming them then turn around and put it on the web for all the other perverts out there, if they could do that, I'd say if he hasn't already molested a child, he just got caught before it happened.

Yeah, it's possible you are ****ing an eight year old, too, but I'm not accusing you of it because you haven't been caught that I know of. What makes you think he filmed anything or put anything on the web? It's a possibility on this offense, but you have no reason to assume that's what he did.

C'mon -- you are now assuming he's ****ed kids because of this exploitation offense?

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:30 PM
Sheesus people I got 594 offenders just in my county alone. They need to streamline this so you can see who the bads ones are around you. Frankly I could give a shit if somebody had sex with 16 year old.
long as its not your daughter (if you got one) huh? It would be ok for a 37 year old man to have sex with your 16 year old daughter I guess.PLEEEEESE. :shake:

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:31 PM
Yeah, it's possible you are ****ing an eight year old, too, but I'm not accusing you of it because you haven't been caught that I know of. What makes you think he filmed anything or put anything on the web? It's a possibility on this offense, but you have no reason to assume that's what he did.

C'mon -- you are now assuming he's ****ed kids because of this exploitation offense?
If someone is on a sex offender list and the word child comes into play, yes I assume the worse.

No reason to think I am ****ing any child, I'm not on a sex offender list, if I was people may have the right to assume that yes.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:32 PM
If someone is on a sex offender list and the word child comes into play, yes I assume the worse.

There is just as much reason to assume you are ****ing a kid as he is.

That is, no reason at all.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:33 PM
There is just as much reason to assume you are ****ing a kid as he is.

That is, no reason at all.
BULLSHIT, his name is on a damn sex offender list with other peoples like rapist and child molesters, your grabbing at straws it sounds like now, your getting too far out there with your theory. :rolleyes:

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:34 PM
No reason to think I am ****ing any child, I'm not on a sex offender list, if I was people may have the right to assume that yes.

I have a confession. I stole a couple of sharpies from the office. Does this make me threat to steal your ride?

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:36 PM
I have a confession. I stole a couple of sharpies from the office. Does this make me threat to steal your ride?
It proves your a theif, and can't be trusted.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:36 PM
BULLSHIT, his name is on a damn sex offender list with other peoples like rapist and child molesters, your grabbing at straws it sounds like now, your getting too far out there with your theory. :rolleyes:

His name is on a list of people that include:

rapists
child molesters
18 year olds who had sex with their 17 year old girlfriend
people who downloaded porn
guys who unknowingly ****ed someone who is underage
and much more

All we know is that this guy had sex with no one (related to this offense). Other than that, it could be anything.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:37 PM
It proves your a theif, and can't be trusted.

Great! We agree! I said one page one of this thread that this guy can't be trusted and you should keep your eye on him.

KCWolfman
04-18-2005, 05:38 PM
UPDATE!

I called the county Sherrifs office. A very nice lady officer understood my concerns and did some digging for me. She called me back and said his crime was computer related. Whew! That is a load off my mind. Not negating the fact he did something illegal, but at least it was cyber illegal.

Thanks again everyone who participated in this discussion. :clap:
Glad to hear

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 05:38 PM
UPDATE!

I called the county Sherrifs office. A very nice lady officer understood my concerns and did some digging for me. She called me back and said his crime was computer related. Whew! That is a load off my mind. Not negating the fact he did something illegal, but at least it was cyber illegal.

Thanks again everyone who participated in this discussion.

Re: your update. I'd hardly find this bit of information any consolation or any less reason to worry. It merely means this isn't your run of the mill scum unsophisticated child predator. Rather, he has some sophistication about him and they are often the harder ones to read and ultimately catch.

Good luck.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:39 PM
His name is on a list of people that include:

rapists
child molesters
18 year olds who had sex with their 17 year old girlfriend
people who downloaded porn
guys who unknowingly ****ed someone who is underage
and much more

All we know is that this guy had sex with no one (related to this offense). Other than that, it could be anything.
All I'm saying is this man cannot be trusted, UNTIL the whole story comes to light, everyone around him has to be very careful when it comes to their children

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:40 PM
Re: your update. I'd hardly find this bit of information any consolation or any less reason to worry. It merely means this isn't your run of the mill scum unsophisticated child predator, rather he has some sophistication about him and they are often the harder ones to read and ultimately catch.

Good luck.
I agree. :thumb:

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:40 PM
All I'm saying is this man cannot be trusted, UNTIL the whole story comes to light, everyone around him has to be very careful when it comes to their children

Which is EXACTLY, almost WORD FOR WORD what I have said all along.

Glad you agree with me.

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 05:41 PM
I've got to side with jcroft on this, in that one needs to know what the offense is prior to deeming the guy a threat.

The dilemna about these offender registries is that they inhibit the incorporation of people back into society who have already been punished for their deed, but at the same time they're necessary for people to understand potential threats by the offenders who truly are predators.

The obvious answer to this is that more detail is needed on the registry. It's rational and understandable for a neighbor to make the worst assumption possible, but that can lead to unnecessary escalation if that assumption is mistaken.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:41 PM
Which is EXACTLY, almost WORD FOR WORD what I have said all along.

Glad you agree with me.
Well we took the long way around it, but finally glad we met somewhere. :p

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 05:42 PM
I've got to side with jcroft on this, in that one needs to know what the offense is prior to deeming the guy a threat.

The dilemna about these offender registries is that they inhibit the incorporation of people back into society who have already been punished for their deed, but at the same time they're necessary for people to understand potential threats by the offenders who truly are predators.

The obvious answer to this is that more detail is needed on the registry. It's rational and understandable for a neighbor to make the worst assumption possible, but that can lead to unnecessary escalation if that assumption is mistaken.

I'm sorry, but given the recidivism rate of sexual criminals, I don't believe ANYONE on a sex offender registry needs to be given ONE IOTA of the benefit of the doubt...

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:43 PM
The obvious answer to this is that more detail is needed on the registry. It's rational and understandable for a neighbor to make the worst assumption possible, but that can lead to unnecessary escalation if that assumption is mistaken.

Right. I think it's very appropriate for a neighbor to be scared and cautious, but you can't go threatening him or trying to "make his life a living hell" with the limited information you have.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:43 PM
I've got to side with jcroft on this, in that one needs to know what the offense is prior to deeming the guy a threat.

The dilemna about these offender registries is that they inhibit the incorporation of people back into society who have already been punished for their deed, but at the same time they're necessary for people to understand potential threats by the offenders who truly are predators.

The obvious answer to this is that more detail is needed on the registry. It's rational and understandable for a neighbor to make the worst assumption possible, but that can lead to unnecessary escalation if that assumption is mistaken.
Yea I'd like to be able to click on the persons name and get the whole low down on the story, they should do that for the reason you stated above.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:45 PM
I'm sorry, but given the recidivism rate of sexual criminals, I don't believe ANYONE on a sex offender registry needs to be given ONE IOTA of the benefit of the doubt...

It's not really giving them the benefit of the doubt. It's recognizing that you aren't getting much information from these registries. It's as if I told you all I got a "TRAFFIC VIOLATION."

What does that mean? Did I got five miles over on the highway? Did I roll a stop sign? Did I drive recklessly and put people in danger? Was I drunk? You wouldn't know. It could be any of those.

So, in that case, I would understand if you wanted to stay off the road when I was on it. But, you wouldn't have the right to come up to me and call my a drunk who is putting the lives of others in danger and threaten my life if I do it again, because you don't know if I did that.

That's all I'm saying.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:46 PM
I'm sorry, but given the recidivism rate of sexual criminals, I don't believe ANYONE on a sex offender registry needs to be given ONE IOTA of the benefit of the doubt...
thats what I have been trying to say, think the worse until you find out differently, no I wouldn't go making his life a living hell until I found out the whole story, even then I wouldn't mess with him and my ass end up in trouble, but yea you should expect the very worse and use caution as if it was the worse until you know differently.

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 05:46 PM
I'm sorry, but given the recidivism rate of sexual criminals, I don't believe ANYONE on a sex offender registry needs to be given ONE IOTA of the benefit of the doubt...


You may have said this earlier in the thread, but how would you handle the situation then? Is being on the list sufficient grounds for you to gather a neighborhood posse and drive the person out?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:46 PM
Here's a bit of irony: I just realized that this guy was only a few blocks from me when I lived in Topeka about eight months ago. :)

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:48 PM
thats what I have been trying to say, think the worse until you find out differently, no I wouldn't go making his life a living hell until I found out the whole story, even then I wouldn't mess with him and my ass end up in trouble, but yea you should expect the very worse and use caution as if it was the worse until you know differently.

