|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Quote:
Well, you give teenagers an inch...and they will take a foot. Really, lets look back into the past. Fifty years ago.......
1. Kids respected (or at least acted like it) their parents.
2. The divorce rate was much lower then it is today.
3. Family values, integrity, love of country and sacrifice were common values.
4. Kids did what their teachers told them, at school......because their were consequences.
5. Parents were allowed to discipline their kids without having the fear of child services being called in for a spanking.
6. Teen birth rates were not common....eventhough kids were having sex, it was very hush hush (yes, kids have been finding ways to break boundaries for ever...I'll give you that).
1. How do you know?
2. Irrelevant.
3 How do you know? How did you quantify the difference between these values then and now?
4. You want corporal punishment brought back? My dad and mom were teenagers 50 years ago, they would not agree.
5. Not sure how this is connected. I'm pretty sure if kids had phones back when spanking was allowed, they'd be sending dirty pics.
6.The latest info on teen birth rates i could get was 2006 for the states. Vermont has half the national average. More conservative states(states that tend to vote republican) are generally higher. |
Easy. Talk to people who are in their 60's and 70's.
Nothing on that list is irrelevent..........well, only to extreme liberals who think......."if it feels good, do it"......
However, I will agree with you the sexting matter (if my son/daughter) were caught, would stay inside the home. But, in terms of damage control....once you open doors that lead to trouble, it is hard to go back in the other direction. There has to be a point when enough is enough.
Since it IS a problem, does this show the lack of discipline the parents infuse on their kids....in Vermont?
dmbfan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote[Supporters of the sexting law say it's necessary so that teenagers will not be prosecuted as sexual offenders and have their lives ruined. There is some validity to that, as dopey kids do dopey things. However, the sane solution would be to categorize sexting as a misdemeanor breach of the peace, thus sending a message that it is unacceptable for kids to send other kids sexual images.[/quote]
O'Reilly actually has a pretty good point here. If he hadn't buried in it the middle of his tired culture-warrior schtick, where liberals are all a bunch of anti-American demons, he could have had a pretty effective article.
It just goes to show that his brief is making money rather than really trying to effectively advocate his political views. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Since it IS a problem, does this show the lack of discipline the parents infuse on their kids....in Vermont? |
It's no more a problem than saying f*ck to your granny. Not something the law should get involved in.
My main point was as follows..maybe i buried it before..
A sext message is a private message. It is not in the public view. If the person who is sent the message, then puts it on a website then I'm sure there is a law that applies to that not connected to the initial act of taking the pic and sending it to your girlfriend/boyfriend.
As far as the 'just ask the old timers' thing you have going on, I don't know, I think my parents would disagree but I haven't taken a poll. Even if I did I'm not sure how much would be real and how much would be nostalgia.
As far as my parents are concerned, they are both in their 60s. I think they would say people are generally the same as they always were.
As far as things being all rosy and people being full of respect and traditional values well my parents have crazy stories about basically being physically abused in the 50s/60s. My mother has a stutter(it is not a coincidence at all that I have always found stutters to be cute) that shows up sometimes..she was regularly kept back after class to complete her daily oral spelling test as stuttering would count as a fail..she would also receive beatings. As far as I can tell from their stories and my aunts and uncles who shared these teachers, that a good portion of teachers back then were sadistic bastards. My father stated quite clearly that if any teacher disciplined any of his children physically, he would hospitalize them.
So maybe if you asked my parents, things have changed for the better. Their children didn't get beaten for one.
Anyway the main point from a legal point of view is bolded above. My anecdote about my parents is worth just as much as any anecdotal evidence from people recalling hows things were 50 years ago..not a lot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DorkothyParker
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: Jeju
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm just annoyed that someone invented the word "sexting" to begin with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dmbfan wrote: |
| Quote: |
I'd be interested to know how Vermont's youth crime rate compares to other states.
Oh wait, let me google it ...
Quote:
Vermont has the lowest juvenile arrest rate in the United States.12
12 Vermont Task Force on School Violence, Preventing and Responding to School Disruption and Violence, Department of Education, June 22, 1998 citing paper by Peggy Miller, Planning Division, Agency of Human Services, citing Juvenile Crime Rankings by State, 1997.
http://www.vtnea.org/vio-2.htm
While the stats are 10 years old, it still sure says something. I wonder how conservative states with great Christian, family values like Texas do in comparison to Vermont. Oh well, don't let facts get in the way of rhetoric when dealing with American conservatives. |
OH, so it's a Christian thing? Funny, these days it is acceptable to slander Christians about anything/everything but heavan forbid we slander the Muslims/far left, etc.
