quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: someone explain what just happened
the truth hurts i gess yo save the tatas i have no clue who you are but it sounds like you care a lot about my EX --- other wise you wouldn't keep following me around the forums & givin me such a hard time now would you lol ? its a free country freedom of speech and i didnt start this topic so get over ur self you dont seem to have a problem with any thing any one else had to post in here now did you just what i had to post sounds kinda fishy to me lol
the only reason u come here to post is cuz of jesse. every year its the same thing. your not contributing to this forum with your junior high school bs. thats why people get annoyed by you.
Posts: 8925 | From: over yonder | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: someone explain what just happened
the truth hurts i gess yo save the tatas i have no clue who you are but it sounds like you care a lot about my EX --- other wise you wouldn't keep following me around the forums & givin me such a hard time now would you lol ? its a free country freedom of speech and i didnt start this topic so get over ur self you dont seem to have a problem with any thing any one else had to post in here now did you just what i had to post sounds kinda fishy to me lol
the only reason u come here to post is cuz of jesse. every year its the same thing. your not contributing to this forum with your junior high school bs. thats why people get annoyed by you.
im in the WELFARE TOPIC FORUM what seems to be the problem now? people are just talking about how they feel about the people on welfare ..... and hard working tax payers money who support them ....
so your telling me that you don't have a problem with a man going on welfare just to avoid paying his child support . How is it jesse has contributing to the forum when he hasen't competed but what 1 or 2 shows this whole year and he is on welfare hello whats he contributing to if you dont mind me asking?
go look at jesse stats and tell me what were his best years running the were ---->all prior to 2004 were'nt they ? i wounder why !!!!
any one in his or her right mind would agree with me on this so please and thoes who dont get a job like the rest of us !!!!!
we were talking about welfare and welfare reform. we were not singling out any specific person like your first post was. we are not concerned with jesse and his living/working arrangements in this thread, so please find somewhere else to troll.
Posts: 8925 | From: over yonder | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: after "I take this even further," was a second, related topic. It went form felons voting, to voting rights in general. (the 17-year-old couldn't vote because the minimum age to vote is 18-- not because speeding is a felony). Sorry I didn't make it clear enough.
Yeah either I misread that or you didn't separate the topics well enough...... either way.
I'm not opposed to letting people younger than 18 vote.... I'd rather the right to vote be tied to whether or not you pay taxes. But I think people under the age of 18 are more easily influenced since they are still under the legal controll of their parents. If you allow a person that is under the legal controll of another person (the parent) then that means the person popping out the most babies will have the greatest influence in an election.
I'm not opposed to holding someone to the standard of the law regardless of whether they can vote or not. I believe the laws are more in place to protect the victim not the person breaking the law.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: And I don't know quite what to make of the opening arguements in that post... you erealize that they would not be voting to legalize things like rape, robbery, and child molestation (because you recognize that those issues will not come up)... BUT you say that the reason you don't want them to vote is because they will vote to legalize those things?
What is going to be the felons motivation to vote??? More specifically what does a felon hope to change by voting???
Personally I vote for people that are supposedly going to take care of issues and solve problems that concern me in way that solves the problem in a correct way and in a way that satisfies me. I have to assume and say that other people that vote are doing the same.
What does a felon hope to achieve by voting??? When they commited the felony they either didn't feel what they were doing was illegal..... or they didnt care. So that means that they are either ignorant or that they have bad judgement and morals. Either way I don't care for anyone with bad judgment, ignorance or bad morals to have a voice.
If I had to have an issue with felons not being able to vote my issue would be with the definition of a felony......
My problem is that a felony is that by definition, a felony is determined by the length of time a person serves instead of the type or nature of the crime the felon commits. So if you muder/rape/moslest/rob someone and only get 8 months........ you are not technically a felon. Which is really silly IMO.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: How they vote isn't the issue, its whether they vote.
and, this was hinted at a little bit...
Respecting others' rights is not the same thing as condoning their actions, or what they say. KKK members and the like have the right to exist. I strongly disagree with their world views, and pretty much everything else about them... but its their right to think how they wish.
The difference being that people beliefs and world views are different than their actions.
A felon commits an action that hurts another person...... everyone else just has a view or belief that may or may not hurt another person. You can't or shouldn't controll how people are thinking or what they say. You should argue against stupidity and explain to a person with a dumb view why they are dumb.........
A felon actually physically harmed someone in reality....... An action that resulted in harm to another person. So in tern we commit an action that results in harm to that person...... ie: locking them up, taking away their right to vote, yada yada yada.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: and pick at gov's discretion? ok, so you don't know much about our current system...