I can agree with that. I only took offense to those who said they were going to threaten him and try to make his life a living hell. I certainly never disagreed with those who said they would be very cautious around him.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:48 PM
This guy lives near me....sick freak!

http://jeffcroft.com/images/jeff.jpg

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:50 PM
This guy lives near me....sick freak!

http://jeffcroft.com/images/jeff.jpg
I couldn't get it, it wouldn't open. :banghead:

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:51 PM
I couldn't get it, it wouldn't open. :banghead:

Uh, it's just an image. You're a riot. ROFL

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:52 PM
Uh, it's just an image. You're a riot. ROFL
I didn't get an image, nothing would come up, I clicked on the x and clicked on see picture and nothing happened.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:53 PM
I can't see it either, gochiefs.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:53 PM
I didn't get an image, nothing would come up, I clicked on the x and clicked on see picture and nothing happened.

How odd....it's working fine for me. Anyway, it's a picture of jcroft from his website. :D

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 05:54 PM
You may have said this earlier in the thread, but how would you handle the situation then? Is being on the list sufficient grounds for you to gather a neighborhood posse and drive the person out?

Well, speaking from personal experience, as soon as I realized we have a guy on the sex crime registry living down the street, I told anyone who would listen and especially those with kids to check out his picture and be on the look out.

So, if you want to call that a posse, then yes. No one is 'driving' the guy out but he's not on the neighborhood bbq invite list either. :hmmm:

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:55 PM
How odd....it's working fine for me. Anyway, it's a picture of jcroft from his website. :D
ROFL ROFL I'd like to see it anyway and see who I been debating with. :hmmm:

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:56 PM
ROFL ROFL I'd like to see it anyway and see who I been debating with. :hmmm:

Here he is...looks like he's watching some sick underage porno...

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:56 PM
How odd....it's working fine for me. Anyway, it's a picture of jcroft from his website. :D

It's not working because I don't allow mooching of my pictures off my web server. I don't want to pay for the bandwidth, sorry.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:56 PM
It's not working because I don't allow mooching of my pictures off my web server. I don't want to pay for the bandwidth, sorry.

I figured...

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:56 PM
Heh. Yep, that's me and my metrosexual self.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 05:57 PM
Here he is...looks like he's watching some sick underage porno...
ROFL ROFL the pic is fine, I'm laughing at your comment.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 05:57 PM
OK badgirl....your turn.

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 05:57 PM
It's not really giving them the benefit of the doubt. It's recognizing that you aren't getting much information from these registries. It's as if I told you all I got a "TRAFFIC VIOLATION."

What does that mean? Did I got five miles over on the highway? Did I roll a stop sign? Did I drive recklessly and put people in danger? Was I drunk? You wouldn't know. It could be any of those.

So, in that case, I would understand if you wanted to stay off the road when I was on it. But, you wouldn't have the right to come up to me and call my a drunk who is putting the lives of others in danger and threaten my life if I do it again, because you don't know if I did that.

That's all I'm saying.

I understand what you are saying. I also understand that a sex crime against a child is enough for ME to feel I need to be weary and on the look out for this person. I don't have an interest in befriending the guy and aiding in his rehabilitation. I just want him to stay the fugg away from my family and my neighbors kids and I'll allow him to live in peace. But he's being watched and he's being monitored and if he doesn't like it he can fugg himself and MOVE.

CosmicPal
04-18-2005, 05:58 PM
Geez, will this ever end?

Man, if you think he has it bad living next to a sex offender, then imagine my own issue- I'm surrounded by a bunch of Broncos' fans in my neighborhood.

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 05:59 PM
Well, speaking from personal experience, as soon as I realized we have a guy on the sex crime registry living down the street, I told anyone who would listen and especially those with kids to check out his picture and be on the look out.

So, if you want to call that a posse, then yes. No one is 'driving' the guy out but he's not on the neighborhood bbq invite list either. :hmmm:


People will probably neg rep me for saying this, but that's a rational response, in my opinion.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 05:59 PM
I understand what you are saying. I also understand that a sex crime against a child is enough for ME to feel I need to be weary and on the look out for this person. I don't have an interest in befriending the guy and aiding in his rehabilitation. I just want him to stay the fugg away from my family and my neighbors kids and I'll allow him to live in peace. But he's being watched and he's being monitored and if he doesn't like it he can fugg himself and MOVE.

If that's all you're doing (watching him and keeping your kids away), then I think that's fine. I just don't think it's fine for people to torment and threaten these guys when they don't know the whole story.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 06:00 PM
People will probably neg rep me for saying this, but that's a rational response, in my opinion.

Just so you know, the stick figure in your avatar is underage. I'm alerting the FBI since the stick figure appears to be naked.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:00 PM
People will probably neg rep me for saying this, but that's a rational response, in my opinion.

I agree. I think it's a completely reasonable and rational response, and it's what I told scorp to do.

CosmicPal
04-18-2005, 06:01 PM
If that's all you're doing (watching him and keeping your kids away), then I think that's fine. I just don't think it's fine for people to torment and threaten these guys when they don't know the whole story.

Exactly! It's too easy to call for a lynching than it is to find out who a real person is.

tk13
04-18-2005, 06:03 PM
But he's being watched and he's being monitored and if he doesn't like it he can fugg himself and MOVE.

To where? That's what I've never really realized until reading this thread. No matter what the screw up is, once you do it you have no chance. I think we need to have a better defined system to divide someone screwing a 4 year old and some 18 year old having sex with his high school girlfriend...

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 06:04 PM
Just so you know, the stick figure in your avatar is underage. I'm alerting the FBI since the stick figure appears to be naked.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 06:06 PM
To where? That's what I've never really realized until reading this thread. No matter what the screw up is, once you do it you have no chance. I think we need to have a better defined system to divide someone screwing a 4 year old and some 18 year old having sex with his high school girlfriend...

The link I posted kinda explains the guidelines for the ages, but its a UK link, but I'd imagine the guidelines are not far from our own

BIG_DADDY
04-18-2005, 06:06 PM
long as its not your daughter (if you got one) huh? It would be ok for a 37 year old man to have sex with your 16 year old daughter I guess.PLEEEEESE. :shake:

I never said it was OK, I just don't think it should be illegal. We have the highest age of consent of any country here it's ridiculous. By 16 your daughter should know better if that's what you taught her.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 06:07 PM
OK badgirl....your turn.
I don't know how :p

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:07 PM
The link I posted kinda explains the guidelines for the ages, but its a UK link, but I'd imagine the guidelines are not far from our own

I have no idea what makes you imagine that the guidelines are similar to ours. The UK has totally different moral standards than the USA.

go bowe
04-18-2005, 06:08 PM
To where? That's what I've never really realized until reading this thread. No matter what the screw up is, once you do it you have no chance. I think we need to have a better defined system to divide someone screwing a 4 year old and some 18 year old having sex with his high school girlfriend...mmmmmm... college girls...

oh, wait... :eek: :eek: :eek:

badgirl
04-18-2005, 06:09 PM
I never said it was OK, I just don't think it should be illegal. We have the highest age of consent of any country here it's ridiculous. By 16 your daughter should know better if that's what you taught her.
yea but I'd still be pissed at the 40 year old.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:09 PM
I never said it was OK, I just don't think it should be illegal. We have the highest age of consent of any country here it's ridiculous. By 16 your daughter should know better if that's what you taught her.

I agree completely. And before anyone asks, yes, I have a 10 year old daughter.

CosmicPal
04-18-2005, 06:09 PM
I have no idea what makes you imagine that the guidelines are similar to ours. The UK has totally different moral standards than the USA.

No shit...I apologize, badgirl but he has a point here and you've done nothing to prove anything with the link. They have an entirely different set of morals and justice system than ours.

BIG_DADDY
04-18-2005, 06:10 PM
To where? That's what I've never really realized until reading this thread. No matter what the screw up is, once you do it you have no chance. I think we need to have a better defined system to divide someone screwing a 4 year old and some 18 year old having sex with his high school girlfriend...

Thank you, I agree. When looking at a registry I want to see the bad guys not somebody who met a girl at a party, brought her home and found out the next day she wasn't quite 18 especially when some of these younger women look much older than they are these days.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 06:11 PM
I have no idea what makes you imagine that the guidelines are similar to ours. The UK has totally different moral standards than the USA.
Well I'm sure we have guidelines, and I'd say if someone is 16 or 17 the laws would be different than if they were 10 or 12.

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 06:13 PM
I agree completely. And before anyone asks, yes, I have a 10 year old daughter.

Wait till she's menstruating...

we'll see if you are still singing same tune.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:14 PM
Well I'm sure we have guidelines, and I'd say if someone is 16 or 17 the laws would be different than if they were 10 or 12.

You're making assumptions. The UK is a totally different place. The laws they have there have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on US law.

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 06:15 PM
It's a good thing that they don't have a registry for impure thoughts.

Oh, wait. They do. It's the U.S. Census.