Anyway, thats beside the point.
You forgot to mention the populiation of Vermont....AND... you forgot to mention their judicial system, laws and what the state considers a crime.
I'm wondering why Vermont does not have Jessica's Law?
dmbfan |
It was you and Mr O'Riely who brought up the matter of 'Judeo-Christian' (i.e. American Protestant) values. However I'd be willing to bet it does better in the area of youth crime than states where more people go to church. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It was you and Mr O'Riely who brought up the matter of 'Judeo-Christian' (i.e. American Protestant) values. However I'd be willing to bet it does better in the area of youth crime than states where more people go to church. |
OK. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dmbfan wrote: |
I'm wondering why Vermont does not have Jessica's Law?
|
Maybe because it is a bad law?
JESSICA'S LAW BLATANTLY DISREGARDS THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION! IT IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, AND IT CONTINUES TO PUNISH PEOPLE EVEN AFTER A SENTENCE HAS BEEN SERVED. IT IS DRIVEN BY FEAR-MONGERING, OPPORTUNISTIC POLITICIANS AND WILL DO NOTHING TO ACTUALLY PROTECT CHILDREN. THERE ARE MILLIONS OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHOSE LIVES ARE INTER-TWINED WITH A SEX OFFENDER. THEY SHOULD MATTER TOO. FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL, JESSICA'S LAW IS ANOTHER CONVEYOR-BELT LAW TO BENEFIT LAW ENFORCEMENT. IT IS A ONE-SIZE-FITS ALL WAR ON THE PEOPLE THAT MUST NOT PASS!
Jessica's law will place severe restrictions on the lifestyles of ALL convicted sex offenders who have a requirement to register with law enforcement in the community in which they reside. This does not only include child molesters but any and all sex offenders regardless of the offense and when it took place. The two major restrictions are
1) ALL sex offenders must live 2000 feet away from any park, school or other areas the community deems necessary for the duration of their registration requirement, (which is usually for life).
2) ALL sex offenders must wear GPS ankle bracelets, not only for the duration of their parole (which will be increased to five and even 10 years) but for their ENTIRE LIVES! The sex offender is expected to pay for this device if he/she can afford it.
3) ALL sex offenders will be unable to earn good-time credits while in prison. They would have to serve the entire sentence regardless of their recovery and good behavior. There are many other stipulations within Jessica's law (e.g. increased prison terms) but these three conditions are exceptionally unjust, unwarranted and a big waste of resources. The law targets the mentally ill, their families and will ensnare teens, marking them for life with a red-letter punishment when they may not be a predator at all. Jessica's Law is the next war on the people. It will do nothing to protect children and will destroy more lives.
Paraphrased from http://www.1union1.com/Jessicaslaw...Noway.htm
And from http://www.reformsexoffenderlaws.org/blog.php:
I am a Case Manager at a cognitive behavioral program for parolees. We have a number of sex offenders in the program who possess offenses from child molestation to public urination. Some offenses make me cringe, others I find almost humorous. However the law's treatment of these individuals is in no way humorous. Forced transience, GPS, destruction of family units, forced to quit jobs...the injustice goes on and on. I do not condone their crimes, but they have already served their time; now they are imprisoned on the cold streets. Laws like Jessica's Law sound good at first and make great PR, but actually strip people of their dignity and civil liberties and comes dangerously close to Double Jeopardy. Please redraft or rescind these laws!
...
Jessica's Law has now been passed by 32 states--its unrealistic distance restrictions driving offenders from urban to rural areas. This can throw kids into harm's way rather than save them, since stress and instability are known to increase recidivism. Ohio is now seeking to repeal this legal nightmare, while Californians who ignored Ohio's lesson are presently struggling with the same mess.
...
Mark Lunsford, the driving force behind the laws bearing his daughter Jessica's name, insists that her murderer John Couey would never have gotten to her if such a law had been in place. What he doesn't say--and what is not common knowledge--is that Couey had pled for psychiatric help since 1978, writing that he had "a disease of the mind." He continued begging for help to no avail for about 20 years--the letters to his attorneys are in his court files. And if he'd received the treatment he so urgently wanted and needed, Jessica might be with us yet. The preventative approach we advocate can be far more effective than the retribution a mentally disordered Couey now faces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
