I don't get your point anymore....are your panties in a wad over them not being in jail long enough? Or thinking that reporting their address and work location to authorities is cruel and unusual? If it helps protect kids and women from people that have been proven by their peers to have done something to harm them in the past, then what are you so hellbent against it for?

If it's just a case of wanting something because he doesn't think he can have it
that's not a good sign -I'm kinda leary of his sincerity anyway
but it's only a dog

Hell, I'm all for this. "Why not?" is right.

However, I'd rather them have a brand of a penis on their forehead, not an S. It would be a sort of permanent mushroom stamp.

Only a dog? ONLY A DOG?!?!?!

Hehe, yeah its just a dog. :D

Its principle. My criminal record is clean (except 3 or 4 speeding tickets), and I know of no one personally who is impacted. I sincerely believe if you are free, you should be free, none of this half-assed bullsh*t.

If anything, these lists could be dangerous to the very people you want to protect. Having these lists available makes it more likely that we decide its ok to let an iffy marginal case go "well, the public will be informed so our conscience is clear. If someone is hurt, oh well we did the best we could." Bullcrap, if someone wants to reoffend you think a damned list will stop them? Your kids wont memorize faces and even if they do they would be ambushed. The offenders are also usually capable of walking more than 1,000 feet at a time.

Its security theater to give you the false illusion that you know where all the bad people are, so you feel safer. Well you arent safer, to the extent that danger exists, these lists do squat, all you do is make life miserable for the Romeo and Juliet bullcrap cases who shouldnt be on the list while not protecting anyone at all from the people you are scared of.

If someone is dangerous, dont think that a list will make everything all better, increase the sentences or declare them legally crazy.

In a related story, Steelers QB Ben Roethlisburger has told friends he would like to settle down and force himself on the right girl.

At first glance, I thought the title was Mike Vick: I would like to drown a dog again someday

You're a ****ing idiot.

fyp

:D

Again, your logic is massively flawed. Your example of a 'marginal case' where someone is KNOWN to be very dangerous (immediate danger) still, but released anyway is bogus...Please show some evidence for this. How is having a list MORE dangerous than not having a list for the community?

In the VAST majority of these cases both the prisoner AND the prison system wish for the prisoner to be released....the prisoner having served their time. Again, how is having a list more dangerous than not, when we are BOUND to release these prisoners?

If you have a problem with the length of punishment for certain crimes, that is a completely separate issue than a list....I mean if you think the time served should be 'life in prison, or until we can show 100% that this person will never commit a crime again' that is an even higher standard than murder....I could possibly agree with it though.

It seems like you don't really understand what you are even arguing for...

ROFL @ People acting like he has an uncontrollable urge to kill dogs.

Yes, he should be allowed to own a dog.

Comparing a dog to anything human is pretty much reeruned.

No shit.

LMAO

I think he should be able to.