"Are you kidding me?" / Facepalm Thread.

[Hoosier45]

And I can imagine if LEO knocked on my door and said to evacuate.
Me: "What's going on"
LEO: "Neighbor found some ammo in the basement."
Me: "Have a good day" [shuts door in face...]

-rvb

LEO: "Neighbor found some ammo in the basement."
Me: "Can I have it?"

 

[Kurr]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...unds-in-theaters/ar-AAnZxHG?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Cinema chain horrifies by building playgrounds in theaters

 

[historian]

Teens sexting face registering as sex offenders.
Juveniles caught sexting face felony child porn charges -- but s - WAOW - Newsline 9, Wausau News, Weather, Sports

I can't say I'm opposed. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that. I think that this is getting out of hand, and the only way to stop it is to keep throwing the book at it until people wise up. My buddy is a principal at a middle school and he usually kicks about 50 kids out a year for this.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I can't say I'm opposed. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that. I think that this is getting out of hand, and the only way to stop it is to keep throwing the book at it until people wise up. My buddy is a principal at a middle school and he usually kicks about 50 kids out a year for this.

I don't know. It's common among certain circles to insist that this line of thinking hasn't worked with drugs and their abuse. To extend that to sex, why would we think it would work in this aspect of human life? If there's anything people are going to do more than find ways to get intoxicated is find ways to satisfy their sexual appetites. Soooo, since they're going to do it anyway, why make a vice illegal and damage peoples' lives for doing what their bodies are driving them to do?

 

[Woobie]

Panic much?

Nearby homes evacuated after 75 rounds of ammunition found underneath house | KABB

Makes sense. Only get so many chances to make a run with the bomb squad truck. This helps the funding for next year's budget. You've gotta waste tax dollars to justify receiving more tax dollars.

 

[Woobie]

I don't know. It's common among certain circles to insist that this line of thinking hasn't worked with drugs and their abuse. To extend that to sex, why would we think it would work in this aspect of human life? If there's anything people are going to do more than find ways to get intoxicated is find ways to satisfy their sexual appetites. Soooo, since they're going to do it anyway, why make a vice illegal and damage peoples' lives for doing what their bodies are driving them to do?

If a girl is dumb enough to send a nudie to a boy, then that is her choice. If he distributes that without her permission, he has caused her harm. A person harming another person is a proper instance for application of government force.

 

[Spear Dane]

I can't say I'm opposed. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that. I think that this is getting out of hand, and the only way to stop it is to keep throwing the book at it until people wise up. My buddy is a principal at a middle school and he usually kicks about 50 kids out a year for this.

Dude you are nuts. WTF is wrong with you? You wanna ruin a kids entire life because they texted a naked picture of a classmate? Would you wish that on YOUR child?

 

[jamil]

I can't say I'm opposed. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that. I think that this is getting out of hand, and the only way to stop it is to keep throwing the book at it until people wise up. My buddy is a principal at a middle school and he usually kicks about 50 kids out a year for this.

Figure out who is the victim; who is the agressor. Punish the aggressor commensurate with the harm done. That's how I think criminal laws should be. But no. We have nebulous laws against "society" and we must throw books at people and ruin their lives for juvenile behavior because they sinnned against the collective.

To me this is a family issue, unless someone is harmed. Harmed. Not "harmed".

Let dad dispatch older brother to convince boyfriend not to sext photos of his junk to daughter anymore. If it happened at school the school can suspend the students for disrupting class.

 

[JettaKnight]

Dude you are nuts. WTF is wrong with you? You wanna ruin a kids entire life because they texted a naked picture of a classmate? Would you wish that on YOUR child?

Yeah, I'm kind of with you on this.

At 14, kids aren't fully capable of understanding long term consequences. Plus, how does society benefit from ruining a kid's life? What danger does this kid pose to society such that he needs to be on the list? There are better ways to handle it.


You know, at his age, there's a lot of us that would have done the same thing he did. Stupid, but...

 

[HoughMade]

LEO: "Neighbor found some ammo in the basement."
Me: "Can I have it?"

If 75 rounds of ammo warrants evacuation....

...there are days when I would need to evacuate my pants.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

If a girl is dumb enough to send a nudie to a boy, then that is her choice. If he distributes that without her permission, he has caused her harm. A person harming another person is a proper instance for application of government force.

