RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks

RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

farglebargle -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 9:59:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer Of course it's not going to be upto date and accurate it's a government thing. If you wait for perfection you'll never even reduce the problem let alone solve it. I'd rather deal with the potential of a grown man mistakenly placed on the "special population" bus than deal with the more vulnerable being transported and housed with those that have already proven they are violent and predatory on a mixed population bus. If you're going to exclude them during an emergency evacuation, why aren't you excluding them from regular buses, trains, airplanes and subways? It is a parent's responsibility to ensure that their children are safe and secure, and to provide those children with the education and training required for them to ensure THEIR OWN safety. If there's a threat on an evac. bus, then there's a threat on a REGULAR bus. The solution is to teach children to kill abductors and molesters...they are "declared to be among the enemies-general of humankind, to be dealt with as wolves are. "

kdsub -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 10:22:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle It is a parent's responsibility to ensure that their children are safe and secure, and to provide those children with the education and training required for them to ensure THEIR OWN safety. If there's a threat on an evac. bus, then there's a threat on a REGULAR bus. The solution is to teach children to kill abductors and molesters...they are "declared to be among the enemies-general of humankind, to be dealt with as wolves are. " Hmmm... would you be willing at allow the children to use tasers on their molesters?... Would it be OK to have the molesters pulled over by the Utah Highway Parole? Butch

farglebargle -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 11:29:26 AM)
I am perfectly willing to allow children to summarily execute any molester or kidnapper IN THE ACT of molestation or kidnapping, using whatever means are available. I believe children should be taught to do exactly that. Don't kick and scream. Rip out their jugular vein with your teeth and eat their eyes. Or push them into an oven... Whatever works...

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 3:45:48 PM)
I agree, but now we have to remind our governments, local and state, that we have the right to carry firearms. Excluding the kill them method, do you have a second choice as provided in the question? If the choice is to bus them together, or not, then which do you choose? quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Well if the choice is to have a mistaken ID in a bus with sex offenders, and such or a bus with women and children, which bus do you vote for? There was a lot of critisism about sex offenders being housed with women and children, after Katrina, so what is your solution to that? Tell the women to shoot anyone who tries to molest their children.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 3:48:38 PM)
So the prefered method is to wait until republicans are handling it, let the kids or women be molested, and then accuse the ones managing the evacuation of being inept because of this? Popeye is correct, damned if you do and damned if you don't. So how would you handle it, to keep from putting pedophiles on buses with kids, and still get them out as fast as you believe is necessary? quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Well if the choice is to have a mistaken ID in a bus with sex offenders, and such or a bus with women and children, which bus do you vote for? There was a lot of critisism about sex offenders being housed with women and children, after Katrina, so what is your solution to that? That`s not the choice ,though. The choice is a rapid response,or a prolonged response. The average number of bad guys in any town,are what it is.I`m not going to ask a guy if he`s a solid citizen,as I pull him from the flood waters. Prove to me, that no time is/will be lost and I`ll be all for it.Prove to me, that when multiplied by the thousands and thousands,precious time won`t be lost ,endangering so many more people.

farglebargle -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 5:17:41 PM)
I don't buy into the framing of the question. You're constructing it so that there is a choice of: (a) "Segregate them before the ride" OR (b) "Children will be molested". I don't buy into that. There's that whole range of options between the two. The artificial construction of a scenario neglects the duty and effect of Personal Responsibility.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 6:26:08 PM)
Add the word "possibility" to B and you are closer to the choices. The reason I put it like this, is because the authorities were accused of not screening out Sex Offenders in the Katrina evacuation. So this Texas thing is in response to that. So the two choices is to reflect this. I believe an armed guard on each bus will keep it from occuring, and keep speed in the evacuation. This is not what the authorities are being pushed to though. If they do not respond with segregation, then if it does happen again, they may be liable financially and politically. I only work within the realm of what is, but I will offer how I think it should be. BTW, shouldn't we be talking about Bush fraud since this is likely another distraction? quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle I don't buy into the framing of the question. You're constructing it so that there is a choice of: (a) "Segregate them before the ride" OR (b) "Children will be molested". I don't buy into that. There's that whole range of options between the two. The artificial construction of a scenario neglects the duty and effect of Personal Responsibility.

