A couple of years back, all same-sex sodomy laws were struck down by the Court. The last I heard, a year or two ago, Oklahoma still had laws pertaining to sexual conduct. I tried using google in order to find the "conduct" law but I couldn't find reference to it.
Until SCOTUS ruled in 2003, it was illegal in many states, in different variations. (All sodomy, sodomy among unmarrieds, same-sex sodomy.) I believe it is still unclear how that decision affects sodomy laws that apply to both heterosexuals and homosexuals so it seems there is some ambiguity. Also, keep in mind that sometimes, sodomy is broadly defined to include any sex act that does not have the potential for procreation. Depending on how, or if, UCMJ defines it, all kinds of fun could get you in trouble. :tongue2_1 Several convictions have been overturned though, so you are probably safe. Also, in states like Florida where sodomy laws are, I believe, still on the books, those laws may very well still enforcable since they aren't homosexual specific and therefore don't have the flaws that led to the 2003 ruling that Texas' law was unconstitutional. So those of you in Pensacola who are extremely risk-averse might want to keep your hands et al. to yourselves. Umm, is it weird that I know so much about this? I was really interested in the case in 2003 and sometimes I'm a SCOTUS junkie.
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.
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........
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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. 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.
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. Reading comprehension: 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.
How about making the argument that puts your life in the hands of a convicted felon - not ours. Have fun with that.
You're not an Admiral or a General that is eligible to approve these waivers, so it seems like your opinion pretty much doesn't matter. Like I said, you may never know who you're serving with that has a felony conviction. I never knew - and it turns out he was one of the few guys that I would trust with my life. It's a pity that you're so narrow minded to realize that people are indeed capable of learning from their mistakes.
Never saw this happen. However, if you were a “dick” you went mess cooking or coup cleaning rather quickly. If you were a “dick” we’d never let you near an airplane. We had a few guys in our squadron who swabbed decks, slopped chow, or made racks the whole time they were in the service. Those of us that went the distance in my squadron … well we did all of the neat shit! Cold flight decks and hot Yuma dets. (Fun stuff though, wouldn’t trade it for anything.) Ah what I wouldn’t have given for a WESTPAC or a MED cruise. Put in two chits for a transfer to any sea going squadron. They wouldn’t let me leave 44. Steve
"...the red areas are contaminated with chemical agents, you have these two barrels and a coffee cup to complete the mission. Time is of the essence, and your rifleman has been convicted of a felony." If you don't get the joke, sorry, it's a Marine thing. Just sounds like a leadership challenge to me. You'll know way before you have to trust your life with them whether that's an issue or not. Now having to deal with them in garrison, that's where they'll be a real thorn in your side if they're going to be. ...I'll take a guy who was convicted of possessing a pound of weed or getting a hummer from his 17 year old girl friend over a run of the mill draftee any fucking day of the week.
I'm not a Marine and I get it....:sleep_125 I agree with the point you made, BTW... who cares. There are plenty of non-felon shitbags in the military. Those with bad histories who hide it well.... most probably wouldn't even know. Those were AND are shitbags...they won't be around too long...or at least shouldn't be.
So why do we even come on AW in the first place? I guess we should all go skipping off into the sunset now.......:icon_roll Well, I am happy that you had a good experience with someone who was a convicted felon. I haven't though, though I can honestly say that I only know the felons I know of were convicted while in the military, and I would not want to serve with any of them. Why is it such a pity I am so close-minded on this issue? I believe in redemption and second chances, but why does it have to be the military that offers them? Life ain't fair, and it sucks a heck of a lot worse when you are convicted of a felony. Even fast food joints don't like hiring convicts, why should the military? So, you had a good experience with a felon, a single experience does not change the fact that we are letting in people that could pose a danger to others. And who says that the Generals and Admirals giving the waivers are not making mistakes? They are as fallible as the rest of us.
