Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Still Waters

Gay convictions to be wiped from the records

207 posts in this topic

What do you define as mentally ill? Or weirdo, for that matter.

The states definition of serious mental illness.

Like people who think they're being commanded by god, or maniac depressives, or attempted suiciders, or just plain insanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The states definition of serious mental illness.

Like people who think they're being commanded by god, or maniac depressives, or attempted suiciders, or just plain insanity.

I shall add to this that most of these are prevented from being in the police anyway because they are unstable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm saying some that have been wronged with prison sentences might have a vendetta but that isnt the same thing as saying homosexuals all have a vendetta.

Nelson Mandela was the leader of the armed wing of the African National Congress and was convicted for sabotage lol. I hope thats just a mistake in your research and you are not trying to incite people to terrorist acts.

Silver Thong needs adding to the watch list lol.

So in your first sentence you are confusing yourself. So if a gay person that just happens to not be charged with a gay crime is ok it just takes being charged with a gay crime to make one a possible terroist. How about a gay couple is broken up because one is sentenced and the other is not. The one not charged may be more vandictive then the one in jail. Your walking a fine line here.

Nelson Mandela was jailed for 20 years and later exonerated, the same if you will a wrongfully convicted gay person that you seem to feel will attack the state on release.

You sir, are by no doubt already on the watch list and don't even know it ;)

Edited by The Silver Thong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The states definition of serious mental illness.

Like people who think they're being commanded by god, or maniac depressives, or attempted suiciders, or just plain insanity.

So we should ban god.... Commanded by god could mean anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in your first sentence you are confusing yourself. So if a gay person that just happens to not be charged with a gay crime is ok it just takes being charged with a gay crime to make one a possible terroist. How about a gay couple is broken up because one is sentenced and the other is not. The one not charged may be more vandictive then the one in jail. Your walking a fine line here.

Nelson Mandela was jailed for 20 years and later exonerated, the same if you will a wrongfully convicted gay person that you seem to feel will attack the state on release.

You sir, are by no doubt already on the watch list and don't even know it ;)

No I'm not confused my sentence was clear.

Let me ask you since when were 1000's of old homosexual convicts clones of Nelson Mandela? If they arent clones then what in this world makes you think they will all act the same on release?

Some might have a grudge.

Edited by Chimpanzee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell you have stated a couple of different things.

1. The individuals discussed in the OP should not be permitted to hold positions of judgement over others because their negative interaction with the judicial system causes them to be biased.

2. Teachers and authority figures should keep "dossiers" on everyone from birth on in order to "weed out" individuals that could be problems in the future and to limit these individuals to employment that would not allow them to judge others.

Correct?

Nibs

Chimpanzee,

Can you let me know if I am correct on my above statement?

Thanks

Nibs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some might have a grudge.

So by sum you mean all meaning we need to profile "them" all.

I'll add to this but you might be quoting me right now. How about we take it case by case and judge people on there actions not what one thinks there actions might be.

Edited by The Silver Thong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The individuals discussed in the OP should not be permitted to hold positions of judgement over others because their negative interaction with the judicial system causes them to be biased.

2. Teachers and authority figures should keep "dossiers" on everyone from birth on in order to "weed out" individuals that could be problems in the future and to limit these individuals to employment that would not allow them to judge others.

It sounds like the patriot act but -

1. The individuals discussed in the OP should be monitored in positions of law, punishment and judgement just in case any of them have a vendetta or issues relating to their prior treatment.

2. Authority figures like teachers, lecturers, doctors, priests, civil servants, policemen, army officers and others should monitor people to look out for any danger signs in the population. These will include radical views, terrorist views, unbalanced individuals, people with dangerous attitudes towards others, etc, etc. These individuals should be reported to the state and monitored. Their employment should be restricted to roles where they cant do any harm and if the state feels its nessecary should section them for being a threat to society.

Edited by Chimpanzee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All people that could have issues should be monitored.

white, black, gay, jew, catholic, every walk of life cant produce nuts.

Ok, cool, fair enough.

Although I don't really agree with you on a lot of what you are saying in this thread, at least it seems like you feel there are suspicious characters from all walks of life, and your statements here are really keeping in the spirit of the OP since it was specifically about homosexual cases.