farglebargle -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 6:50:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Add the word "possibility" to B and you are closer to the choices. Well, if you're going to deal in possibilities, shouldn't you deal with the possibility of aliens landing and wanting to sing Kumbaya with everyone? You can rationalize all sorts of fascist decrees based on what might happen. That's called "Taking Counsel From Your Fears", and it's guaranteed to, at best Fail, at worst hand a Win to the Totalitarians who would use it as an excuse... quote: The reason I put it like this, is because the authorities were accused of not screening out Sex Offenders in the Katrina evacuation. Who fucking cares? It's not their job, and anyone whining about it can just be discounted as being a whiny bitch. quote: I believe an armed guard on each bus will keep it from occuring, and keep speed in the evacuation. Right.... Disarm the people so they need to be protected. That's the exact opposite of Freedom and Liberty. "Security and Safety" are the direct opposites of "Freedom and Liberty". Taking away people's Freedom and Liberty to "Protect Them" is for Commies.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 7:21:59 PM)
Fargle do you enjoy creating spin out of what people say? Are you a politician by day? You have many of the characteristics of such. I did not say all possibilities, anyone intelligent without alterior motives can see that. It is the job of the government to follow the constitution of the United States and their respective state. If that means being a servant of the people, and the people say "do this", then it is very much their job. I never said disarm, I said an armed guard in the bus. Try looking at my other post where I say we should be armed. It is apparent that your motive is just to bicker and argue. You should run for office.

farglebargle -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/21/2007 9:44:11 PM)
Do you really expect once they've duplicated the "No-Fly-Lists" for FEMA evacuations, they won't duplicate the TSA Airport Dance while they're at it? No liquids over 3 ounces. Nothing potentially sharp or confusing to the Bus Monitors... One bag per person, please... ( FWIW, my family's FOOD bug-out-bag is ONE BAG. That's not counting the bag/person allocation, and if you think I'm ditching my FOOD to get on the bus, you're fucking crazy... ) The whole scenario is a trainwreck... There was plenty of DRY land around the flooded out neighborhoods, why ship people to Texas in the first place, and then PLAN to do it again going forward? It's just Federal Cover Your Ass Bullshit, when the real problems of establishing a resilient, distributed disaster-response-and-recovery "Civil Defense" infrastructure are left unaddressed...

Archer -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/22/2007 6:24:48 AM)
Yes lets go back to Civil Defense, the folks who brought us the oh so effective "Duck and Cover". Yeah they were Oh so much better than FEMA at natural disasters. A little basic reading on history will tell you that part of the reason FEMA was created was to try to help provide one point of contact, instead of the 20+ Disaster Services aspects in the various Dept of Agriculture, Dept of Transportation, FDA, etc. The Good Old days of CD were not so good as you are wanting to make them out fargle. AT least 4 Rapes that have been reported occured within days of the storm that can be easily traced at least in part to Sexual Offenders not being tracked. How many were there in the Superdome 2 or 3? I know we had one in Acworth GA that was tracked down to an evacuated previous offender. So Yes the construct of either you track them or their will be rapes seems to be bourne out by historic fact. The Law says the government is obligated to track Sexual Predators for us so that we can take our part of personal responsibility. They FAILED to perform the duty the law obligates them to perform for us.

farglebargle -> RE: Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks (12/22/2007 9:09:13 AM)
quote: The Law says the government is obligated to track Sexual Predators Please cite the statue REQUIRING the Government to track sexual predators. While there may be legislation PERMITTING IT, it's clear from case law ( e.g.: Grieshaber v City of Albany, 279 AD2d 235 10793[2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 719 [2001] ) that there is no express duty to protect and/or defend any individual.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.015625