More Convicted Felons Allowed to Enlist

[ea6bflyr]

Where in this country is sodomy still illegal?

Your question reminds me of one of my favorite videos: NSW

-ea6bflyr

 

[HAL Pilot]

^ +1

 

[Flash]

Eh. But, what's a sex crime? Depending on a jurisdiction, it could be a felony to possess or purchase a sex toy or other sexual enhancements. Sex crimes is a rather blanket statement for a slew of crimes ranging from rape to sodomy to compelling the act of prostitution.

As was noted earlier in the thread, what is often threatened and what someone is actually convicted of are often quite different. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone convicted of a felony sex crime for buying a dildo.

Taking a piss on the side of I-90 in the middle of the night is a "sex crime" in Massachusetts.

Buddy got whacked with that.

Felony? I doubt it........

 

[MasterBates]

Felony, no. Registered "Sex Offender" yes.

 

[Rasczak]

Felony, no. Registered "Sex Offender" yes.

Wow. What a load of crap. I feel bad for your buddy.

 

[Flash]

Felony, no. Registered "Sex Offender" yes.

Too bad for him then, maybe he should have gotten a better lawyer.

Letting in convicted felons who commited sex crimes or manslaughter is still inexcusable though. Many people deserve a second chance, but I don't believe the military should be that chance for the aforementioned people.

 

[QuagmireMcGuire]

As was noted earlier in the thread, what is often threatened and what someone is actually convicted of are often quite different. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone convicted of a felony sex crime for buying a dildo.



Felony? I doubt it........

If memory serves me correct, there was a bill in front of the North Carolina legislature to make the sale and purchase of adult toys as a felony offense. They are misdemeanor offenses in the state of Texas and Mississippi. In MS, they actually had a few police stings and special news reports on several sex shops illegally selling them. In TX, there was another raid and felony charges brought against the store owner for selling illegal products within proximity of minors.

But, I was using that one as an extreme example of what constitutes a sex crime. The definition varies depending on the jurisdiction; heck, even having a consensual affair with your ex step-sister is considered a felony crime in some jurisdictions as they may consider that to be an incestuous relationship.

Unfortunately, there are people who still want to involve themselves in what you do in your bedroom and there are still prosecutors willing to prosecute.

 

[Flash]

If memory serves me correct, there was a bill in front of the North Carolina legislature to make the sale and purchase of adult toys as a felony offense. They are misdemeanor offenses in the state of Texas and Mississippi. In MS, they actually had a few police stings and special news reports on several sex shops illegally selling them. In TX, there was another raid and felony charges brought against the store owner for selling illegal products within proximity of minors.

But, I was using that one as an extreme example of what constitutes a sex crime. The definition varies depending on the jurisdiction; heck, even having a consensual affair with your ex step-sister is considered a felony crime in some jurisdictions as they may consider that to be an incestuous relationship.

Unfortunately, there are people who still want to involve themselves in what you do in your bedroom and there are still prosecutors willing to prosecute.

Okay, I get where you are coming from, I really do understand.......But how many times do I have to repeat myself? I am talking about people who have been CONVICTED of FELONIES for sex crimes and manslaughter being allowed to ENLIST IN THE MILITARY. I am not talking about proposed bills, someone being charged, threatened with prosecution, misdemeanors (sex offenders included) or some guy who stole a car when he was 16 for a joyride and was convicted of a felony.

I am certain there are exceptions to the rule, and I would bet that there are several people on here who have a buddy who deserves that second chance because he got drunk and stupid and got caught (probably the most important part). But to be convicted of a FELONY sex crime or MANSLAUGHTER is not something that can or should be easily excused, and they certainly don't belong in the military. Sorry if they got a 'bad break' but life sucks sometimes, deal with it.

For the handful of people that were let in under those circumstances, I don't think it is worth compromising the military's recruitment standards to such a low level. Just the bad PR that we have gotten about this in the past few days should be enough to convince you all of this, not to mention the possible danger that some of these people might present to their fellow servicemembers and dependents.

 

[QuagmireMcGuire]

Okay, I get where you are coming from, I really do understand.......But how many times do I have to repeat myself? I am talking about people who have been CONVICTED of FELONIES for sex crimes and manslaughter being allowed to ENLIST IN THE MILITARY. I am not talking about proposed bills, someone being charged, threatened with prosecution, misdemeanors (sex offenders included) or some guy who stole a car when he was 16 for a joyride and was convicted of a felony.

I am certain there are exceptions to the rule, and I would bet that there are several people on here who have a buddy who deserves that second chance because he got drunk and stupid and got caught (probably the most important part). But to be convicted of a FELONY sex crime or MANSLAUGHTER is not something that can or should be easily excused, and they certainly don't belong in the military. Sorry if they got a 'bad break' but life sucks sometimes, deal with it.

For the handful of people that were let in under those circumstances, I don't think it is worth compromising the military's recruitment standards to such a low level. Just the bad PR that we have gotten about this in the past few days should be enough to convince you all of this, not to mention the possible danger that some of these people might present to their fellow servicemembers and dependents.

And, Flash, I get where you are coming from but I ask you: can you tell me what felony sex crimes that these people were convicted of? There is a difference between someone who bought an adult toy (and considering that some of these state laws have been around for years and that other states have repelled their laws; so it is entirely possible that there is a person carrying a felony because of such purchase) and a serial child rapist. In the article it states:

"For example, in several of the Marine sex crime cases, the offender was a teenager involved in consensual sex with another underage teen."