I do agree with you that sometimes a person with a chip on their shoulder could be problematic in some professions. However, most employers have screening processes, and if those fail, an employees work record can speak for itself.

I'm really not sure how I feel about monitoring with the results being reported to a higher power like government. Right now I think there is already too much binding of hands in the whole process between employer/employee, let alone getting the government more involved with monitoring and reporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm saying some that have been wronged with prison sentences might have a vendetta but that isnt the same thing as saying homosexuals all have a vendetta.

Nelson Mandela was the leader of the armed wing of the African National Congress and was convicted for sabotage lol. I hope thats just a mistake in your research and you are not trying to incite people to terrorist acts.

Silver Thong needs adding to the watch list lol.

people you will get more common sense out of a house brick than you will out of this person he clearly is deluded about the way the world is.in his world if you are convicted of speeding and later exonorated you will turn into some sort of motorway terrorist ramming police cars off the road or worse still become a traffic officer and randomly beat people up for speeding .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people you will get more common sense out of a house brick than you will out of this person he clearly is deluded about the way the world is.in his world if you are convicted of speeding and later exonorated you will turn into some sort of motorway terrorist ramming police cars off the road or worse still become a traffic officer and randomly beat people up for speeding .

Kinda shows more about him, doesn't it. :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think Homosexuals should be allowed in the Police, Prison Service, Justice system or allowed to become solicitors.

Looking at the strength of their overeactions on these forums alone I think many are incapable of behaving professionally should they encounter people accused of hate crimes, discrimination or in fact guilty of them.

I think the state should keep a database of all homosexuals as a screening aid should they apply for a job connected to any of the above. Old records should be added to the new. Those will convictions from a time when homosexual acts were illegal may be more prone to unprofessional behaviour that others.

:rolleyes:

Edited by ChloeB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people you will get more common sense out of a house brick than you will out of this person he clearly is deluded about the way the world is.in his world if you are convicted of speeding and later exonorated you will turn into some sort of motorway terrorist ramming police cars off the road or worse still become a traffic officer and randomly beat people up for speeding .

No, if you are convicted of speeding and given 15 years which ruins you life then you might have issues relating to your treatment.

I own a shotgun and go hunting do you know that?

Are you now going to descend back into your irrational paranoia?

Will I awake tomorrow morning to find a lynch mob outside my house made up of left wing extremists who have come to sort me out because I think records should be kept and yet (gasps) I own a shotgun?

If you were leader of the state I could see millions of people going missing thanks to your fear, paranoia and laughable but scary level of hysteria directed at them.

You would make Stalin proud or maybe that should be Pol Pot.

Edited by Chimpanzee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, if you are convicted of speeding and given 15 years which ruins you life then you might have issues relating to your treatment.

I own a shotgun and go hunting do you know that?

Are you now going to descend back into your irrational paranoia?

Will I awake tomorrow morning to find a lynch mob outside my house made up of left wing extremists who have come to sort me out because I think records should be kept and yet (gasps) I own a shotgun?

If you were leader of the state I could see millions of people going missing thanks to your fear, paranoia and laughable but scary level of hysteria directed at them.

You would make Stalin proud or maybe that should be Pol Pot.

Question then: should you be on a register for owning that shotgun of yours? After all it IS a weapon that's capable of killing someone. Wheather you use it for hunting or not is irelevent. Fact is if you own a gun you're more likely to shoot someone (sound logic no?) which is a lot more dangerous then what you're trying to imply others are capable of (with no evidence to back it up I might add).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question then: should you be on a register for owning that shotgun of yours? After all it IS a weapon that's capable of killing someone. Wheather you use it for hunting or not is irelevent. Fact is if you own a gun you're more likely to shoot someone (sound logic no?) which is a lot more dangerous then what you're trying to imply others are capable of (with no evidence to back it up I might add).

In the UK you require a liscene to own a shotgun and the criteria for gaining it means potentially violent people are screened out. Gun owners are less likely to shoot someone because of the screening they go through.

Can you not think of any scenarios where someone imprisoned for 15 years because of homosexuality would snap or go on a rampage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK you require a liscene to own a shotgun and the criteria for gaining it means potentially violent people are screened out. Gun owners are less likely to shoot someone because of the screening they go through.

