 | | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Okay, but would you hold a profoundly retarded person equally culpable for his actions as a fully-functioning, mentally healthy adult? To do so would be, in my view, unforgiveably cruel and unfair. By the same token, if a child is (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Frank's "[as an abuse]" is a perfect clarification. Basically, I think that to deny access to our rights as citizens based on the age of the citizen (which I assert kids are) is exactly the moral equivalent of denying rights based on skin tone (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) As one of the people suggesting that everything can be treated as a property right, I would like to point out that I don't think that compensation is the sole remedy. Certainly people who demonstrate an inability to restrain themselves need to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Of course not, and in fact you've nicely paraphrased my objection to a pure "propertly loss/compensation" system of law that some here have previously proposed. But if the accepted laws of society recognize that you have duly repaid your debt (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: W
|
|
(...) We only ever hear from the puppet-master at the end of the show. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: W
|
|
(...) That's 'cause he thinks he's Major T. J. "King" Kong. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) Rather than simply restating the claim; perhaps you should just say why you think he is a "luddite"? Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) One feeling I have is that if someone is still dangerous, they belong in detention or treatment. Simply hanging a sign around their neck (and these laws are just high tech versions of hanging a sign around a persons neck) isn't really going to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Does guilt vanish with repayment? If I steal your car and am required to compensate you and pay an additional fine, have I then _not_ stolen your car? I think there are some pretty disturbing abuses of these laws, and I go back and forth about (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Timmy
|
|
(...) Arrrrr, there be nuthin' a-wrong wi' Timmy. He be making good chum when chopped inta small 'nuf bits. If'n ya be fishing fer yer great white, then he be good fer trollin' abaft yer transom on a really big 'ook. Thrashes 'bout most convinc'n'ly (...) (22 years ago, 9-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