Psychologists/Psychiatrists assess whether the person who did the crime is mentally capable. The gov doesn't decide because thats not what the gov does. It brings in experts. the gov is (suppossed to be) an arbitrator of sorts.
Well now you are getting into something else I disagree with....
I dont think Psychologists/Psychiatrists should assess whether the person committing the crime was mentally capable of understanding thier actions. Whether they understood what they were doing are not is second to the act they commited.
If a person is found to be insane when they mudered a person they can be just as insane while we are frying their ass. If a person is mentally retarded when they rape a person they can be stay mentally retarded behind bars.
I think alot of that is getting back the PC BS.
-------------------- 92 caprice wagon "think for a minute about how stupid the average person is.... and remember that half are dumber than that" Posts: 4216 | From: ga | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
If yall want to argue about something other than the topic..... Or if its not atleast something related to the topic....
Then GTFO!!!
Use PMs thanks.
-------------------- 92 caprice wagon "think for a minute about how stupid the average person is.... and remember that half are dumber than that" Posts: 4216 | From: ga | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:we were talking about welfare and welfare reform. we were not singling out any specific person like your first post was. we are not concerned with jesse and his living/working arrangements in this thread, so please find somewhere else to troll.
x2
and Hum, yeah, he mentioned a name. But, you agreed that that was the person you were talking about. That says that Yes, you were singling out someone, and it was you who brought that person up (though you didn't use their name). If that weren't the case, people who knew the situation would have no idea who you were talking about.
IMO, you saw this thread and posted for no other reason than to give a long-winded "FU" without adding anything to the topic. You achieved your goal.. no please don't get our thread locked...
quote:I'm not opposed to letting people younger than 18 vote.... I'd rather the right to vote be tied to whether or not you pay taxes. But I think people under the age of 18 are more easily influenced since they are still under the legal controll of their parents. If you allow a person that is under the legal controll of another person (the parent) then that means the person popping out the most babies will have the greatest influence in an election.
hmm... voting tied with taxes. Thats a great idea. That may be better than the test... and would certainly be easier to implement. That would not only measure competency, but contribution. I'd still like to keep the 18 blanket rule, though.
and yes, younger people are more fickle. To be perfecly honest, yeah, that does worry me as well. An ignorant 17-year-old who votes for someone just because they hinted they might legalize pot has just as much of a say as I do? But, I'm willing to accept that. If they pay tazes, are subject to the law, just like myself, they should be able to vote IMO.
and the babies.. yeah, thats true. but thats always been true. Most children follow their parents' religious/political beliefs anyway.
quote:I'm not opposed to holding someone to the standard of the law regardless of whether they can vote or not. I believe the laws are more in place to protect the victim not the person breaking the law.
I agree. Even though I think that its somewhat irresponsible for a government to punish those who cannot vote, negligently immunizing those sections of the population would cause far more harm than good. Earlier when I touched on this I was showing thoughts as rationale for the gov to let them vote, not for the gov to not punish those who aren't allowed to vote. (just thought I'd clear that up to stave off misunderstanding while I was thinking about it)
quote:What is going to be the felons motivation to vote??? More specifically what does a felon hope to change by voting???
I don't think the motivation for voting changes whether or not a person is a felon. I also don't think that felons would categorically vote different than a significant portion of non-felons. But you still may be right. This is something that could be measured.. although I doubt we'd be able to find any info on it.
quote:The difference being that people beliefs and world views are different than their actions. ...
yes, but thats not quite what I was getting at. I wasn't talking about punishing them, I was talking about my views towards them. I approve that they exist, but I don't approve of their actions. Just like I approve of felons voting, but I don't approve of their actions.
and about the mentally impaired...
If I understand it correctly, it depends on age. If the person is underage and ruled to not understand, they are under juvenile laws, which usually mean they can be punished up until they're 18 or 21 (don't remember), and must be released with no record. and their names are never mentioned.
if the person is older, their names are released, they go to trial, and if they are ruled incompetent, they are put in away (I think only in a mental institution) for their sentence, and the only difference is that they cannot be put to death. could be wrong, though. With them its more about safety than punishment. If they person isn't mentally able to be in soceity and not harm them, then they are kept away and watched after. Felons that understand what they are doing are kept away for public safety, but in jail, where they are also punished.
With children its a little different story. If they aren't mentally capable yet.. they may become capable as they grow, so they are let out.
It used to be a blanket immunity for people under certain ages, before they started to judge them with psychiatrists. The most notable exampkle are when two undreage middleschoolers gathered up some guns, foudn a place outside the emergency exits, and pulled the fire alarm. they shot their classmates as they exited the building. They couldn't be tried as adults because of the law at the time, and they are both free now.