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 06:15 PM
To where? That's what I've never really realized until reading this thread. No matter what the screw up is, once you do it you have no chance. I think we need to have a better defined system to divide someone screwing a 4 year old and some 18 year old having sex with his high school girlfriend...

You have no chance...and who's fault is that? :hmmm:

If the HS girlfriend is 15 then he's broken the law and as such the girl's parents have the right to seek to have him prosecuted. Yeah, it sucks but it's the law.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:15 PM
Wait till she's menstruating...

we'll see if you are still singing same tune.

I'm not sure I get what you are saying. I said this in reference to that fact that I believe the age of consent, at 18, is too high. I believe people ought to be able to make up their mind closer to age 16. I'm not sure how my daughter's menstruation commencement if going to change my opinion on this matter.

CosmicPal
04-18-2005, 06:16 PM
Thank you, I agree. When looking at a registry I want to see the bad guys not somebody who met a girl at a party, brought her home and found out the next day she wasn't quite 18 especially when some of these younger women look much older than they are these days.

Which nearly happened to me one night at a buddy's wedding reception. We felt like there weren't enough women in the reception, so we sent a couple of guys to go hunting around the hotel for women and to invite them to the reception. Well, one dude brings in what he thought was a college soccer team. They lied to him 'cause they wanted to drink. They were actually in high school, and I had one of them in my hotel room when I kept asking her how old she was. She kept telling me 18, but something kept telling me she wasn't telling the truth and I simply walked her back to her room and said, "Goodnight"

Gawd knows had I completed the act what kind of trouble I'd be in now. People make mistakes- just because we get drunk one night and have consentual sex with someone who tells us they are an adult, but aren't DOESN'T, and let me repeat this: DOESN'T MAKE ONE A PREDATOR!

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:17 PM
You have no chance...and who's fault is that? :hmmm:

If the HS girlfriend is 15 then he's broken the law and as such the girl's parents have the right to seek to have him prosecuted. Yeah, it sucks but it's the law.

I agree with you. But do you think that 18 year old who boinked his 15 year old girlfriend should be treated exactly like a 50 year old who has a kiddy porn ring set up in which he rape pre-pubescent girls time and time again and gets it on film?

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 06:17 PM
If that's all you're doing (watching him and keeping your kids away), then I think that's fine. I just don't think it's fine for people to torment and threaten these guys when they don't know the whole story.

I guess it would depend on the definition of torment...or threaten. I mean he could feel tormented that I've spread his name and picture around. He could also feel threatened by those actions...

tough shit.

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 06:19 PM
I agree with you. But do you think that 18 year old who boinked his 15 year old girlfriend should be treated exactly like a 50 year old who has a kiddy porn ring set up in which he rape pre-pubescent girls time and time again and gets it on film?

No, I don't think so. And the law doesn't treat him the same. The sexual registry apparently does. If sexual preditors want to start a movement to get their 'rights' protected and their crimes designated on these registries then I guess I'll seriously consider their concerns. Until then, boo hoo.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:19 PM
I guess it would depend on the definition of torment...or threaten. I mean he could feel tormented that I've spread his name and picture around. He could also feel threatened by those actions...

tough shit.

As long as you stay within the confines of the law, you're fine. Just remember that if you torment him too much, he'll get a restraining order. :)

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:20 PM
No, I don't think so. And the law doesn't treat him the same. The sexual registry apparently does. If sexual preditors want to start a movement to get their 'rights' protected and their crimes designated on these registries then I guess I'll seriously consider their concerns. Until then, boo hoo.

He's not treated exactly the same by the law. But, he is put on the list and it's clear from reading this thread that most people treat him the same either way. It's not fair, in my mind.

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 06:20 PM
As long as you stay within the confines of the law, you're fine. Just remember that if you torment him too much, he'll get a restraining order. :)

Actually, what my actions will likely do is keep my neighborhood safe and send him off to some other unsuspecting area...
:rolleyes: :banghead: :shake: :cuss:

BIG_DADDY
04-18-2005, 06:21 PM
You have no chance...and who's fault is that? :hmmm:

If the HS girlfriend is 15 then he's broken the law and as such the girl's parents have the right to seek to have him prosecuted. Yeah, it sucks but it's the law.

If it sucks it sucks, get rid of it.

memyselfI
04-18-2005, 06:22 PM
He's not treated exactly the same by the law. But, he is put on the list and it's clear from reading this thread that most people treat him the same either way. It's not fair, in my mind.

It's not fair. But then when you are convicted felon few people take the time to find out what you did, they just see you as felon. So goes the stigma attached with criminal activity.

BIG_DADDY
04-18-2005, 06:23 PM
Which nearly happened to me one night at a buddy's wedding reception. We felt like there weren't enough women in the reception, so we sent a couple of guys to go hunting around the hotel for women and to invite them to the reception. Well, one dude brings in what he thought was a college soccer team. They lied to him 'cause they wanted to drink. They were actually in high school, and I had one of them in my hotel room when I kept asking her how old she was. She kept telling me 18, but something kept telling me she wasn't telling the truth and I simply walked her back to her room and said, "Goodnight"

Gawd knows had I completed the act what kind of trouble I'd be in now. People make mistakes- just because we get drunk one night and have consentual sex with someone who tells us they are an adult, but aren't DOESN'T, and let me repeat this: DOESN'T MAKE ONE A PREDATOR!

Exactly. The whole age thing should be dropped to 16 nationally and most of this stuff would works it's way out.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 06:23 PM
It's not fair. But then when you are convicted felon few people take the time to find out what you did, they just see you as felon. So goes the stigma attached with criminal activity.

I'm agreeing with you -- I'm just saying it's not right, that's all. I totally agree that's just the way it is. I just think it's too bad that people are so judgmental.

go bowe
04-18-2005, 06:24 PM
yea but I'd still be pissed at the 40 year old.wow, this old guy is aging fast...

didn't you just say he was 37 years old, now already he's 40? :shrug:

go bowe
04-18-2005, 06:29 PM
If it sucks it sucks, get rid of it.wait a minute...

i didn't find this one 'til i was 31 and i don't want to get rid of her just yet... :shake: :shake: :shake:

tk13
04-18-2005, 06:31 PM
You have no chance...and who's fault is that? :hmmm:

If the HS girlfriend is 15 then he's broken the law and as such the girl's parents have the right to seek to have him prosecuted. Yeah, it sucks but it's the law.
Well I'd like to think we strive to make laws that are in the best interest in society, and are also fair in nature. Apparently you disagree, and that's fine, that is how things are sometimes...

badgirl
04-18-2005, 06:38 PM
Ok read the definition of a "child" its someone 14 years or younger.
See if this helps:

child
n. 1) a person's natural offspring. 2) a person 14 years and under. A "child" should be distinguished from a "minor" who is anyone under 18 in almost all states.
See also: minor
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=185&bold=||||

badgirl
04-18-2005, 06:50 PM
:hmmm: don't know why you can't click on the link, but there it is if you want to type it in yourself. It was copied and pasted,I don't know why it won't take you to the site.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 06:59 PM
These sick f#cks should NEVER be allowed out into society again. Child molestation should be a death penalty offense, period. It is one of the greatest shames of our society that these f#cks are freed to strike again and again. There are certain crimes that should remove one's rights to everything except the end of a noose or a lightning ride..

I think you're being a little too lenient here...I'm starting to think you are too soft on crime!!! :)


I personally think that if these freaks are freed, they should all be required to live right next door to the liberal idiot douchebags who champion their freedom. But it never works out that way.

I agree wholeheartedly...wonder how many attorney's would take a case for this type of crime if they knew that the people thy help get free had to live either with them or next door for the first year.

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:01 PM
Ok read the definition of a "child" its someone 14 years or younger.
See if this helps:

child
n. 1) a person's natural offspring. 2) a person 14 years and under. A "child" should be distinguished from a "minor" who is anyone under 18 in almost all states.
See also: minor
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=185&bold=||||

This is nice, but it's still clear from post #234 that in the case of Sexual Exploitation of a Child in Kansas, we're referring to anyone under 18.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:03 PM
I agree wholeheartedly...wonder how many attorney's would take a case for this type of crime if they knew that the people thy help get free had to live either with them or next door for the first year.

mmaddog
*******

Let me get this straight. You believe that people convicted of Sexual Exploitation of a Child in Kansas should never be freed from prison?

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:05 PM
This is nice, but it's still clear from post #234 that in the case of Sexual Exploitation of a Child in Kansas, we're referring to anyone under 18.
its a law dictionary, it clearly defines the legal term for child, does it say Kansas is one of the states this doesnt apply to? It says almost all states have this term as the legal term for child, but Kansas isn't one of those states? How do you know.?

Why is it looking at a legal term used for "child" says 14 or under, not click with you? Why do you seem to be pressing the issue that there is a possibility the guy was filming someone older, is it to hard for you to comprehend that going by the legal term of child, the kid was more than likely under 14?

