44-year-old arrested on sex charges

44-year-old arrested on sex charges

There are 28 comments on the Loomis News story from Aug 15, 2010, titled 44-year-old arrested on sex charges. In it, Loomis News reports that:

Auburn police officers Ian Ackard, left and Dustin McLaughlin detain 44-year-old Charles Wayne Burghy Friday afternoon after he allegedly solicited sexual acts to a 16-year-old boy through text messages.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Loomis News.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#23 Aug 16, 2010
Janitor wrote:
<quoted text>
A lot of goood that would do. Most kids today know computers a lot better than their parents and any software the parents put on to block their using sites the kids could easily bypass.
Now there is a good reason to do nothing, if I ever heard one. Let's see......does the kid drink? Don't bother getting rid of or locking up you own booze, casue the kid will drink outside the home anyway. Does your kid drive over the speed limit? Don't bother taking the car away, cause he will just borrow another kid's car and do the same. Oh no, don't make any effort to correct your kid, cause he will misbehave anyway.

PhoeniXRizing

“Rizen from the Ashes”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#24 Aug 16, 2010
Dyssonance wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey!
I'm a sociopath.
At least this woman is honest

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#25 Aug 16, 2010
Then, the kids are on their own and deserve whatever happens to them. Parents should protect their kids, but if the kids refuse to be protected, I guess we'll just start thinning the herd. Harsh? Maybe. But there is only so much anyone can to to help people who refuse to be helped.

Of course, there are parental control programs that are almost breach-proof. If the parents can't install them, they can hire a "geek" to do so.
Janitor wrote:
<quoted text>
A lot of goood that would do. Most kids today know computers a lot better than their parents and any software the parents put on to block their using sites the kids could easily bypass.
Janitor

United States

#26 Aug 16, 2010
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
Now there is a good reason to do nothing, if I ever heard one. Let's see......does the kid drink? Don't bother getting rid of or locking up you own booze, casue the kid will drink outside the home anyway. Does your kid drive over the speed limit? Don't bother taking the car away, cause he will just borrow another kid's car and do the same. Oh no, don't make any effort to correct your kid, cause he will misbehave anyway.
I didn't say to do nothing. If you'd been bothering to read what I wrote I was addressing the idea that kids have their computers fixed with software for blocking. The best thing to do would be to monitor the use of the computer and restrict it to use for such things as research for homework and for limited socializing. When the child displays a responsible attitude restrictions would be gradually rescinded and more freedom would be allowed. And, if the child took advantage of privelege to do something they knew they were not supposed to be doing, the privelege could be revoked and restrictions reinstated. This system has been effectively used for a long time. I never once said not to make an effort to correct your child. It's a pity that you cannot comprehend the difference. Perhaps maturity is something you lack yourself and some restrictions should be administered until you begin to employ common sense.
Janitor

United States

#27 Aug 16, 2010
cpeter1313 wrote:
Then, the kids are on their own and deserve whatever happens to them. Parents should protect their kids, but if the kids refuse to be protected, I guess we'll just start thinning the herd. Harsh? Maybe. But there is only so much anyone can to to help people who refuse to be helped.
Of course, there are parental control programs that are almost breach-proof. If the parents can't install them, they can hire a "geek" to do so.
<quoted text>
I used to believe that until I saw how adept the students at the school I work in were with computers. They could undo anything the school system did to stop them from doing as they pleased and, you are correct, they did deserve whatevr happened to them and they were routinely refused the right to use the school computers for any purpose when they were caught breaking the rules. The school employed a memory bank system that recorded everywhere the user went and it could not be erased. The monitor in the learning resource center also had an automatic alarm that would start flashing if any user even began to use a site deemed not acceptable or began to use the system for anything not on the allowed lists. How it worked I'm not sure but the head librarian said students had even found ways of backdooring it on occasion. Though, to be honest, most of the misuse was caught.

“dyssonance hotmail”

Since: Mar 07

Phoenix, AZ

#28 Aug 16, 2010
PhoeniXRizing wrote:
<quoted text>
At least this woman is honest
*always*.

Truthful, too. And extraordinarily precise.

I may have a huge ego, but I also know all my personal shortcomings really, really well.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#29 Aug 16, 2010
You don't come across as a sociopath. Of course, who is better at acting normal than a sociopath?
:)

Whatever it is, it seems to be working for you.
Dyssonance wrote:
<quoted text>
*always*.
Truthful, too. And extraordinarily precise.
I may have a huge ego, but I also know all my personal shortcomings really, really well.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#30 Aug 17, 2010
Janitor wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say to do nothing. If you'd been bothering to read what I wrote I was addressing the idea that kids have their computers fixed with software for blocking. The best thing to do would be to monitor the use of the computer and restrict it to use for such things as research for homework and for limited socializing. When the child displays a responsible attitude restrictions would be gradually rescinded and more freedom would be allowed. And, if the child took advantage of privelege to do something they knew they were not supposed to be doing, the privelege could be revoked and restrictions reinstated. This system has been effectively used for a long time. I never once said not to make an effort to correct your child. It's a pity that you cannot comprehend the difference. Perhaps maturity is something you lack yourself and some restrictions should be administered until you begin to employ common sense.
Mea Culpa. I mis-interpreted your post. Sorry.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Pulse nightclub massacre is Florida's top story... 22 min gary 5
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 28 min lides 44,022
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 31 min lides 23,883
News DeGeneres says her show is no place for anti-ga... 36 min Demon Finder 201
News The Case for Decriminalizing Gay Sex in Public ... 49 min Southern Charm 2
News Homosexuality against natural law (Sep '09) 1 hr Southern Charm 1,433
News Gay man legally donates blood after a year with... 1 hr Cordwainer Trout 4
More from around the web