Minor argument turns into incedent exposure arrest

[Nopal]

imported post

marshaul wrote:

jgregel wrote:

marshaul wrote:

Ca Patriot wrote:

Also, now you are going to brag about getting this guy a sex offender rap ? I am not defending his actions but this is the kind of stuff we DONT need as a registered sex offender. You and everyone else in your state are going to have to pay about an additional $25,000 a year for his terms of offender guidelines all because he flashed supposedly flashed his wee-wee at you. Lame.

I'm inclined to agree with this analysis.

Until you have this happen to you and your family (hope it never does) you just won't understand. Dirt bags like this wouldn't think twice about raping your wife, daughter, sister or even you. I would bet that this kid has other sex related offenses.

This is my first time reading the California forum. I feel sorry for you guys and your screwed up gun / self defense laws. I live in Ohio and carry all the time. OC at home (loaded of course) and CC when out and I would never have gone out to confront this kid without my gun. Just because it looked like he didn't have a gun doesn't mean he didn't. My Glock 23 goes nicely with a t-shirt and shorts.

Using cost to justify not charging someone with a crime is unthinkable. Why bother arresting anyone with that thinking. Do you know what a murder trial cost? How about life in prison? I'm all for sticking him with every charge you can. If the law considers what he did bad enough to be considered a sex offender then he really screwed up and will pay the price. Sexually preoccupied people like this almost always escalate.

I think you did a fine job and its good to know your neighbor has your back. Give your dog an extra biscuit. Good luck.

John

So, because this guy exposed his privates after an argument, he's on the fast track to raping and murdering my daughter?

The financial cost is the least of my worries. I worry that sex offender status is used far too frequently, leading to lifelong penalties over trivial offenses.

I'm sorry, what this guy did doesn't deserve anything more than a couple days in jail.

This republican-voting-conservative-with-libertarian-leanings agrees. We have laws that are far too over-reaching and border on violating the 8th ammendment.

To pharaphrase Dennis Prager (anotherconservative),words have specific, definitemeanings. Debasing and eroding those meanings only destroys clarity, clarity of thought as well as of communication. In my book, a guyexposing himselfto adults merely as acurde way of insulting them is not the same as a guy exposing himself to get off, or for other sexually-twisted reason. The label of "sex offender," in this case, did not apply.

Now, I am not sure if the guy deserved more than a couple of days in jail or not, or if calling the cops on him was warranted or not. I actually think the OP was left with little choice but to call the cops given the stakes (potential robbers targetting theneighbohood, etc.), but the sad truth is that no matter how much of an idiot or low-life this guy is, he is now carrying a label that is pointless andunfair, and that make a mockery of the purpose behind the sex offender registry.

 

[marshaul]

imported post

Well, I'm glad to know there are conservatives with libertarian leanings who also feel the same way.

 

[We-the-People]

imported post

When running for public office in CA I was "accused" of being a "closet libertarian" by the libertarian party candidate while talking with him after a "meet the candidates" forum where we all gave our spiels. I told him I was so far right that if you looked to my left you would see the top of Rush Limbaughs head out on the horizon.

There are many who register and cote republican who lean much further right than the national party but realize that it usually comes down to a lesser of two evils choice as the candidate with the liertarian party "tag" rarely has a chance to win anything other than a non-partisan local office.

I have to agree with the abuse of the "sex offender" tag. WAY too many being issued and it dilutes the usefulness of the system.

 

[markm]

imported post

We-the-People wrote (in part):

There are many who register and cote republican who lean much further right than the national party but realize that it usually comes down to a lesser of two evils choice as the candidate with the liertarian party "tag" rarely has a chance to win anything other than a non-partisan local office.

I have to agree with the abuse of the "sex offender" tag. WAY too many being issued and it dilutes the usefulness of the system.

Hello We-the-People and nopal,

What you wrote about republicans with libertarian leanings is correct. Dennis Prager has that philosophy-thing down pat. I vote for people who can win and get something good accomplished.

Also, as threads go, the secondtheme of this thread was not the incorrect inclusion of "sex offender" status for this type of offense. The criticisms that oc4ever was receiving was for the entirety of the encounter. I am not exagerating here, people were blaming the victim and acquiting the offender with declarative statements--people who weren't at the scene passed judgement as only a judge and jury could.

I think on your narrowly focussed point, which is the third theme change for this thread,you do have a legitimate gripe with the term "sex offender" and its current repercussions.

Big Ben (Steelers QB) was not charged with rape as I suspect the two women involved andaccusing him, probably were kissing him-up in the bar and freely entered his room. There is no credible proof that Big Ben raped anybody, whether he did or not. It is very possible that Big Ben is guilty of being dooped by back-crawling women trying to cash-in. He does not deserve sex-offender status and the perp in oc4evers case may not deserve "full-fledged" sex offender status either.

As to the other posters who have used a liberal tactic of blaming the victim and feeling sorry for, and excusing the perp, you are still wrong! oc4ever is the victim!

A responsible person does not do stupid things that gives themselves "sex offender" status wether the law is being used judicously or not. People peeing in the bushes don't deserve sex offender status. We need to change-out our politicians with people who use the law sparingly and correctly. I don't LOC, or LCC because it is against the law; however, I am actively trying to get those laws changed.

Until then charge the perp with everything we have available as he will be on the streets within days--hang-him-up on something and let the ACLU fight the narrowly focused topic, that you bring-up, in court. The perp is a dumb-ass who broke several laws.

markm

 

[oc4ever]

imported post

Mark, thanks for the well thought out response.

+I did not ask him to come trespass in our neighborhood and refuse to leave.
+I did not ask him to swear at my wife with racial slurs and insults.
+I did not help him pull down his pants, fondle himself, and yell to have a sexual act done to him.

He did that all on his own, and should suffer whatever consequences the court determines is fair. It really is as simple as taking responsibility for your own actions, and let the chips fall as they may. If people want to act stupid and break the law, this is what happens. It not his first arrest, and I doubt it will be the last.