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 07:08 PM
Fraz, I totally agree with you if you're talking about child molestation, but there's no way to know if that's what we're talking about at all. Actually, we know that he either encouraged a child to prostitute him/herself, or he filmed/photgraphed a sexual act of someone underage. That's all we know.

Given that, it's quite possible that he took some nudie pics of him and his 17 year old girlfriend when he was 18. Should he be locked up forever?

Yes, I'm a liberal, but no matter how conservative you are you can't possibly think someone should be put to death for that, can you?

Sorry, but as a father, any of the above would drive me to committ myself to making sure the death penalty was handed down.

I would be absolutely pissed no matter how young or old they were if they tried to talk my daughter into prostituting herself OR or even taking a nude photo of herself regardless of whether she was committing a sex act or not.

mmaddog
********
NO quarters when it comes to my kids

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 07:11 PM
Let me get this straight. You believe that people convicted of Sexual Exploitation of a Child in Kansas should never be freed from prison?




you just wanna fight...dont' you.;)

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:12 PM
its a law dictionary, it clearly defines the legal term for child, does it say Kansas is one of the states this doesnt apply to? It says almost all states have this term as the legal term for child, but Kansas isn't one of those states? How do you know.?

Uhhh, because the Kansas definition of Sexual Exploitation of a Child clearly says "under the age of 18." You are focusing on the word "child" and completely ignoring that the whole phrase is "child under the age of 18."

Picking a dictionary definition of the word "child" is completely irrelevant here.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 07:13 PM
Let me get this straight. You believe that people convicted of Sexual Exploitation of a Child in Kansas should never be freed from prison?

Not at all....sorry if that seems heartless. Have you seen the damage that something like this can do to a child? Ever had someone you know suffer this consequence, only to kill themself because the "shame" of what happened was too much to bear?

A crime against a child is unforgivable......

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:13 PM
Sorry, but as a father, any of the above would drive me to committ myself to making sure the death penalty was handed down.

I would be absolutely pissed no matter how young or old they were if they tried to talk my daughter into prostituting herself OR or even taking a nude photo of herself regardless of whether she was committing a sex act or not.

mmaddog
********
NO quarters when it comes to my kids

Ohmigod. You want the DEATH PENALTY for your daughter's boyfriend if she consents to him taking nude pictures of her and he does so?

You scare me.

jettio
04-18-2005, 07:14 PM
And what if he didn't? What if he tried to get some preschooler to give him a blowjob? You don't know anymore than I did. But if it's YOUR KIDS who's lives/well-being are on the line, you have to assume the worst.

Would you want him living next door TO YOU?

The text of the law suggests that it has to involve some kind of recording of porn.

I would not want the guy has a neighbor, but I think it is still a good idea to find out the details of his crime before deciding what to do.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:14 PM
Not at all....sorry if that seems heartless. Have you seen the damage that something like this can do to a child? Ever had someone you know suffer this consequence, only to kill themself because the "shame" of what happened was too much to bear?

A crime against a child is unforgivable......

mmaddog
*******

I defy you to find one case of a 16 or 17 year old killing him/herself because someone took pictures of them with their consent.

I highly doubt you'll find such a thing.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:15 PM
The text of the law suggests that it has to involve some kind of recording of porn.

I would not want the guy has a neighbor, but I think it is still a good idea to find out the details of his crime before deciding what to do.

Amen.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:16 PM
Uhhh, because the Kansas definition of Sexual Exploitation of a Child clearly says "under the age of 18." You are focusing on the word "child" and completely ignoring that the whole phrase is "child under the age of 18."

Picking a dictionary definition of the word "child" is completely irrelevant here.
Its not just a dictionary its a law dictionary meaning the words in it are the legal terms used and what they mean, it says in the link anyone under 18 is a minor, but 14 and under is considered a child, and it has another word "minor" to click on for that defination, therefore his crime didn't say Exploitation of a Minor it said Child, and since a minor is anyone under 18 and a child is someon14 and under, it is a CHILD he was filming not a MINOR.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:18 PM
Its not just a dictionary its a law dictionary meaning the words in it are the legal terms used and what they mean, it says in the link anyone under 18 is a minor, but 14 and under is considered a child, and it has another word "minor" to click on for that defination, therefore his crime didn't say Exploitation of a Minor it said Child, and since a minor is anyone under 18 and a child is someon14 and under, it is a CHILD he was filming not a MINOR.

So then why would the Kansas law use the phrase "under the age of 18" when it means "under the age of 14?"

Also, you say, "that he was filming," when we have no idea if he filmed anything. The law says that sexual exploitation of a child can simply be POSSESSING a video or photograph.

You're not making sense, Ms. badgirl. Sorry. You can read all the dictionaries you want -- I'll keep reading the actual relevant law.

Skip Towne
04-18-2005, 07:19 PM
Its not just a dictionary its a law dictionary meaning the words in it are the legal terms used and what they mean, it says in the link anyone under 18 is a minor, but 14 and under is considered a child, and it has another word "minor" to click on for that defination, therefore his crime didn't say Exploitation of a Minor it said Child, and since a minor is anyone under 18 and a child is someon14 and under, it is a CHILD he was filming not a MINOR.
Nevermind. I'll get Tommykat to explain it to me.

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 07:20 PM
Sorry, but as a father, any of the above would drive me to committ myself to making sure the death penalty was handed down.

I would be absolutely pissed no matter how young or old they were if they tried to talk my daughter into prostituting herself OR or even taking a nude photo of herself regardless of whether she was committing a sex act or not.

mmaddog
********
NO quarters when it comes to my kids

I must ask. When you were 18, did you have a girlfriend who was 17? And if I showed her a doll, would she point at any bad places where you touched her? If so, should you go to prison for life?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:22 PM
I must ask. When you were 18, did you have a girlfriend who was 17? And if I showed her a doll, would she point at any bad places where you touched her? If so, should you go to prison for life?

According to him, he should go to prison for life even if all he did was keep a video of his buddies' 17 year old girlfriend under his mattress.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:22 PM
So then why would the Kansas law use the phrase "under the age of 18" when it means "under the age of 14?"

You're not making sense, Ms. badgirl. Sorry.
look at the defination again closely and read it slowly, yes everyone under the age of 18 your a minor, you can't go signing contracts and stuff and your parents are responsible for your actions, but although a say 13 year old is still a minor, I'd say because of their mental capacity they are considered a child whereas a 17 year old, although still a minor isn't considered a child any longer.
Why is this so hard for you to comprehend?
If a crime is against a 17 year old it would be Sexual Exploitation of a MINOR, 14 or under it would be Sexual Exploitation of a CHILD.
It makes perfect sense.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:26 PM
Why is this so hard for you to comprehend?
If a crime is against a 17 year old it would be Sexual Exploitation of a MINOR, 14 or under it would be Sexual Exploitation of a CHILD.
It makes perfect sense.

No, it really makes no sense at all. In the definition of Sexual Exploitation of a Child, it says a a child is defined as "under the age of 18."

Why is THAT so hard to understand? I don't believe there is such a thing as "Sexual Exploitation of a Minor" in Kansas. I think you just made it up. If not, show me where it exists in the law. I can't find it.

Inspector
04-18-2005, 07:27 PM
You forgot to put it in bacon. Pedophiles can't resist bacon.


mmmmm...bacon....

No wait....

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:30 PM
Here you go, badgirl. All of the Kansas sex offense laws. There is NO SUCH THING as "Sexual Exploitation of a Minor." You made it up. I wish it DID exists, because it would clarify things, but it doesn't. Sorry.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/kansas.htm

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:38 PM
Ok I did a little digging on what Child Exploitation really is it 3 things and only these three things

A-being used in making child pornography

B-Prostitution

C-Trafficing a child for sexual purposes.

Doesn't say anything about just owning a tape with child porn on it, if you have been convicted of Child Exploitation, you have done one of the above.

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 07:39 PM
Here you go, badgirl. All of the Kansas sex offense laws. There is NO SUCH THING as "Sexual Exploitation of a Minor." You made it up. I wish it DID exists, because it would clarify things, but it doesn't. Sorry.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/kansas.htm





It's your brother isin't it? That is why you are defending him so much.:)

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:39 PM
Here you go, badgirl. All of the Kansas sex offense laws. There is NO SUCH THING as "Sexual Exploitation of a Minor." You made it up. I wish it DID exists, because it would clarify things, but it doesn't. Sorry.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/kansas.htm
Go to Ask Jeeves and type in Child Exploitation, it also has Child Exploitation of a Minor and of a child, why don't you do that. I just found all kinds of link for it, is that too hard for you to do, go ahead and do it now, so I can see what else your gonna try to prove.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:40 PM
Doesn't say anything about just owning a tape with child porn on it, if you have been convicted of Child Exploitation, you have done one of the above.