Its different now, thuogh. To the best of my knowledge, there aren't any (or at least many) blanklet immunity laws based on age anymore. Pretty much no mater the age, they can be tried as an adult if the psychiatrists/psycholigists say so.
But, I do recognize that it takes more competence to make an educated vote than it does to simply undrestand that something is wrong and not do it.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: after "I take this even further," was a second, related topic. It went form felons voting, to voting rights in general. (the 17-year-old couldn't vote because the minimum age to vote is 18-- not because speeding is a felony). Sorry I didn't make it clear enough.
Yeah either I misread that or you didn't separate the topics well enough...... either way.
I'm not opposed to letting people younger than 18 vote.... I'd rather the right to vote be tied to whether or not you pay taxes. But I think people under the age of 18 are more easily influenced since they are still under the legal controll of their parents. If you allow a person that is under the legal controll of another person (the parent) then that means the person popping out the most babies will have the greatest influence in an election.
I'm not opposed to holding someone to the standard of the law regardless of whether they can vote or not. I believe the laws are more in place to protect the victim not the person breaking the law.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: And I don't know quite what to make of the opening arguements in that post... you erealize that they would not be voting to legalize things like rape, robbery, and child molestation (because you recognize that those issues will not come up)... BUT you say that the reason you don't want them to vote is because they will vote to legalize those things?
What is going to be the felons motivation to vote??? More specifically what does a felon hope to change by voting???
Personally I vote for people that are supposedly going to take care of issues and solve problems that concern me in way that solves the problem in a correct way and in a way that satisfies me. I have to assume and say that other people that vote are doing the same.
What does a felon hope to achieve by voting??? When they commited the felony they either didn't feel what they were doing was illegal..... or they didnt care. So that means that they are either ignorant or that they have bad judgement and morals. Either way I don't care for anyone with bad judgment, ignorance or bad morals to have a voice.
If I had to have an issue with felons not being able to vote my issue would be with the definition of a felony......
My problem is that a felony is that by definition, a felony is determined by the length of time a person serves instead of the type or nature of the crime the felon commits. So if you muder/rape/moslest/rob someone and only get 8 months........ you are not technically a felon. Which is really silly IMO.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: How they vote isn't the issue, its whether they vote.
and, this was hinted at a little bit...
Respecting others' rights is not the same thing as condoning their actions, or what they say. KKK members and the like have the right to exist. I strongly disagree with their world views, and pretty much everything else about them... but its their right to think how they wish.
The difference being that people beliefs and world views are different than their actions.
A felon commits an action that hurts another person...... everyone else just has a view or belief that may or may not hurt another person. You can't or shouldn't controll how people are thinking or what they say. You should argue against stupidity and explain to a person with a dumb view why they are dumb.........
A felon actually physically harmed someone in reality....... An action that resulted in harm to another person. So in tern we commit an action that results in harm to that person...... ie: locking them up, taking away their right to vote, yada yada yada.
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: and pick at gov's discretion? ok, so you don't know much about our current system...
Psychologists/Psychiatrists assess whether the person who did the crime is mentally capable. The gov doesn't decide because thats not what the gov does. It brings in experts. the gov is (suppossed to be) an arbitrator of sorts.
Well now you are getting into something else I disagree with....
I dont think Psychologists/Psychiatrists should assess whether the person committing the crime was mentally capable of understanding thier actions. Whether they understood what they were doing are not is second to the act they commited.
If a person is found to be insane when they mudered a person they can be just as insane while we are frying their ass. If a person is mentally retarded when they rape a person they can be stay mentally retarded behind bars.
I think alot of that is getting back the PC BS.
caprice, i would have to disagree with your theory of felons voting. granted that someone's mindset might not be right when they commit the crime, but that doesnt mean that they havent thought about the issues of the country. let me explain..... a) not all crimes are premeditated/planned. b) not all crimes are committed because of greed/power c) not all people who have committed a crime will do the same again in the future. d) not any one criminal has ever been let off the hook for taxes since they are a felon.
if you want me to swing it way right, i could even argue that felons create more jobs than tax breaks, lol.....
what i am trying to say is that you, caprice, want a felon to pay the price for his crime, to pay his debt to society, and then to be a rehabilitated productive member of society, but never vote for the issues that affect him. the felon is not exempt from taxes, is not exempt from working a job to pay his bills. why should he be exempt from something that matters most to his future? your theory of a felon voting for someone who would legalize crime is insane. icon said it best when he mentioned that society in whole would never go for that. kinda like current voting, the majority wins.
some ex-cons do rehabilitate, they do become productive members of society. some wisen up and decide that their lifestyle isnt correct so they change. hell, some of the politicians we have had are now felons and some of them should be felons for their past. stopping someone from voting because of their past is just like segregation.
also, imho I dont believe that the ones your worried about would vote anyways, if they are in that mindset you speak of, I doubt they would come anywhere close to anything resembling authority....