Can you not think of any scenarios where someone imprisoned for 15 years because of homosexuality would snap or go on a rampage?

Derrick Bird and Michael Ryan aside...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derrick Bird and Michael Ryan aside...?

So? wheres all the ones that kill that dont own guns

Dont post distorted points

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So? wheres all the ones that kill that dont own guns

Dont post distorted points

Hi Chimp -- I think if we follow your *general* line of reasoning, then Derrick Bird should have been on a "watch list". He was under severe stress as taxi driver; the taxation people were persecuting him; his twin brother betrayed him; and possibly other reasons ... :hmm:

Edited to add: And if he changed jobs because he was persecuted -- and worked as a law enforcement officer, he would have had a gun. Must be a zillion Derrick Birds around.

Edited by Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you not think of any scenarios where someone imprisoned for 15 years because of homosexuality would snap or go on a rampage?

No I can't. You know why? Because it's unheard of.

Now if gay people that were imprisoned were snapping on a regular basis you may have an arguement there.

Again I ask of you: can you provide even a single example where the scenarios you claim have actually happened?

All I'm seeing from you is paranoia about something which has never actually happened.

Edited by shadowhive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So? wheres all the ones that kill that dont own guns

Dont post distorted points

You said that you had gone through police checks to get a license to own a firearm but with your distorted views maybe you should have been rejected if under your regime....clearly unsuitable to own a firearm in my opinion with your views....as for distorted.....:sleepy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chimp -- I think if we follow your *general* line of reasoning, then Derrick Bird should have been on a "watch list". He was under severe stress as taxi driver; the taxation people were persecuting him; his twin brother betrayed him; and possibly other reasons ... :hmm:

I'm not arguing about that I'm arguing about pulling two names out at random like its supposed to defeat my argument.

I agree Bird snapped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not arguing about that I'm arguing about pulling two names out at random like its supposed to defeat my argument.

I agree Bird snapped.

And the example of Bird snapped your argument, Chimp. You really can't draw up a category-list of types of people who *should be* on a watch list ... does not work in real life. Edited by Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A whole list of people should be banned from the jobs it isnt just homosexuals.

Would you let someone who was the victim of child abuse become a Prison Guard looking after sex offenders?

Would you let a KKK member be a Policeman and expect him to behave professionally with black suspects?

Anybody that can have issues against other types of people should be banned from those jobs and yes that includes homosexuals because many will have issues regarding discrimination and hate crime suspects.

Whoa there buddy. I was a victim of child abuse. That has nothing to do with prisoners who are sex offenders if I was a guard. More about who it was that perpetrated the violence against me. yes it was a family member but then it was ok back in the old days to beat the crap out of your kids. If you are making such generalized statements then you would also be out of a job for being judgmental. There are a lot of police, prison guards etc. who behave un -professionaly toward inmates and they may have none of the issues you mentioned. In fact a lot of people who have any power can and do abuse it. And anyone can snap under stress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mixed opinions over this.

I think that if they were convicted of having sexual relations with someone under 21 at the time of the offence.

Then it shouldn't be taken away. Because at the time it was classed as child abuse.

Also loitering with intent is a crime. I mean maybe i'm wrong but isn't that having sex in public places, which again is illegal.

So again that shouldn't be stricken from the record.

But if it was someone been convicted of just been gay, then of course take it away

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think Homosexuals should be allowed in the Police, Prison Service, Justice system or allowed to become solicitors.

Looking at the strength of their overeactions on these forums alone I think many are incapable of behaving professionally should they encounter people accused of hate crimes, discrimination or in fact guilty of them.

I think the state should keep a database of all homosexuals as a screening aid should they apply for a job connected to any of the above. Old records should be added to the new. Those will convictions from a time when homosexual acts were illegal may be more prone to unprofessional behaviour that others.

To commit a homosexual crime requires two things not one -

1. Homosexual urges.

2. A willingness to violate societies laws.

As they were also guilty of the second their details should remain on the Police Database. This is because they have already demonstrated they will break laws to satisfy their urges. I bet a large amount of them do drugs as an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.