Sorry, you're wrong again. At least in Kansas:

21-3516. Sexual exploitation of a child.
<strong>(a) Sexual exploitation of a child is: </strong>

(snip)

<strong>(2) possessing</strong> any film, photograph, negative, slide, book, magazine or other printed or visual medium or any audio tape recording or any photocopy, video tape, video laser disk, computer hardware, software, floppy disk or any other computer related equipment or computer generated image that contains or incorporates in any manner any film, photograph, negative, photocopy, video tape or video laser disk in which a visual depiction of a child under 18 years of age is shown or heard engaging in sexually explicit conduct with intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires or appeal to the prurient interest of the offender, the child or another;

http://www.ageofconsent.com/kansas.htm

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:41 PM
Go to Ask Jeeves and type in Child Exploitation, it also has Child Exploitation of a Minor and of a child, why don't you do that. I just found all kinds of link for it, is that too hard for you to do, go ahead and do it now, so I can see what else your gonna try to prove.

Jesus Christ, girl. Because Ask Jeeves isn't specific to KANSAS, that's why. I've got links. You've got false claims. Sorry, I win.

The Kansas Law that I am quoting couldn't possibly be any more clear. Why can't you just accept it?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:42 PM
It's your brother isin't it? That is why you are defending him so much.:)

Who am I defending? I don't think I've defended anyone in this thread.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:44 PM
Try this to begin with,

http://www.fightforme.com/exploitationofminors.html
My claims are not false. :cuss:

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:46 PM
Sorry, you're wrong again. At least in Kansas:

21-3516. Sexual exploitation of a child.
<strong>(a) Sexual exploitation of a child is: </strong>

(snip)

<strong>(2) possessing</strong> any film, photograph, negative, slide, book, magazine or other printed or visual medium or any audio tape recording or any photocopy, video tape, video laser disk, computer hardware, software, floppy disk or any other computer related equipment or computer generated image that contains or incorporates in any manner any film, photograph, negative, photocopy, video tape or video laser disk in which a visual depiction of a child under 18 years of age is shown or heard engaging in sexually explicit conduct with intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires or appeal to the prurient interest of the offender, the child or another;

http://www.ageofconsent.com/kansas.htm
Well we could keep coming up with link and arguing back and forth, but we're both right, ha, I win too :p

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:47 PM
Try this to begin with,

http://www.fightforme.com/exploitationofminors.html

Interesting, and yet totally irrelevant. This is a CALIFORNIA law firm. Clearly, CA law doesn't apply here. All of these sex offense laws are STATE laws. Until you find something in KANSAS law (like I have), it is totally irrelevant.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:49 PM
Well we could keep coming up with link and arguing back and forth, but we're both right, ha, I win too :p

No, you don't. You are still claiming that Sexual Exploitation of a Child in Kansas refers to people under the age of 14, rather than under the age of 18. This is totally incorrect. There is no circumstance in which you could possibly consider yourself to be correct.

badgirl
04-18-2005, 07:49 PM
Interesting, and yet totally irrelevant. This is a CALIFORNIA law firm. Clearly, CA law doesn't apply here. All of these sex offense laws are STATE laws. Until you find something in KANSAS law (like I have), it is totally irrelevant.
There are many links on there not just for California, thought this would get you started, it has links to all kind of sites.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:51 PM
The good news here is that, according to badgirl, it's totally legal for me to take pictures of 16 year girls naked in Kansas. Where's my camera?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:51 PM
There are many links on there not just for California, thought this would get you started, it has links to all kind of sites.

I already found the KANSAS STATE LAW. I don't really need any more links. I've got the same law the judge would be reading from. What else is needed?

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 07:55 PM
I already found the KANSAS STATE LAW. I don't really need any more links. I've got the same law the judge would be reading from. What else is needed?

You are arguing with a woman. You cannot win.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:56 PM
You are arguing with a woman. You cannot win.

Oh, I won long ago. That part was easy. The hard part is getting the woman to ADMIT that I won.

But I've been married before, I've gotten pretty good at it. :)

Rain Man
04-18-2005, 07:56 PM
The good news here is that, according to badgirl, it's totally legal for me to take pictures of 16 year girls naked in Kansas. Where's my camera?

Wait a minute - who's naked?

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 07:57 PM
Oh, I won long ago. That part was easy. The hard part is getting the woman to ADMIT that I won.

But I've been married before, I've gotten pretty good at it. :)

No. You cannot win.

You're right, but you lose.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 07:58 PM
No. You cannot win.

You're right, but you lose.

Heh. Well, i can live with that. As long as you recognize that I'm right. :)

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 08:00 PM
Heh. Well, i can live with that. As long as you recognize that I'm right. :)

I had no idea you valued my approval so.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:00 PM
I had no idea you valued my approval so.

Yep, and now you know.

tk13
04-18-2005, 08:08 PM
You are arguing with a woman. You cannot win.
Tell that to OJ.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:26 PM
I must ask. When you were 18, did you have a girlfriend who was 17? And if I showed her a doll, would she point at any bad places where you touched her? If so, should you go to prison for life?

Rain Man:

I can tell you for sure that when i was 18, the only thing I was worried about was making it to the next BB tryout. I didn't have a girlfriend and could have cared less.

The same way I could take a lie detector test today and say without fail i have never done an illegal substance.

Sorry, that won't wash with me.....try something else.

You guys are trying to make excuses for this guy.......do any of you know that the emancipation age for a girl is 14 in the state of South Carolina? So that means in that state your daughter can leave your residence and do whatever, with whomever, and there isn't a thing you can do about it.

As for the "death penalty" for child abusers....why not? What should we do...slap them on the hand, give them some counseling and hope that they never do it again? FAT CHANCE!!!!

Any of you guys been watching the news lately? Both of the recent events in FLA were done by convicted child molestors.....need any more convincing that reforming these guys is a cinch?

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:30 PM
I defy you to find one case of a 16 or 17 year old killing him/herself because someone took pictures of them with their consent.

I highly doubt you'll find such a thing.

I didn't say they were 16 or 17 when they killed themselves....what, you think someone who was molested at a young age forgets it when they get older?

And we aren't talking consent.....we're talking someone who [B]wasn't[B] a consenting person, or one who was so underage that they trusted the adult they were with wasn't doing anything wrong.

Sorry....I am not in favor of any leniency.

mmaddog
*******

Pitt Gorilla
04-18-2005, 08:34 PM
Just found out we have a twenty year old registered sex offender living 80 feet directly behind my house. My wife is absolutely freaking out. He was convicted of SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A CHILD. I have a 4 yr. old daughter and a 2 month old son. I have absolutely no idea what i should do in this situation. I need some good advice please.


UPDATE!

I called the county Sherrifs office. A very nice lady officer understood my concerns and did some digging for me. She called me back and said his crime was computer related. Whew! That is a load off my mind. Not negating the fact he did something illegal, but at least it was cyber illegal.

Thanks again everyone who participated in this discussion.Just another reason not to over-react to a situation. Think, research, think again, then act, if necessary.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:36 PM
Ohmigod. You want the DEATH PENALTY for your daughter's boyfriend if she consents to him taking nude pictures of her and he does so?

You scare me.

What is an older guy doing trying to get my daughter to have naked pictures taken of her?

You scare me because you are condoning a boy taking pics of an underage girl.....so what if he is only 18 and she is 17, it's still an issue!!!

So what age is it OK for this to happen?

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:39 PM
Just another reason not to over-react to a situation. Think, research, think again, then act, if necessary.

So let me ask the question.....

What is the difference between looking at naked pics of kids and downloading them from the Internet and actually molesting them? It's still exploitation...and if they have to look at the pics, what makes you think that they will stop at that?

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:39 PM
I didn't say they were 16 or 17 when they killed themselves....what, you think someone who was molested at a young age forgets it when they get older?

And we aren't talking consent.....we're talking someone who [B]wasn't[B] a consenting person, or one who was so underage that they trusted the adult they were with wasn't doing anything wrong.

Sorry....I am not in favor of any leniency.

mmaddog
*******

Actually, Sexual Explotation of a Child has nothing to do with consent. So it's irrelevant here.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:41 PM
What is an older guy doing trying to get my daughter to have naked pictures taken of her?


Being normal (assuming, as I said, the older guy is a year or two older, and not MUCH older).


You scare me because you are condoning a boy taking pics of an underage girl.....so what if he is only 18 and she is 17, it's still an issue!!!


You're right. I condone that. I think it's normal coming-of-age behavior. Sorry if that scares you.


So what age is it OK for this to happen?


It's normal for people at almost ANY age to be curious about the sexuality and nudity of others who are of about the same age. If your daughter isn't interested, she's abnormal -- I don't care how old she is.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:43 PM
So let me ask the question.....