Posts: 8925 | From: over yonder | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Iconoclast: that would be a good thread topic, if you'd like to start one.
thanks for the offer but most of the mods in audio forum will just delete any thread or topic i post before any one has a chance to see it but if you all want or think its a topic worth talking about feel free to utilize it in any way you see fit ... once again thanks for your offer ... maybe i will just comment on some other things and what i know about as far as murder and how a murderer can go to probate court and legally have there name changed so when they get out of prison they have a fresh start and no one knows who they really are .... now ain't that one messed up law ....
Somehow I don't think Termpro is gonna solve your issues lady... either get over it, or seek legal and mental help. kthanx
-------------------- Posts: 10371 | From: south | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by HCCAfan is back: caprice, i would have to disagree with your theory of felons voting. granted that someone's mindset might not be right when they commit the crime, but that doesnt mean that they havent thought about the issues of the country. let me explain..... a) not all crimes are premeditated/planned. b) not all crimes are committed because of greed/power c) not all people who have committed a crime will do the same again in the future.
Like I said above........ My problems with not letting felons vote has mostly to do with the definition of a felon. Since the term felony doesnt adequately describe the severety of the crime..... it only describes the amount of time served........ its hard for me to hold all felons to the same standard.
If you commit a voilent crime that is in some way going to affect the victim for the rest of their life like a murderer or rapist or a drunk driver that kills somone..... I really have little care about your voice. Just from a moral standpoint I can't bring myself to say that person should have a voice...... IMO they are lucky enough to have not been put to death.
If its something like burglary, stealing, or any sort of financial scam...... I believe the person should have to pay their debt back to the person they ripped off....... and only then should their rights be fully given back.
Everybody wants to talk about felons paying their debts to society...... How the hell do people feel these felons have paid their debt to society?? If the judge does make a monetary judgement against a criminal its hardly ever enough to undo the actual value lost. Then the costs of policing, feeding, medicating, housing, and trying the criminals is a burden to working folks in the form of taxes that will NEVER get paid back.
It not really like paying back debts at all...... its more like filing for bankruptcy and telling the people you owe to fuk off. With the exception that the people you are telling to fuk off you actually hurt in some way or another.
quote:Originally posted by HCCAfan is back: d) not any one criminal has ever been let off the hook for taxes since they are a felon.
if you want me to swing it way right, i could even argue that felons create more jobs than tax breaks, lol.....
You almost had me until [d] and the last sentence......
We spend about $5billion a year on taxes for our prison system alone. We spend about $25billion on the department of justice...... or about half of what we spend on the Iraq war every single year.
Felons are a negative to society. There is no financial advantage to them. They are a drain.
Lawyers, Police, Prison guards, prison doctors, prison bus drivers, excess judges yada yada yada whatever......... they could all have different jobs in different feilds.
The prison system creates jobs...... true.
But its still a negative. It's a tax expense that creates no tax revenue........ sure all these people stay employed..... but if they were not doing any of these jobs, believe me they would find different jobs.
quote:Originally posted by HCCAfan is back: what i am trying to say is that you, caprice, want a felon to pay the price for his crime, to pay his debt to society, and then to be a rehabilitated productive member of society, but never vote for the issues that affect him. the felon is not exempt from taxes, is not exempt from working a job to pay his bills. why should he be exempt from something that matters most to his future?
See above
quote:Originally posted by HCCAfan is back: your theory of a felon voting for someone who would legalize crime is insane. icon said it best when he mentioned that society in whole would never go for that. kinda like current voting, the majority wins.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
Your right....... maybe I was off base with that logic... But you have to admit that at bare minimum it would encourage politicians and people in power to pander to criminals and to be sympathetic to a demographic that is clearly a drain on society.
Either way I don't really see the point in giving a child molestor the right to vote...... I think he should have been castraited/decapitated.
Maybe they should look into breaking felons into violent and non violent groups and maybe let only the non violent groups vote after they have fully paid back society. (paying back every cost they incured while being locked up to the government)
quote:Originally posted by HCCAfan is back: some ex-cons do rehabilitate, they do become productive members of society. some wisen up and decide that their lifestyle isnt correct so they change. hell, some of the politicians we have had are now felons and some of them should be felons for their past.
Fair enough
quote:Originally posted by HCCAfan is back: stopping someone from voting because of their past is just like seg
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