How many of us committed such an act as a teenager? Most of us were not arrested and convicted of such an act; but does that make us any less guilty of committing the crime? Does it make those who were convicted even more a danger to others?

Have you ever been in a car accident? In some jurisdictions, driving fast and causing an accident resulting in the death of a passenger is considered vehicular manslaughter. There are different levels of manslaughter; in the article, it even made such a distinction:

"but nine involved sex crimes and six involved manslaughter or vehicular homicide convictions."

If you are saying, No Felonies Period, then I can agree with you; but as it stands, it strikes me that we are making a lot of conjecture on these people's morality, character or fitness based upon generic terms like "sex crime".

 

[Flash]

And, Flash, I get where you are coming from but I ask you: can you tell me what felony sex crimes that these people were convicted of? There is a difference between someone who bought an adult toy (and considering that some of these state laws have been around for years and that other states have repelled their laws; so it is entirely possible that there is a person carrying a felony because of such purchase) and a serial child rapist. In the article it states:

"For example, in several of the Marine sex crime cases, the offender was a teenager involved in consensual sex with another underage teen."

"but nine involved sex crimes and six involved manslaughter or vehicular homicide convictions."

If you are saying, No Felonies Period, then I can agree with you; but as it stands, it strikes me that we are making a lot of conjecture on these people's morality, character or fitness based upon generic terms like "sex crime".

No, I can't.....and neither can you. You keep going back to the sex toy argument, how many people have gotten a felony conviction over that? You might cite a case or two (and I would be surprised even if you got one), but this is not law school, it is real life. And several? You sure that is not a PAO trying to mitigate the damage from this story? And what is several? Two out of nine? And not all? What were the others convicted of?

Vehicular manslaughter? Life ain't fair, its harder when you are stupid......or unlucky. Guess what, I still don't want them wearing a uniform.

I never said I was willing to let felons in, I would just understand better if they were convicted of something like stealing a car. Guess what, I don't want those guys either. And if I am judgemental against people convicted felons who committed 'sex crimes' or manslaughter, then so be it. If it means a few less enlistees than so be it (Really, 15 extra recuits?!!). I think we can do without felons nowadays.

I don't want a felon working on my plane, standing a watch, manning the helm, maintaining a nuclear reactor or guarding a base. We ain't a charity, halfway house or a business, we should have some standards and stick to them.

 

[sickboy]

Have you ever been in a car accident? In some jurisdictions, driving fast and causing an accident resulting in the death of a passenger is considered vehicular manslaughter.

This happened to a friend of mine. He skidded around a corner too fast, hit another car. The driver of the other car wasn't wearing a seatbelt, neither were two of his passengers. Needless to say my friend was the sole survivor, and was charged with vehicular manslaughter. He just got paroled and is completeing community service. This was in Pennsylvania.

 

[QuagmireMcGuire]

but this is not law school, it is real life.

In law school, we studied real life cases supplemented by hypotheticals. If I had access to West Law or Lexis Nexis, I would be happy to research cases and provide them to you if possible. As it stands, I can draw upon one real life case dealing with a teenager out of GA that was serving time in prison for receiving oral sex from another teenager. The truth is that neither one of us knows what the exact crimes; I rather side on the presumption that most cases dealt with teenager infractions versus severe cases dealing with serial rapists.

I think we can do without felons nowadays.

I don't want a felon working on my plane, standing a watch, manning the helm, maintaining a nuclear reactor or guarding a base. We ain't a charity, halfway house or a business, we should have some standards and stick to them.

As previously stated, if it is a blanket rule against convicted felons than I understand and side with you on the issue; but to pick, choose, and make a presumption that a person who was convicted of felony A is less of a danger than a person convicted of felony B seems senseless.

 

[Flash]

In law school, we studied real life cases supplemented by hypotheticals. As it stands, I can draw upon one real life case dealing with a teenager out of GA....I rather side on the presumption that most cases dealt with teenager infractions versus severe cases dealing with serial rapists.

I am familiar with the case, I would argue that it is an exception to the rule. And his situation is no longer a felony in Georgia.

I am sure that you can cite cases where some poor sap got shafted. And I am sure that you can search your databases where you can find examples. And I am sure that you would also be able to find a case where a drunk really did just have two beers. But having dealt with more than enough morons in the service who were convicted of crimes while in the military, the exceptional circumstances are rare, that is why they are exceptions and not the rule. Better to err on the side of not letting convicted felons in the service than letting a potentially dangerous individual enlist. I don't want the military to waste the time and money trying to find out which felons were 'done wrong' by the system.

As previously stated, if it is a blanket rule against convicted felons than I understand and side with you on the issue; but to pick, choose, and make a presumption that a person who was convicted of felony A is less of a danger than a person convicted of felony B seems senseless.

Reading comprehension:

I don't want a felon working on my plane, standing a watch, manning the helm, maintaining a nuclear reactor or guarding a base. We ain't a charity, halfway house or a business, we should have some standards and stick to them.

So what, call me prejudiced. Fuck 'em.

Quit trying to lawyer this damn thing to death. We ain't in a courtroom, this is a wardroom.

 

[QuagmireMcGuire]

Quit trying to lawyer this damn thing to death.

PHFFT!

 

[Scoob]

PHFFT!

How about making the argument that puts your life in the hands of a convicted felon - not ours.

Have fun with that.