What is the difference between looking at naked pics of kids and downloading them from the Internet and actually molesting them? It's still exploitation...and if they have to look at the pics, what makes you think that they will stop at that?

mmaddog
*******

You really believe there is NO DIFFERENCE between looking at pics and molesting someone? One is fantasy behavior -- the other is a violent crime. The two are TOTALLY different things.

It's POSSIBLE that someone who looks at pics of kids may eventually act on his fantasy, but it's also possible he won't, just like any fantasy. Nearly every woman has fantasties about being with other women, but many never act on it.

Count Alex's Losses
04-18-2005, 08:47 PM
Child molestors should not be killed. They should have their balls cut off.

Chiefnj
04-18-2005, 08:49 PM
You really believe there is NO DIFFERENCE between looking at pics and molesting someone? One is fantasy behavior -- the other is a violent crime. The two are TOTALLY different things.

It's POSSIBLE that someone who looks at pics of kids may eventually act on his fantasy, but it's also possible he won't, just like any fantasy. Nearly every woman has fantasties about being with other women, but many never act on it.

the one engaging in the fantasy behavior (as you put it) is creating a market for someone else to actually commit the violent crime in order to fulfill the behavior.

Pitt Gorilla
04-18-2005, 08:50 PM
So let me ask the question.....

What is the difference between looking at naked pics of kids and downloading them from the Internet and actually molesting them? It's still exploitation...and if they have to look at the pics, what makes you think that they will stop at that?

mmaddog
*******You're asking this question based on what I wrote? You think he should have threatened him/killed him?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:50 PM
the one engaging in the fantasy behavior (as you put it) is creating a market for someone else to actually commit the violent crime in order to fulfill the behavior.

True. I'm certainly not saying that the looking at kiddy porn pics is okay -- but it's NO WHERE NEAR the offense that child molestation is. To call them the same thing is pretty absurd.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:52 PM
Being normal (assuming, as I said, the older guy is a year or two older, and not MUCH older)..

Sorry...i disagree.



You're right. I condone that. I think it's normal coming-of-age behavior. Sorry if that scares you..

Taking nude pictures of an underage girl is normal-coming-of-age curiosity? WOW....that scares me.



It's normal for people at almost ANY age to be curious about the sexuality and nudity of others who are of about the same age. If your daughter isn't interested, she's abnormal -- I don't care how old she is.

I'll tell you what...you don't try to label my daughter and I won't label yours. Agreed?

mmaddog
*******

Pitt Gorilla
04-18-2005, 08:52 PM
the one engaging in the fantasy behavior (as you put it) is creating a market for someone else to actually commit the violent crime in order to fulfill the behavior.Yeah, it's isomorphic to people who murder people and the people who like to see murder portrayed on television.

Inspector
04-18-2005, 08:54 PM
So, Jcroft....

You got any kids??

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:55 PM
You're asking this question based on what I wrote? You think he should have threatened him/killed him?

No...I asked the simple question...

What is the difference between looking at child porn and downloading it over the Internet, and molesting the child? I agree one is more aggregious than the other, but both are still a crime. And what would you say if the sicko was looking at a naked pic he managed to scarf of your child unknowingly?

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:56 PM
Sorry...i disagree.


Okay.





Taking nude pictures of an underage girl is normal-coming-of-age curiosity? WOW....that scares me.

It most certainly is. If it scares you so much, you better keep your daughter away from digital cameras and webcams. I'm not sure I know a girl between the ages of 15 and 18 that HASN'T showed her tits on a cam.

Of course, you keep saying "underage" like it's a big deal. I'm talking about people within a year or two of each other, which is why I keep using the 17/18 example. One day it's fine for a guy to **** his girlfriend, the next it's not? That's absurd.


I'll tell you what...you don't try to label my daughter and I won't label yours. Agreed?

mmaddog
*******

I'm not trying to label anyone. I'm saying that ALL young people, even as young as a couple of years old, are curious about nudity and sexuality. Even your daughter. It's totally normal.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:57 PM
So, Jcroft....

You got any kids??

I presume this is a joke. But I'll give you benefit of the doubt.

Yes, I have a 10 year old daughter. I've mentioned her numerous times in this thread.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:57 PM
Yeah, it's isomorphic to people who murder people and the people who like to see murder portrayed on television.

Good analogy.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 08:57 PM
True. I'm certainly not saying that the looking at kiddy porn pics is okay -- but it's NO WHERE NEAR the offense that child molestation is. To call them the same thing is pretty absurd.

And to act like one doesn't lead to the other is hiding your head in the sand.....and absurd.

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:59 PM
What is the difference between looking at child porn and downloading it over the Internet, and molesting the child?
*******

The difference is one is molestation and one is exploitation. Two different crimes, two different punishments.

Actually, I'm not even sure if just SEEING child porn is even exploitation. owning it is. I'm not sure about SEEING it.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 08:59 PM
And to act like one doesn't lead to the other is hiding your head in the sand.....and absurd.

mmaddog
*******

So then, if I watch a violent movie, I'm destined to murder someone?

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 08:59 PM
So, Jcroft....

You got any kids??





Now you've gone and done it....ROFL

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:02 PM
Okay.






It most certainly is. If it scares you so much, you better keep your daughter away from digital cameras and webcams. I'm not sure I know a girl between the ages of 15 and 18 that HASN'T showed her tits on a cam.

Of course, you keep saying "underage" like it's a big deal. I'm talking about people within a year or two of each other, which is why I keep using the 17/18 example. One day it's fine for a guy to **** his girlfriend, the next it's not? That's absurd.



I'm not trying to label anyone. I'm saying that ALL young people, even as young as a couple of years old, are curious about nudity and sexuality. Even your daughter. It's totally normal.


1) You hang around kids ages 15 to 18 that show their tits on the Web? You act like it's ok for that.....

2) You never answered my question....what age is it ok ? You keep passing around that 17/18 year old age....why is that the magic age?

3) Actually you labeled my daughter abnormal if she isn't curious about nudity and sexuality....why?

mmaddog
*******

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 09:03 PM
Okay.






It most certainly is. If it scares you so much, you better keep your daughter away from digital cameras and webcams. I'm not sure I know a girl between the ages of 15 and 18 that HASN'T showed her tits on a cam.

Of course, you keep saying "underage" like it's a big deal. I'm talking about people within a year or two of each other, which is why I keep using the 17/18 example. One day it's fine for a guy to **** his girlfriend, the next it's not? That's absurd.



I'm not trying to label anyone. I'm saying that ALL young people, even as young as a couple of years old, are curious about nudity and sexuality. Even your daughter. It's totally normal.





You are so full of shit.....what kind of perv are you or where do you live that every girl age 15-18 has shown their breasts on a cam? :rolleyes:

Inspector
04-18-2005, 09:04 PM
I presume this is a joke. But I'll give you benefit of the doubt.

Yes, I have a 10 year old daughter. I've mentioned her numerous times in this thread.

Yeah, just messin with ya man!

I read the whole thread and couldn't help myself.

I am ashamed of this sophmoric behavior.

I will now resume my position in the corner.

Pitt Gorilla
04-18-2005, 09:05 PM
No...I asked the simple question...

What is the difference between looking at child porn and downloading it over the Internet, and molesting the child? I agree one is more aggregious than the other, but both are still a crime. And what would you say if the sicko was looking at a naked pic he managed to scarf of your child unknowingly?

mmaddog
*******Ok, I admit to being confused here. What does this have to do with my quote; you quoted me then asked a seemingly unrelated question.

It should be noted, however, that you seem to have answered your own question. As to the last question, the guy should be prosecuted.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:07 PM
1) You hang around kids ages 15 to 18 that show their tits on the Web? You act like it's ok for that.....


I know a lot of kids that age, yes. You can act like the fact that I know kids that age makes me a bad guy if you want to, but you actually know nothing about me.


2) You never answered my question....what age is it ok ? You keep passing around that 17/18 year old age....why is that the magic age?


I did answer your question. It's always okay, in my mind, for people about the same age to be interested in one another sexually. It's normal. It's abnormal for people that are clearly adults (which an 18 year is not) to be sexually interested in people that are clearly kids (which a 17 year old is not).

To put it in terms your obviously simple mind can understand: if a child is defined as someone 17 or younger, then I think it's abnormal for anyone over the age of 21 to be interested in that 17 year old. I certainly don't think it's abnormal for an 18 or 19 year old to be interested in her.


3) Actually you labeled my daughter abnormal if she isn't curious about nudity and sexuality....why?

mmaddog
*******

Because ALL people are, unless they have a problem. I said what I meant. You took offense to it -- why?

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:07 PM
So then, if I watch a violent movie, I'm destined to murder someone?

Nice try.....watching a violent movie isn't against the law. But looking at and downloading child porn is.

And there are cases where it is proven that watching a violent movie has driven people to violence...

