washington county offenders

washington county offenders

Posted in the Marietta Forum

thinker

Columbus, OH

#1 Oct 8, 2013
We've been seeing news stories where former sexual offenders are barred from working at area fairs and seasonal entertainment. Since these are temporary jobs, and not likely to allow for long term relationships or even contact, what difference does it make?

If a person has already served their time, why do we then insist that they not be allowed to start a business? Why do we no give them a chance to build a respectable life again?

Seems like double jeopardy to me. How about you?
spudtaterpopdadd ydog

Columbus, OH

#2 Oct 16, 2013
thinker wrote:
We've been seeing news stories where former sexual offenders are barred from working at area fairs and seasonal entertainment. Since these are temporary jobs, and not likely to allow for long term relationships or even contact, what difference does it make?

If a person has already served their time, why do we then insist that they not be allowed to start a business? Why do we no give them a chance to build a respectable life again?

Seems like double jeopardy to me. How about you?
It sounds more like pragmatic thinking than double jeopardy. The odds that convicted sex offenders is high enough that I would not want children to be put in a position of possible close contact. Just like I wouldn't want a convicted embezzler working the counter at the bank, I don't want a sex offender working in positions that involve children.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#3 Oct 25, 2013
A sex offender only needs a couple minutes. They are not really looking for a long term relationship.
derp

United States

#4 Nov 18, 2013
spudtaterpopdaddydog wrote:
<quoted text>
It sounds more like pragmatic thinking than double jeopardy. The odds that convicted sex offenders is high enough that I would not want children to be put in a position of possible close contact. Just like I wouldn't want a convicted embezzler working the counter at the bank, I don't want a sex offender working in positions that involve children.
You might be mistaking sex offender with pedophile. A guy that gets a 30 year old woman drunk and then bangs her without her permission has nothing to do with kiddie diddlers.

Why is it that you show no concern for adult women that are sexually assaulted yet you are concerned with children being molested when children weren't mentioned? You jumped right in to children being banged. Something you're not telling us?
derp

United States

#5 Nov 18, 2013
WVilleHottie wrote:
A sex offender only needs a couple minutes. They are not really looking for a long term relationship.
In an Orwellian nightmare it only takes a second for any thought crime to be committed, but we don't live in 1984.
Brown Crayon

Columbus, OH

#6 Nov 18, 2013
derp wrote:
<quoted text>You might be mistaking sex offender with pedophile. A guy that gets a 30 year old woman drunk and then bangs her without her permission has nothing to do with kiddie diddlers.

Why is it that you show no concern for adult women that are sexually assaulted yet you are concerned with children being molested when children weren't mentioned? You jumped right in to children being banged. Something you're not telling us?
Seeing as it's not likely that the Ferris wheel driver would be plying his riders with alcohol, I think you have a straw man argument here. No one mentioned nonconsensual relations with adult women either, so maybe you have a cross to bear, methinks. Either way, given the choice, I'd just as soon not have contact with people with that kind of history, whether that's fair or not.
derp

United States

#7 Nov 18, 2013
You're right. This hypothetical person won't be plying their riders with alcohol. He's also not a pedophile. There's no chance this hypothetical person will be any danger at all.

You don't want him to have a job even though he's no danger at all all because of "think of the children", which don't factor into this.

Happen to have a cross to bear, do you? Maybe instead of pedophilia as I guessed before it's just straight, raw, undiluted hate that you have a problem with.

There is a strawman argument going on, and it's coming from you. You outright admit that the make believe person cannot be a danger and yet you want him to be jobless.

Hey, I bet you think you can't be a danger. If turnabout is fair play, you'd fired.
Brown Crayon

United States

#8 Nov 19, 2013
derp wrote:
You're right. This hypothetical person won't be plying their riders with alcohol. He's also not a pedophile. There's no chance this hypothetical person will be any danger at all.

You don't want him to have a job even though he's no danger at all all because of "think of the children", which don't factor into this.

Happen to have a cross to bear, do you? Maybe instead of pedophilia as I guessed before it's just straight, raw, undiluted hate that you have a problem with.

There is a strawman argument going on, and it's coming from you. You outright admit that the make believe person cannot be a danger and yet you want him to be jobless.

Hey, I bet you think you can't be a danger. If turnabout is fair play, you'd fired.
Do I have hate in my heart? Sure do. I hate that people take advantage of other people for their own gratification. I hate that our society has become so liberal and permissive that these people are given slaps on the wrist, released back amongst us, and we are the ones who have to deal.

So in short, you're right. I'm full of hate. Caught me.
derp

United States

#9 Nov 19, 2013
You do realize that you're saying you have to deal with a make believe person who cannot be any danger in the make believe situation we're talking about, right?

What exactly are you dealing with in that case? I mean, other than your blinding rage.
Brown Crayon

Columbus, OH

#10 Nov 24, 2013
derp wrote:
You do realize that you're saying you have to deal with a make believe person who cannot be any danger in the make believe situation we're talking about, right?

What exactly are you dealing with in that case? I mean, other than your blinding rage.
It's all hypothetical? Read the Marietta Times and then tell it to that young girl in Belpre.
derp

United States

#11 Nov 27, 2013
Brown Crayon wrote:
<quoted text>
It's all hypothetical? Read the Marietta Times and then tell it to that young girl in Belpre.
Young girl in Belpre, the man that Brown Crayon is angry about working for a carnival putting people on rides and plied an adult woman with alcohol and then had sex with her is not real.

Happy now?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Marietta Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
brian moore Aug 14 Married 2
jessica garcia and trent mason (Jan '16) Aug 10 Somebody 34
News Washington County voters will see 911 levy Jul '16 Rudy 1
ron horsnby - williams ford truck driver - mari... Jul '16 SickoAvenger 1
Squish Jul '16 Me and no one else1 2
worthless: Marietta memorial hospital (Jan '15) Jul '16 Upset 11
Marietta Memorial Jun '16 Dilbert Doughbags 5

Marietta Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Marietta Mortgages