She gave him a gift. She caused her own harm because once she decided to take that action, she lost all control of what happens to that image once it was freely given away.

Of course, there's a sure fire way to prevent this sort of stuff. But that's old-timey thinking.

 

[spencer rifle]

If 75 rounds of ammo warrants evacuation....

...there are days when I would need to evacuate my pants.

Thanks for the mental image.

 

[spencer rifle]

She gave him a gift. She caused her own harm because once she decided to take that action, she lost all control of what happens to that image once it was freely given away.

"Once you open the floodgates, you can’t tell the water where to go." - Thomas Sowell

 

[Woobie]

She gave him a gift. She caused her own harm because once she decided to take that action, she lost all control of what happens to that image once it was freely given away.

Of course, there's a sure fire way to prevent this sort of stuff. But that's old-timey thinking.

Yeah, I guess I can't disagree. Good point.

As for that old-timey stuff, I'm with ya.

 

[historian]

Yeah, I guess I can't disagree. Good point.

As for that old-timey stuff, I'm with ya.

Yup, put me in the old-timers camp on this as well. Then again, in the spirit of moral relativism and all, what difference does it make?

 

[2A_Tom]

Surest form of birth control is an aspirin,











































































Held firmly between her knees.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Yeah, I guess I can't disagree. Good point.

As for that old-timey stuff, I'm with ya.

I agree it's a scummy thing to do. Scum will do scummy stuff if you give them the chance.

Yup, put me in the old-timers camp on this as well. Then again, in the spirit of moral relativism and all, what difference does it make?

It's just sex, after all. At least that's what "they" tell us on one hand.

 

[hog slayer]

Yeah, I'm kind of with you on this.

At 14, kids aren't fully capable of understanding long term consequences. Plus, how does society benefit from ruining a kid's life? What danger does this kid pose to society such that he needs to be on the list? There are better ways to handle it.


You know, at his age, there's a lot of us that would have done the same thing he did. Stupid, but...

I try very hard to not justify or condemn something because it's what I or someone I know would/wouldn't have done. We have guidelines for behavior and usually those criteria are not the same as those criteria.

So, not only are boys at this age incapable of comprehending the entirety of this action, they cannot grasp how our legal system will respond and they do not have all the necessary mental development to actually control some of their actions. While I am all for discipline, a 14 year old should probably not ever be labelled for life as a sex offender. The unfortunate thing is not every young woman has a brother or a father that will take any sort of action against a young man treating their daughter with disrespect and no class.

The next difficult position here is what I would wish on my child. And now we have a second youngster that needs a dad or older brother to go to bat for. The greatest disease in todays society is absent fathers. So the issue of what I would wish on my child is, once again, not the relevant stance. However, there is a need to have a father of THIS child take a stance and do a bit better job of parenting.

Neither a legal system or a principle of a school is sufficient enough for parenting.


I am against this young man being officially labelled as a sex offender. Just wanted to make that clear.

 

[Bill of Rights]

If a girl is dumb enough to send a nudie to a boy, then that is her choice. If he distributes that without her permission, he has caused her harm. A person harming another person is a proper instance for application of government force.

OK, so kiddy porn laws prohibit that kind of pic from being taken, sent, possessed, etc., right? (not quoting or citing as I don't know the title, act, section, etc., but generally, that's the effect of those laws.) So if the hypothetical girl you referenced did that, she's guilty of kiddy porn, if she is under age. The purpose of those laws is to protect innocent children from malevolent predators who have ill intent and care only about money, presumably. So, then, which is this girl: Is she the innocent victim of a malevolent predator? or is she the malevolent predator taking advantage of an innocent victim? The two are mutually exclusive: If you show a victim, there is no defendant. If you show a defendant, there is no victim.

I can see a clear, defined use of those laws against the stereotypical greasy, salivating, strung-out guy snapping pics of a young, starved child in a nightgown or being violated by some object or worse. No question in my mind there, other than whether to use a .45 or a 7.62x54R to end his perversions and possibly his life. (I know it's too quick, but I'm not getting into the "find a worse gross punishment" game. I also, in the abstract, would not be averse to the family members and the victim, if still alive, having about 10-15 minutes alone with him before sentence is carried out.) Be that as it may, those laws, if they can somehow find a single person to be both victim and predator, are poorly written.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[hopper68]

Something else to consider. If your child has naked pictures on their phone, can you get charged because technically the phone is in your name?