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:08 PM
You are so full of shit.....what kind of perv are you or where do you live that every girl age 15-18 has shown their breasts on a cam? :rolleyes:

I didn't say every one did. I said I think all of them *I* know have. But the point is -- it's certainly not abnormal for a 15-18 year old to be interested in nudity and sex. Were YOU interested in nudity and sex when you were that age? Why would you expect today's youth to be any different?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:10 PM
Nice try.....watching a violent movie isn't against the law. But looking at and downloading child porn is.

And there are cases where it is proven that watching a violent movie has driven people to violence...

mmaddog
*******

I'm not talking about what's legal and what's not right now -- I'm talking about what is real. The reality is that people do view child porn and never molest children, just like people do view violence and never kill people.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:14 PM
I know a lot of kids that age, yes. You can act like the fact that I know kids that age makes me a bad guy if you want to, but you actually know nothing about me.

You're making assumptions......I asked the question and you took it from there. Feeling guilty?



I did answer your question. It's always okay, in my mind, for people about the same age to be interested in one another sexually. It's normal. It's abnormal for people that are clearly adults (which an 18 year is not) to be sexually interested in people that are clearly kids (which a 17 year old is not).

To put it in terms your obviously simple mind can understand: if a child is defined as someone 17 or younger, then I think it's abnormal for anyone over the age of 21 to be interested in that 17 year old. I certainly don't think it's abnormal for an 18 or 19 year old to be interested in her.

The law says they are adults at 18 years old. They go to war, are able to get a credit card, get a mortgage, sign legal documents. Can't have it both ways....they are an adult at 18 and if you start messing with an underage girl there are consequences.




Because ALL people are, unless they have a problem. I said what I meant. You took offense to it -- why?

Because you, once again are making an unfounded assumption. Are you absolutely sure that ALL people are curious? Unless you have absolute facts to back you up it is nothing more than an opinion on your part. And my answer back was not one of offense....just stating that I won't label your child if you won't label mine. OK?

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:18 PM
You're making assumptions......I asked the question and you took it from there. Feeling guilty?


If you weren't making assumptions then, you sure as hell are now.




The law says they are adults at 18 years old. They go to war, are able to get a credit card, get a mortgage, sign legal documents. Can't have it both ways....they are an adult at 18 and if you start messing with an underage girl there are consequences.


Actually in Kanas the age of consent is 16. Good try, though.


Because you, once again are making an unfounded assumption. Are you absolutely sure that ALL people are curious? Unless you have absolute facts to back you up it is nothing more than an opinion on your part. And my answer back was not one of offense....just stating that I won't label your child if you won't label mine. OK?


I'm not making an unfounded assumption. I'm citing what you will read in any baby book, and psychology book, any sex education book, etc. I'm not taking the time to find you facts, because you're not worth it. Go buy any book on parenting if you don't believe it and you're that curious.

I won't label your child. Never have, never will. You can label mine all you want -- nothing you say here is going to hurt me.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:18 PM
Ok, I admit to being confused here. What does this have to do with my quote; you quoted me then asked a seemingly unrelated question.

It should be noted, however, that you seem to have answered your own question. As to the last question, the guy should be prosecuted.

Pitt:

You quoted the part where he updated everyone after speaking with the Law Enforcement personnel.....that it was just viewing porn and downloading it not molestation.

My question to you was....does it make any difference which crime he committed? Its still a crime against a child isn't it?

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:20 PM
Pitt:

You quoted the part where he updated everyone after speaking with the Law Enforcement personnel.....that it was just viewing porn and downloading it not molestation.

My question to you was....does it make any difference which crime he committed? Its still a crime against a child isn't it?

mmaddog
*******

I know you didn't ask me, but I'm answering anyway...

IF he viewed child porn (and we don't know that this is what he did -- we are just talking possibilities here), then he did committ a crime. But he did NOT victimize a child himself. Someone had to have, in order for that porn to exist, but it was not the guy living behind scorp.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:23 PM
If you weren't making assumptions then, you sure as hell are now..

LOL....I make no assumptions. I don't know you well enough to.






Actually in Kanas the age of consent is 16. Good try, though.. And age of consent is SC is 14.....but if you go to another state where the age is older you can still be arrested. See the poor soul who married a gal in SC...he was 19...she was 15. They went to visit her parents in another state and he was arrested.




I'm not making an unfounded assumption. I'm citing what you will read in any baby book, and psychology book, any sex education book, etc. I'm not taking the time to find you facts, because you're not worth it. Go buy any book on parenting if you don't believe it and you're that curious..

Translation= I can't really back up my claim.

I won't label your child. Never have, never will. You can label mine all you want -- nothing you say here is going to hurt me.

I never labeled your child. You asserted mine would be abnormal....and unlike you I am not here to hurt anyone.

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:26 PM
I know you didn't ask me, but I'm answering anyway...

IF he viewed child porn (and we don't know that this is what he did -- we are just talking possibilities here), then he did committ a crime. But he did NOT victimize a child himself. Someone had to have, in order for that porn to exist, but it was not the guy living behind scorp.

Sorry....but viewing and downloading child porn is victimizing the child. Even the experts agree on that.

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:28 PM
I never labeled your child. You asserted mine would be abnormal....and unlike you I am not here to hurt anyone.

mmaddog
*******

Oh c'mon, man. This is getting ridiculous. We disagree on some things. But let's kiss andmake up or something. Good god. If you think i'm here to hurt you ro anyone else, then I'll stop talking right now.

If, on the other hand, you're just being an asshole, I'll be glad to keep it up.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:29 PM
Sorry....but viewing and downloading child porn is victimizing the child. Even the experts agree on that.

mmaddog
*******

Probably the same experts that wrote the books I referred to, since you provide about as much proof as I did.

But I get it -- you can cite "the experts" and it's good enough, but I can't. Fine.

Iowanian
04-18-2005, 09:31 PM
I can't get with the "lets give these fugs the benefit of the doubt Program"....

btw Croft.........You were great on SNL...the Sprockets skits were fab.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:32 PM
Probably the same experts that wrote the books I referred to, since you provide about as much proof as I did.

But I get it -- you can cite "the experts" and it's good enough, but I can't. Fine.

No...just showing you that "saying so" doesn't make it right.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:33 PM
I can't get with the "lets give these fugs the benefit of the doubt Program"....

btw Croft.........You were great on SNL...the Sprockets skits were fab.

Haha. Nice one. I'm not terribly fond of that picture. I've been meaning to change it to a more recent one, like maybe this one:

http://photos4.flickr.com/5335273_48fa3600b1.jpg

What do you think? Better?

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:34 PM
No...just showing you that "saying so" doesn't make it right.

Oh yeah, you were "just showing me." You didn't mean that. I believe you. Yeah. Totally.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:35 PM
Oh c'mon, man. This is getting ridiculous. We disagree on some things. But let's kiss andmake up or something. Good god. If you think i'm here to hurt you ro anyone else, then I'll stop talking right now.

If, on the other hand, you're just being an asshole, I'll be glad to keep it up.

I have no problem with disagreement....

And, there are very few people who will label me an asshole.....I can think of 3 or 4.....arrogant and obnoxious maybe, but not an asshole.

mmaddog
*******

Iowanian
04-18-2005, 09:35 PM
That show you have on Bravo where you give Lumberjacks' haircuts, and new ways to button their flannels is nice too.

Mosbonian
04-18-2005, 09:36 PM
Oh yeah, you were "just showing me." You didn't mean that. I believe you. Yeah. Totally.

Just like I believe that you really know what you are talking about....why not just end this now?

mmaddog
*******

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:37 PM
That show you have on Bravo where you give Lumberjacks' haircuts, and new ways to button their flannels is nice too.

I'm not sure if that's supposed to be an insult, but since I embrace the metrosexuality, it's more like a compliment. Thanks.

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:37 PM
Just like I believe that you really know what you are talking about....why not just end this now?

mmaddog
*******

Okay, I'm done.

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 09:41 PM
I didn't say every one did. I said I think all of them *I* know have. But the point is -- it's certainly not abnormal for a 15-18 year old to be interested in nudity and sex. Were YOU interested in nudity and sex when you were that age? Why would you expect today's youth to be any different?





I was stoned so I don't remember.......ROFL

jcroft
04-18-2005, 09:42 PM
I was stoned so I don't remember.......ROFL

In that case, you've probably boned an underage girl and don't remember. But don't worry, I don't think it makes you a sexual predator.

Iowanian
04-18-2005, 09:52 PM
I'm not sure if that's supposed to be an insult, but since I embrace the metrosexuality, it's more like a compliment. Thanks.


This was a joke.....I wouldn't think at this point, a poster with 5000+ would need a disclaimer to recongize an Iowaninsult.

Real men don't wear abercrombie.

chiefs4me
04-18-2005, 10:48 PM
In that case, you've probably boned an underage girl and don't remember. But don't worry, I don't think it makes you a sexual predator.






Where the hell have you been that you don't know I have never and will never.....as you put it..bone a female........ROFL

jcroft
04-18-2005, 11:05 PM
This was a joke.....I wouldn't think at this point, a poster with 5000+ would need a disclaimer to recongize an Iowaninsult.

Real men don't wear abercrombie.

I knew it was a joke. My response was a joke, too. No worries, I can always handle your jokes (it's ENDelt's that get to me -- that mother****er.) :D

For the record, there's not a single garment of Ambercrombie in my wardrobe. :D

badgirl
04-18-2005, 11:44 PM
In that case, you've probably boned an underage girl and don't remember. But don't worry, I don't think it makes you a sexual predator.
If shes boned an underage girl she has more worries than we know about and being a sexual predator isn't one of them. ROFL

go bowe
04-18-2005, 11:47 PM
Where the hell have you been that you don't know I have never and will never.....as you put it..bone a female........ROFL[jcroft voice]what? are you gay or something?[/jcroft voice]

badgirl
04-18-2005, 11:50 PM
So let me ask the question.....

What is the difference between looking at naked pics of kids and downloading them from the Internet and actually molesting them? It's still exploitation...and if they have to look at the pics, what makes you think that they will stop at that?

mmaddog
*******
If someone is downloading child porn or making it, I beleive it would escalate into molestation, evidentally seeing a naked child turns these sickos on, just like a rapist who turns into murderer, they have fantasies about going one step farther, and it may take a while but some do end up carrying out the fantasies they have had for a long time, and kill their victim

Someone who is sick enough to watch kiddie porn is or will be a molester IMO, I agree with everything mmaddog said.

jcroft
04-19-2005, 12:08 AM
[jcroft voice]what? are you gay or something?[/jcroft voice]

Why would that be in MY voice? I've got to be the least homophobic straight guy on ChiefsPlanet.

Sorry, I didn't realize she was female. My mistake.

jcroft
04-19-2005, 12:09 AM
If someone is downloading child porn or making it, I beleive it would escalate into molestation, evidentally seeing a naked child turns these sickos on, just like a rapist who turns into murderer, they have fantasies about going one step farther, and it may take a while but some do end up carrying out the fantasies they have had for a long time, and kill their victim

Someone who is sick enough to watch kiddie porn is or will be a molester IMO, I agree with everything mmaddog said.

It's definitely possible, and probably even likely, but it's not a certainy. I know a guy who collects strange porn, but he's not actually into strange sex. It's just a weird thing.

I do see your point, though, and I think you're right most of the time -- just not always.

But still, you can't charge a guy with a crime you think he's GOING to commit. If he hasn't done it yet, you really can't hold him responsible for it -- can you? Is this real-life Minority Report?

badgirl
04-19-2005, 01:45 AM
It's definitely possible, and probably even likely, but it's not a certainy. I know a guy who collects strange porn, but he's not actually into strange sex. It's just a weird thing.

I do see your point, though, and I think you're right most of the time -- just not always.

But still, you can't charge a guy with a crime you think he's GOING to commit. If he hasn't done it yet, you really can't hold him responsible for it -- can you? Is this real-life Minority Report?
Of course you can't charge someone on a crime he might committ, but there needs to be some stricter laws on sex offenders so they will think twice before letting it escalate to the point of murder, rape or molestation.

yunghungwell
04-19-2005, 08:34 AM
I was stoned so I don't remember.......


In that case, you've probably boned an underage girl and don't remember. But don't worry, I don't think it makes you a sexual predator.

We could surely sell tickets to that!!

chiefs4me
04-19-2005, 09:23 AM
Well I checked all the texas links I could find and I am happy to say there are no sick mother******* living close to me at all. There are a few in town and they live clear on the other side of the town...Now I think I will do a background check on my neighbors....the ole grinch down the street better hope I don't find anything on him.:)

yunghungwell
04-19-2005, 09:27 AM
Ok, I had so many things that came to mind that I needed to jot them down as I read this thread!

1) Sorry some of you folks live in Kansas and that Kansas does not let you know the age range of the victim. Maybe you should lobby to change that. In Iowa the sex offender registry list the individual's crime and then states the age range that the age of the victim falls into. It is either 0-13 yrs. or 14-17 yrs.

2) I know that many of you have stated that you would like to know exactly what it is that this dude did. Then you could finally lay down some judgment. WELLLLLL, court records on issues such as this are not as accessible to the public for a reason. That reason is to protect the child. I do not think that this law should be changed by any means. I am not saying that some of you would be in favor of changing these laws. I just thought it would be a good point to bring to light lest we forget why we don't know the "whole" story.

3) Oh sure there is internet porn out there that is professionally produced and one can only assume that all participants are willing, but being will to let your 18 yr. old bf take some naked pictures of you when you are 17 is a bad decision but far different from allowing them to be posted on the internet for the world to see. Damn the legality of it all. If some butthole boyfriend posts naked pictures of my daughter on the internet, especially without her consent, that little bastage is becoming a eunuch!

4) Many of the posters on this thread have stated their concern with finding out that a person listed on the sex offender registry lives near them. One thing to remember is that there are many more sexual offenders out there that have never been caught, some never will be. You have to be watchful of ANYONE that your child has interaction with, and many times the abuse comes from someone totally unexpected, like a family member or a teacher or even a priest.

You never know what a potential abuser is going to look like. Does this guy look like someone who would try to get a 13 yr. old drunk and have sex with her?

http://www.perverted-justice.com/pedopics/meyer1979.jpg

Well he certainly would, he lives in the Kansas City area, and he was caught in a sting for a KC TV news station. You can read his thoughts about finding a 13 yr. old female friend here. Scott 1 (http://www.perverted-justice.com/?archive=meyer1979) Scott 2 (http://www.perverted-justice.com/index.php?archive=meyer1979%20-%20part%20II)

5) Rehabilitate all you want. Being a child molester is analogous to being addicted to meth. (97% relapse rate) I personally know someone who was a family counselor working in conjunction with DHS and this person recounted a story of a convicted child molester who was released from prison. He went to live with his daughter and young granddaughter. As the counselor, this person was obligated to tell the "woman" of the house to kick her father out and protect her daughter from potential abuse. The woman was in denial and didn't think that here father would do such a thing again until her told the whole family in a meeting that he would probably do just such a thing again if he were given the chance. Not that he didn't think what he did was wrong, he knew for sure that it was wrong, but he just couldn't resist himself.

FTR, generalities were used in the telling of this story. Client confidentiality was not broken. I know nothing of where these people live or their names or ages.

6) People please, pay attention to what your children are doing on the internet and be as close to 100% sure as you can that you know who they IM with. I ran across the following link yesterday while looking to see who the guys at Pervertedjustice.com had actually gotten convicted. I could not stand to read it word for word. I only scanned to get the picture. It changed something in me a little. It is hard to live in the nice little box you create for yourself after reading such a thing.

Here it is...sick focker, Paul Short, link. (http://www.perverted-justice.com/?archive=fleet_captain_jaime_wolfe)

Mr. Short originally entered a plea of "not guilty" with his public defender, before changing his mind nearly three months later, and taking a prosecution deal. Under the deal, Mr. Short pled guilty to one of seven felony counts of indecent solicitation, and has been given two years probation, listed as a sex offender, and a fine.

yunghungwell
04-19-2005, 09:32 AM
Yeah, it's isomorphic to people who murder people and the people who like to see murder portrayed on television.

Pitt, if you truly like to see people murdered in movies and on TV, I have serious doubts about how "right" you are in the head.

Brock
04-19-2005, 09:38 AM
1) Sorry some of you folks live in Kansas and that Kansas does not let you know the age range of the victim. [/URL]

Yes, they do. As in, "Aggravated Indecent Liberties with a Child", a child is anyone under 16. What more would I need to know?

Saulbadguy
04-19-2005, 09:48 AM
1) You hang around kids ages 15 to 18 that show their tits on the Web? You act like it's ok for that.....


Welcome to the Internet.

Brock
04-19-2005, 09:48 AM
I agree with you. But do you think that 18 year old who boinked his 15 year old girlfriend should be treated exactly like a 50 year old who has a kiddy porn ring set up in which he rape pre-pubescent girls time and time again and gets it on film?

They're not the same crime, why would anyone think it should entail the same punishment? "Unlawful Voluntary Sexual Relations" is not the same as "Indecent Liberties".

Saulbadguy
04-19-2005, 09:48 AM
You are so full of shit.....what kind of perv are you or where do you live that every girl age 15-18 has shown their breasts on a cam? :rolleyes:
Welcome to the Internet.

Count Alex's Losses
04-19-2005, 10:13 AM
Jesus, that shit that yunghungwell posted is scary.

MOhillbilly
04-19-2005, 10:29 AM
adding to the chair,nail.knive punishment i would also set the room on fire.

I likea good far.